Transfer portal part 2

[Plebe]

Maybe it’s the State and not the team. Wonkers down there.

Define "wonkers".

 

[shiverz45]

This tickles me. Will a Mizzou henchWOman be welcomed by SC fans and players? And on the other hand,..it would be quite the middle finger to Mizzou coaches. You can't make this stuff up.

I don't see it. SC is full. Her best bet would be Ole Miss or Baylor.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

I don't think you'll find a better center in the portal than you found in Juhasz last year. UCONN transfers typically take a while to adjust to the motion offense. Agree that if Deberry develops, she could be the difference maker for UCONN.

Reese would be a great fit IMO since she's so athletic, blocks shots well and would pair well playing with a physical 4 in Edwards, but she's clearly looking for a school where she can play primarily on the perimeter so I don't see it happening. Agree though that UCONN needs to add in more speed, size and athleticism. Geno's recruiting philosophy as of late seems to be targeting kids who are pretty developed and can contribute from day 1 but aren't necessarily top flight athletes. Dawn Staley has the opposite approach of targeting speed and athleticism with the hopes that she'll develop them into solid players. It's worked extremely well for her as of late, plus landing Boston obviously helped too. I think getting athletes like Lattimore or Reese could help big time for UCONN to compete with the athletes SC has, but I don't see those 2 (or any transfer) wanting to pick a new school where they'll likely be a backup for 2 more years. If I'm Geno my top priority is landing a top post in 2023 and developing Deberry/

And worth noting, Bueckers is draft eligible next year. I'd be surprised if she goes pro with NIL and after missing out on most of her sophomore year, but it's a realistic possibility.

I'm old school. I don't consider Dorka a center any more than I think Reese would be successful on the perimeter. And while Dorka can play around the basket, unless a miracle happens don't see her as a post up, back to the basket threat...even at her size. She doesn't have the footwork or balance for operating in tight spaces. She jut doesn't look comfortable. I don't see Paige bolting and leaving Fudd after she practically begged her to come to UCONN. But yea...anything is possible. I don't think UCONN needs to make any desperate changes, but adding some absent skills only helps them. They are still on top of recruiting. One of the things I hope to see next season is pulling starters early and rest them in games that aren't close and use games to move bench development along quicker. I don't care how hard a practice is...they don't feel like...the real game.

 

[triaddukefan]

oh my

 

[AmeriConn]

She is a rebounding machine

I likey. We need a rebounder. She also had quite a few double doubles.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

I like here even more because...she mentioned STUDYING.

 

[triaddukefan]

Not sure where to put this.. So ill put it here.

 

[triaddukefan]

 

[Purchase1]

Not sure where to put this.. So ill put it here.

Wonder what this means for Meyers from Princeton.

 

[triaddukefan]

 

[triaddukefan]

And let the record show that I dont follow that coach on Twitter it just appeared on my timeline.

 

[undersized]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about how the 2020-2021 "COVID season" impacted eligibility. The rule was never "everyone gets an extra year" which is what, for example, Banghart (on behalf of Ivy Leaguers) and Notre Dame fans (on behalf of Dodson) have been claiming. Rather, it was that the COVID season would not count against anyone's eligibility whether you played that season or not. Lots of media sources have also been using the "extra year" language because it's quicker and easier to understand than getting into the technicalities of eligibility clocks, etc. But it's not exactly accurate, which has created perceived unfairnesses.

Now, it's perfectly fine to argue about whether the NCAA policy is sensible or not, which is a separate question. But at the very least, the NCAA has applied their rule consistently.

As for Abby Meyers, this decision doesn't change the fact that she still has a year of eligibility. She has only played 2017-2018, 2019-2020, and 2021-2022.

As for Littlefield -- sorry but she wasn't getting drafted.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

Not sure where to put this.. So ill put it here.

I don't appreciate her inference, capitalizing STUDENT, that non ivy players aren't students as well or to some lesser degree. I didn't think the Ivy league schools had athletic scholarships...so they were paying regardless of this decision.

 

[Geew1992]

I disagree, it's one thing if those players elected to not play themselves, but when the conference made the decision for them, I believe they should get the exception.

Agreed. And the teams that played a few games, then called it quits, they get the extra year.

 

[cancontent]

Agreed. And the teams that played a few games, then called it quits, they get the extra year.

I was just thinking about this too. Glad I'm not the only one.

 

[oldude]

I disagree, it's one thing if those players elected to not play themselves, but when the conference made the decision for them, I believe they should get the exception.

Agreed. And the teams that played a few games, then called it quits, they get the extra year.

I’m not sure why this issue has caused so much confusion. College athletes get 4 years of eligibility. Last year didn’t count towards those 4 years. Whether an athlete played last season (Dorka at tOSU), decided not to play (Maya Dodson at Stanford) or had the decision made for them by their school/conference (Abby Meyers at Princeton), an athlete still only gets 4 years of eligibility, not including last season, which doesn’t count for anyone.

The only unfairness I perceive in this process involves HS recruits from the classes of 2021-2024 who may lose PT sitting behind 5th year players.

 

[tigers4ever]

I’m not sure why this issue has caused so much confusion. College athletes get 4 years of eligibility. Last year didn’t count towards those 4 years. Whether an athlete played last season (Dorka at tOSU), decided not to play (Maya Dodson at Stanford) or had the decision made for them by their school/conference (Abby Meyers at Princeton), an athlete still only gets 4 years of eligibility, not including last season, which doesn’t count for anyone.

The only unfairness I perceive in this process involves HS recruits from the classes of 2021-2024 who may lose PT sitting behind 5th year players.

Im still confused even after your explanation. So those super seniors last year were playing in their 5th year and effectively had 5 years of eligibility. Were the super seniors a one time thing for 2021-2022 or will the super seniors be around for 3 more years? I agree it is the HS recruits over the next few years who are being most negatively impacted by the extra COVID year being granted.

 

[sivad40]

Im still confused even after your explanation. So those super seniors last year were playing in their 5th year and effectively had 5 years of eligibility. Were the super seniors a one time thing for 2021-2022 or will the super seniors be around for 3 more years? I agree it is the HS recruits over the next few years who are being most negatively impacted by the extra COVID year being granted.

Super seniors will be around for 3 more years.

 

[oldude]

Im still confused even after your explanation. So those super seniors last year were playing in their 5th year and effectively had 5 years of eligibility. Were the super seniors a one time thing for 2021-2022 or will the super seniors be around for 3 more years? I agree it is the HS recruits over the next few years who are being most negatively impacted by the extra COVID year being granted.

OK, let me go over it again:

• Last season is basically a “do-over” for every college athlete (Covid year). It’s as if it never happened…kind of like the Avengers when the Hulk gets the infinity stones and brings back the other half of everybody in the universe that were eliminated by Thanos when he had the infinity stones.
• Because last year didn’t count for any college athlete, every athlete in college last year still gets to compete for 4 full seasons.
• So last year’s seniors got to compete this year if they wanted to. This year’s seniors get to compete next year if they want to. Next year’s seniors get to compete in 2023-24 if they want to. 2023-24 seniors get to compete in 2024-25 if they want to.
• While all of last year’s athletes get a 5th year of competition, just because they were in college last year, the athletes that get the “short end of the stick” are the HS recruits from 2021-24, who only get 4 years to complete their 4 years of eligibility, which may mean they ride the bench behind 5th year players.
• After 2024-25, things return to relative normalcy. Everyone has 4 years to complete their eligibility unless they are redshirted due to injury or some other reason. Nobody gets to play 5 years.

 

[CocoHusky]

Wonder what this means for Meyers from Princeton.

What it means is that Abby will have 1 year of eligibility remaining not 2.

 

[GCKSFN4L]

I’m not sure why this issue has caused so much confusion. College athletes get 4 years of eligibility. Last year didn’t count towards those 4 years. Whether an athlete played last season (Dorka at tOSU), decided not to play (Maya Dodson at Stanford) or had the decision made for them by their school/conference (Abby Meyers at Princeton), an athlete still only gets 4 years of eligibility, not including last season, which doesn’t count for anyone.

The only unfairness I perceive in this process involves HS recruits from the classes of 2021-2024 who may lose PT sitting behind 5th year players.

i definitely agree with you when it comes to high school students for the next few years. But I still feel the same as it pertains the Ivy League athletes, I understand the situation and I understand the NCAA reasoning, but where I differ with you is where the students get screwed by the decisions of their conference.

While in the eyes of the NCAA everyone that's taking an extra year is only playing 4 years it still doesn't change the reality that everyone else will get an option of a whole extra season to play their given sport. That's why I believe those kids deserve an exception, it seems unfair to me that two students that entered college at the same time can get a whole extra season of play based on the luck of what conference you're in.
.

 

[CocoHusky]

I don't understand why people can't understand this - and I am deeply displeased that Banghart can't wrap her head around this simple concept.

I disagree, it's one thing if those players elected to not play themselves, but when the conference made the decision for them, I believe they should get the exception.

There is something very subtle to what Courtney is upset about. There was a lot of uncertainty when the NCAA decided on the extra year of eligibility. One of the provisions of that NCAA announcement is that schools COULD NOT withdraw athletic scholarship for players who decided to opt out because of COVID.
Since the Ivy League does not offer athletic scholarship that provision was never going to the apply to the Ivy League players. I just think her ire is misdirect. She should be directing her ire at the Ivy league which could have simply changed the policy.

 

[Geew1992]

Saniya Rivers has entered the portal

 

[CocoHusky]

Saniya Rivers has entered the portal