UW Better Than UNC

[ChicosBailBonds]

You said, they don't leave the good programs...the stable programs...anywhere near the rate that they leave the bad programs with the sucky coach that just got fired.

So unless you consider Kentucky, UCLA, Georgetown and UNC bad programs, this statement is wrong.

You're using a dated idea of how the college basketball world works.  Welcome to 2011 where kids transfer like we change underwear.  It says nothing about the programs, it's just the way the world works now.  So, your highlighted statement above is a dated perception of what transferring means.

Is Wisconsin a good program...what's their transfer rate?  Go through your data over the last 10 years and I'll bet you find many other good programs with far less transfers.  Good for you that you found some that had some transfers, that's not the whole story though is it?

Secondly, is it any wonder UNC has struggled the last few years...when you're stable you tend to do better.  When you're having to constantly replace players with new players, you have a greater chance to skip a beat. 

I'll bet over the long haul Sultan is right and the transfer rates at the good, stable programs are lower.  You can't just pick one year and claim this is the norm.  Doesn't work that way.

[Pakuni]

So of the "600 transfers per year," you pick out 20 from stable programs that is that supposed to prove something?  And if you subtract that ones that occured with a coaching change or because the kid got suspended, it is even less.

With all due respect, Sultan, at least 84 attempted to provide some data - which is out there for all to see - supporting his side of the debate. You, on the other hand, offered a blanket statement, i.e. "transfers don't leave good, stable programs" yet provided no support for that whatsoever. Maybe 600 names is a bit much to go through, but shouldn't you at least try to support your claim?

I don't think anyone here is arguing that a large number of transfers is a great thing. But if you're going to claim they only - or mostly - occur at bad, unstable programs,  try to back it up, rather than mocking those who at least make an effort. Who knows, you may be able to prove yourself correct.

What we can say for sure is that last year alone, about 125 programs - more than a third Division I teams - had multiple players transfer. These included  good, stable programs (that didn't undergo a coaching change) such as UNC, Wisconsin, UCLA, UConn, Michigan State, Missouri, Illinois, Gonzaga, Florida and Washington.
Make of it what you will, but transfers - and yes, multiple transfers - are not necessarily a reflection of significant upheaval.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I do find it ironic that some of the same people here defending transfers were so up in arms about transfers in the previous administration.  Interesting to say the least.

[Silkk the Shaka]

I'm guessing you weren't up in arms about the transfers under the previous administration - even defended them? Yet now you think they're abominable and tow the UW party line on every controversial issue? Interesting to say the least?

[Pakuni]

I do find it ironic that some of the same people here defending transfers were so up in arms about transfers in the previous administration.  Interesting to say the least.

Who might that be?
And I find it ironic that you, of all people, would point out that irony.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm guessing you weren't up in arms about the transfers under the previous administration - even defended them? Yet now you think they're abominable and tow the UW party line on every controversial issue? Interesting to say the least?

Tow the UW party line...you make it sound like I'm a fan of theirs.  Good grief, I think UW fans can tell you I despise them.  That doesn't mean I can't recognize that their stability, consistency, style of play has led to them being an incredible program.

Did I defend some transfers in the past..yup, sure did.  Did I also say that transfers under Buzz AND Crean lead to instability...yup, sure did.  I've criticized both.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Who might that be?
And I find it ironic that you, of all people, would point out that irony.

Who might that be....really Pakuni?  Really?

Remember, according to you, someone can't change their mind and their beliefs apparently burned into their souls at a certain age never to be altered again...I'm exaggerating, of course, but you've often questioned people here that come to new conclusions over the years.  Ironic..yes.  Am I one of those people...yup.  I've admitted it, as well. 

Would you like some of those references...happy to dig them up for you, but it will be later today.  I'm off to my son's Little League game...big game early in the season against the Yankees and the two undefeated teams remaining.  Need to figure out how we're going to beat a squad with three sons of former NFL players on it....these 12 year olds are the size of 16 year olds.  Should be fun.

[Tugg Speedman]

Maybe 600 names is a bit much to go through, but shouldn't you at least try to support your claim?

What we can say for sure is that last year alone, about 125 programs - more than a third Division I teams - had multiple players transfer. These included  good, stable programs (that didn't undergo a coaching change) such as UNC, Wisconsin, UCLA, UConn, Michigan State, Missouri, Illinois, Gonzaga, Florida and Washington.
Make of it what you will, but transfers - and yes, multiple transfers - are not necessarily a reflection of significant upheaval.

600 came from article by Jay Bilas about two months ago (which I cannot find at the moment).  He noted that each of the last three years has set a new record.  So, Chicos, your argument about the last 10 years is not the correct way to look at it.  Bilas said the world changed about 3 to 5 years ago and now transfers occur at all levels all the time.  Need to look at the last 5 years and you'll see plenty of transfers at any school you look at.

This is based on all 345 D1 schools so that averaged about 1.5 per school per year.  And as you point out 125 had multiple transfers (which is at least 250).

I think we're getting it that transfers are the "new normal."

[texaswarrior74]

Wow. UNC with 4 transfers in 6 months? Is there any place more "unstable"? How could Tokoto possibly opt for a program like that?

The list is incorrect...UNC has had three transfers...Will Graves is not a transfer, he was cut from the team by Roy for violating team rules. He had been suspended by Roy in 2009 also for violating rules, came back last year and got strike three this year. Speculation is that the kid liked the wacky tobaccy too much....

Larry Drew's recent departure has been the best thing to happen in terms of team chemistry and success on the court.....they've lost one game since freshman Kendall Marshall replaced him as the starting point guard. As to negatives, it leaves them with depth issues especially since F Reggie Bullock is finished for the year with a knee injury.

[Pakuni]

Who might that be....really Pakuni?  Really?

Remember, according to you, someone can't change their mind and their beliefs apparently burned into their souls at a certain age never to be altered again...I'm exaggerating, of course, but you've often questioned people here that come to new conclusions over the years.  Ironic..yes.  Am I one of those people...yup.  I've admitted it, as well. 

Would you like some of those references...happy to dig them up for you, but it will be later today.  I'm off to my son's Little League game...big game early in the season against the Yankees and the two undefeated teams remaining.  Need to figure out how we're going to beat a squad with three sons of former NFL players on it....these 12 year olds are the size of 16 year olds.  Should be fun.

Really, Chico's, really.

And yes, I've frequently stated that people can never change their minds and their beliefs are burned into their souls from childhood. It's long been my motto. In fact, I have it tattooed across my back. I'll send you a jpeg some time.
I do find it interesting, however, that your philosophical change on transfers happened to coincide with a coaching change that didn't go the way you wanted.
If only Cottingham had listened to Chico's and made a strong play for Keno Davis or Tony Bennett ...

[Tugg Speedman]

The list is incorrect...UNC has had three transfers...Will Graves is not a transfer, he was cut from the team by Roy for violating team rules. He had been suspended by Roy in 2009 also for violating rules, came back last year and got strike three this year. Speculation is that the kid liked the wacky tobaccy too much....

Graves is leaving and going to another school.  That is the definition of a transfer.  I'm sure they all have individual reasons but issue here is the number of transfers and if they reflect poorly on a school.  I say no because EVERYONE has them ... including UNC.

[Lennys Tap]

I do find it ironic that some of the same people here defending transfers were so up in arms about transfers in the previous administration.  Interesting to say the least.

Other than yourself, who are these people who are/were "up in arms" about tranfers in one administration and okay with it in another? Irony, indeed.  

[GGGG]

You said, they don't leave the good programs...the stable programs...anywhere near the rate that they leave the bad programs with the sucky coach that just got fired.

So unless you consider Kentucky, UCLA, Georgetown and UNC bad programs, this statement is wrong.

Really?  Posting a few kids who transfer from top programs means that they transfer "at the same rate?"  Do you understand what "at the same rate" means???

With all due respect, Sultan, at least 84 attempted to provide some data - which is out there for all to see - supporting his side of the debate. You, on the other hand, offered a blanket statement, i.e. "transfers don't leave good, stable programs"

You snipped my quote too early...I said good stable programs *at the same rate.*  Transfers happen.  8 transfers in less than three years don't happen at good, stable programs.

[Tugg Speedman]

Really?  Posting a few kids who transfer from top programs means that they transfer "at the same rate?"  Do you understand what "at the same rate" means???


You snipped my quote too early...I said good stable programs *at the same rate.*  Transfers happen.  8 transfers in less than three years don't happen at good, stable programs.

7 of those transfers were in the first two years of a new coach and 6 were "the other guy's players".  That is fairly common and history.  This year we have one transfer which is less than UNC, GU UCLA and Kentucky.  And this does not even count the number of kids that come out early from these prgrams (see Kentucky last year).  Add this in and UCLA, UNC and Kentucky typically turnover half their roster every year.  By Sutlan's dated view of the world, these programs are highly unstable and should frequently lose.

Let give you the bottom line.  Expect two transfers a year.  We had one at mid-season.  Expect another after the season ends.  As long as it is two year or less, the program is stable.  If it is more than two ince the coach has his own players (this year for Buzz), then we can ask if the program is unstable.  But only then.

Again Sultan, welcome to 2011 when everyone has two transfers a year.  

[rocky_warrior]

Seriously guys, there's lots of good basketball today - stop multitasking with the silly posts and pay attention to the games

Or, maybe think about MU's upcoming game today.

[PlasticMan]

Graves is leaving and going to another school.  That is the definition of a transfer.  I'm sure they all have individual reasons but issue here is the number of transfers and if they reflect poorly on a school.  I say no because EVERYONE has them ... including UNC.

Actually he is not going to another school, he's playing pro ball in Japan right now.

If that's a transfer than every early entrant to the NBA is a transfer.

And the Wear twins were just that, twins. Obviously if one leaves, both leave.

Not complaining about Drew. His leaving put Carolina from on the bubble to Final Four contenders.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Other than yourself, who are these people who are/were "up in arms" about tranfers in one administration and okay with it in another? Irony, indeed.  

Lenny, I'll throw you a lifeline since you didn't join this board until January of 2009.  I believe the previous administration lasted until about April 1st or 2nd of 1998.  Posters that were around on that date and prior often were "up in arms" over transfers while these same posters are not today.  I'm happy to provide you with a list of people, you know it's rather easy to do. 

[Lennys Tap]

Lenny, I'll throw you a lifeline since you didn't join this board until January of 2009.  I believe the previous administration lasted until about April 1st or 2nd of 1998.  Posters that were around on that date and prior often were "up in arms" over transfers while these same posters are not today.  I'm happy to provide you with a list of people, you know it's rather easy to do. 

I was a long time "lurker". I read Scout for a long time and started reading Scoop when I found out about it (can't recall exactly when that was). Maybe I'm wrong but I don't recall TC getting a ton of heat about transfers. Bottom line for me is this: one could make the argument that tranfers are more common and therefore more acceptable now, but I don't feel that way. I've always been ok with transfers - unhappy players should be able to look for a better fit and so should unhappy coaches.

[El Duderino]

Is Wisconsin a good program...what's their transfer rate?  Go through your data over the last 10 years and I'll bet you find many other good programs with far less transfers.  Good for you that you found some that had some transfers, that's not the whole story though is it?

Secondly, is it any wonder UNC has struggled the last few years...when you're stable you tend to do better.  When you're having to constantly replace players with new players, you have a greater chance to skip a beat. 

I'll bet over the long haul Sultan is right and the transfer rates at the good, stable programs are lower.  You can't just pick one year and claim this is the norm.  Doesn't work that way.

I expect even the upper tier programs to struggle with transfers going forward for a few reasons

1. So many highly recruited kids today feel entitled to immediate playing time and being featured.

2. So many kids are delusional about their realistic chances to make the NBA, thus the first point flares up. I need to be playing right away coach or you're ruining my chances to be making millions in the association.

3. The AAU circuit is so big now with upper tier recruits. It feeds a lot of these kids minds even further into thinking they are extra special.

That's why i see the days being largely over where say a Dean Smith, Bobby Knight, or other elite coaches at top programs will be able to reel in 12 top recruits and be able to keep nearly all of them. To many top recruits today not only want to play right away, they feel entitled to playing right away. If they aren't appeased, they'll look for another program to grant their wishes.

As for why Bo has less transfers, i think that is clearly because of the type of kids he recruits. He doesn't sign many top 50ish kids. Most of his recruits as high school kids may have dreams in the back of their mind of making the NBA, but they aren't thinking it's a near sure thing i'll be in the association. He rarely is signing kids that all the top programs are after. Kids who have been told how great they are for ages and thus feel super entitled. He signs kids who often are not only not expecting immediate playing time, they'll accept being red-shirted. Those type of kids will be less inclined to transfer because they aren't starting as a freshman or playing the position they prefer.

[El Duderino]

I was a long time "lurker". I read Scout for a long time and started reading Scoop when I found out about it (can't recall exactly when that was). Maybe I'm wrong but I don't recall TC getting a ton of heat about transfers. Bottom line for me is this: one could make the argument that tranfers are more common and therefore more acceptable now, but I don't feel that way. I've always been ok with transfers - unhappy players should be able to look for a better fit and so should unhappy coaches.

As i tried saying in the previous post, if a college coach today wants to recruit mainly from the pool of top 50-75 high school players each year, he's likely going to face a higher probability of more transfers compared to what went on in the past.

Just look at how major college recruiting is today in basketball/football compared to only say 10 years ago. Many of the elite recruits treat it like an event. Have big press conferences to announce where they'll be playing. Not only is there the high school season where college coaches fawn all over them, there is also the AAU circuit to further build up their egos.

I'd be curious if say the top 50 recruits were polled each year asking them if they thought that they'd end up in the NBA, how many not only would say yes to that, but how many thought they could be one and done guys?

FWIW, i don't begrudge teenagers from having dreams of ending up in the NBA. I also don't want to make it seem like upper tier recruits from 10-15-20 years ago never came into college ball with huge egos and thus expected immediate big roles as freshman. I just think that mentality has increased fairly significantly and the end result is it's lead to kids being quicker to transfer if their desires aren't being met in regards to playing time, what position they are asked to play, being featured, etc.

So that list showing transfers and some multiple transfers from elite programs i don't think will be an anomaly going forward. I expect it to be more common that abnormal, especially for programs who bring in lots of upper tier recruits because many of those kids simply won't be fine with waiting for their turn. The problem though for coaches is that in most cases, those are the kids they need to sign to win big and appease very impatient fan bases who are quick to pile on any coach who doesn't win every year.

[BallBoy]

I was a long time "lurker". I read Scout for a long time and started reading Scoop when I found out about it (can't recall exactly when that was). Maybe I'm wrong but I don't recall TC getting a ton of heat about transfers. Bottom line for me is this: one could make the argument that tranfers are more common and therefore more acceptable now, but I don't feel that way. I've always been ok with transfers - unhappy players should be able to look for a better fit and so should unhappy coaches.

Crean got it all the time.  "House Creaning" has been around for a long time.  I would say that Crean didn't get it as bad earlier in his career so I think most posters weren't used to seeing transfers.  I think after Crean people were looking for transfers more quickly and Buzz had that problem continued, hence "Buzz Cut."