I think it will be easier to tell what the true impact is once the COVID year component has phased itself out. This is adding about 200 grad transfers to the total which inflates the numbers to an extent. Afterwards it may be able to tweak the process to make it more equitable.I don't like it. No, I can't do anything about it. Yes, transfer opportunity needed to be opened up. Yeah, it is what it is and I might as well get used to it.
I loved tracking prospects in high school and loved the excitement of seeing them committ then develop with my team through all four years of their collegiate career. Now? It's hard to invest too much emotion into recruiting when you don't know if a kid will be with your team very long. Heck, look at Janiah Barker never even playing for Georgia (and I'm all for tranfer due to coaching change.
Note to self: Get out of the way old man, Change is here whether you like it or not.
Can it be tweaked? can't think of any way.
Get off my lawn!
That was Geno’s estimate as well.The total is for D1 women only, so your estimate of about 3 transfers per D1 team is accurate.
Actually, in half of the 46 European countries, the population is decreasing. Only a handful have significant population increases and those don’t habitually produce women’s basketball prodigies. Your point was well taken, but extending it to Europe was not a good idea.Athletes have options to wait it out or to try to expand their school choices to mid-major programs.
They can join the military and delay going to school until afterward and still play sports.
Enlistment preserves their NCAA eligibility.
They'll be stronger, more mature and perhaps better able to compete.
They can also redshirt which allows them to develop their skills or academics.
When a lot of public schools were operating remotely, many kids fell behind in their studies and athletic development.
Many kids were also deciding against going to college which has now turned around to produce record enrollment at some schools.
Since 2000, the US population has increased by 47 million people.
Yet there hasn't been a corresponding increase in WBB scholarship opportunities.
There's bound to be a glut of athletes forever into the future simply due to population increases which means that college sports will become more competitive.
And this doesn't include the recruitment of international players from Europe and elsewhere where the population is also increasing.
There will always be more players than scholarships.
The portal glut probably only confirms that the problem exists, but not when it began.
In part, this why I complain about UConn not awarding the maximum number of scholarships that it's allowed.
Under Title lX, colleges are supposed to help women athletes obtain educational benefits equal to men.
UConn could do a better job by awarding more scholarships, perhaps even to a worthy CT high school player.
Right now UConn has 3 international players including Edwards who is Canadian.Actually, in half of the 46 European countries, the population is decreasing. Only a handful have significant population increases and those don’t habitually produce women’s basketball prodigies. Your point was well taken, but extending it to Europe was not a good idea.
I don’t believe that graduate transfers have to sit out a year, even if they have already transferred.A lot of the players entering the portal have previously transferred from a four-year school, meaning by rule they will have to sit out a year when they transfer again. I can't help but wonder do they just want to move on so badly that they're willing to sit a year to do it, or are they being led to believe they can find a way to get a waiver from the NCAA. If the NCAA doesn't enforce the one-time exception rule that allows immediate eligibility at a new four-year school, that is when the true chaos could occur. It seems like it is already teetering on the edge.