It's True - 40% of Freshman Transfer

[TallTitan34]

If you see a player with a background of transfers pre-college, not only is he more likely to de-commit, he's also more likely to become part of the NABC's statistic of the transfer rate which states that 40 percent of all signees transfer prior to their sophomore season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=5729730

[Pakuni]

Seriously, who in their right mind would doubt Buzz when it comes to knowledge of obscure and quirky statistics?

[StillAWarrior]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=5729730

Thanks, Titan.

[lab_warrior]

Uh oh, more facts.  That's not going to sit well with the "belief" based members here.  Surely no other players anywhere else in D1 NCAA basketball transfer.

[Blackhat]

I don't care about a pg transferring out of this program but Buzz sure as hell better get some big boys who can run and rebound in his program or trouble will be coming down the road.

[4everwarriors]

I guess some will argue that guards trump big dudes. LOL

[dw3dw3dw3]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/basketball/mens/news/story?id=5729730

Oh yeah... well I still haven't seen his birth certificate.. oh wait, wrong leader.

[wadesworld]

I don't care about a pg transferring out of this program but Buzz sure as hell better get some big boys who can run and rebound in his program or trouble will be coming down the road.

Because our last really good big man was...?  Marcus Jackson?  Heck, even Oose was decent.  Looks like we've really struggled without those big men.  This NCAA Tournament drought we've had is killing me...

[Danny Noonan]

Because our last really good big man was...?  Marcus Jackson?  Heck, even Oose was decent.  Looks like we've really struggled without those big men.  This NCAA Tournament drought we've had is killing me...

Like it or not, we haven't made a substantial NCAA tourney run since 2003. (I realize injuries to McNeal 2007 and D James 2009 did not help our cause.

[IAmMarquette]

Seriously, who in their right mind would doubt Buzz when it comes to knowledge of obscure and quirky statistics?

I had this exact thought when I read the JS story about Reggie's transfer. The man is a stats freak

[wadesworld]

Like it or not, we haven't made a substantial NCAA tourney run since 2003. (I realize injuries to McNeal 2007 and D James 2009 did not help our cause.

I understand that, but to say "trouble will be coming down the road" if we don't get ourselves a big man who can "run and rebound" isn't necessarily true at all.  Maybe if the talent of our guards/wings begins to decline AND we don't a good big man, THEN we will be in trouble down the road.  But we have proven that we can have success without a really good big man.  Would I like to add a big man that would push us into Sweet 16s, Elite 8s, and Final Fours?  Of course.  But even without one we have been THE most consistent team in terms of finishing with double digit wins and finishing (I believe) 4 games over .500 in the Big East.  Would I love to win Big East championships rather than being consistently in that 2nd tier?  Again, of course.  But again, I'm not ready to say we're in trouble without a big man, as we've proven to not be for the last 5 years.

[GGGG]

My guess is that 40% of freshmen don't transfer from Big East level programs that don't go through a coaching change.  So, out of the eight true freshmen that Buzz has recruited and signed for the past two seasons, three have already transferred out.  (And that doesn't include Newbill.)

Simply put, it's not good.  We can make all the excuses we want about parents, playing time and simple inability, but he has to do a better job of laying out expectations before the kids get here, communicating with them while they are here, or simply not signing bad talent.

[IAmMarquette]

My guess is that 40% of freshmen don't transfer from Big East level programs that don't go through a coaching change.  So, out of the eight true freshmen that Buzz has recruited and signed for the past two seasons, three have already transferred out.  (And that doesn't include Newbill.)

Simply put, it's not good.  We can make all the excuses we want about parents, playing time and simple inability, but he has to do a better job of laying out expectations before the kids get here, communicating with them while they are here, or simply not signing bad talent.

This is a fair point. I don't think anyone here is happy when players leave the program, but the need to blame somebody is unfortunate. Reggie didn't fit Marquette/Marquette didn't suit Reggie. Reggie chose to transfer. It happens...apparently 40% of the time.

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=6734

See article and matchups at the bottom of article

[mu_hilltopper]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

So .. 40% of freshmen transfer from the 323 NCAA teams.

I'd like to see the stat after .. throw out all coaching change transfers.  .. I'd be curious if the top 100 teams have a different rate than the bottom 200+ teams do.   Curious about public vs. private school transfers.  (Although that might not make much difference.)

Also .. head coach age and tenure might change the rate.  I suppose the older coaches know who is going to stick around, the younger coaches perhaps have a better "identifying" rate with kids .. so who knows.

Just throwing that out there.

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

[ChicosBailBonds]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

Especially since the 50% claim that everyone assumes is correct is not.  That's an urban myth that just won't die.

[Lennys Tap]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

So .. 40% of freshmen transfer from the 323 NCAA teams.

I'd like to see the stat after .. throw out all coaching change transfers.  .. I'd be curious if the top 100 teams have a different rate than the bottom 200+ teams do.   Curious about public vs. private school transfers.  (Although that might not make much difference.)

Also .. head coach age and tenure might change the rate.  I suppose the older coaches know who is going to stick around, the younger coaches perhaps have a better "identifying" rate with kids .. so who knows.

Just throwing that out there.

Looks like you've just given yourself a homework assignment that you're interested in and curious about. We'll anxiously await the facts to see if they match speculation.

[Dr. Blackheart]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

Are they counting arrests too?  Or seniors who mysteriously give up their free rides?  Or recruits who are cut before they can earn their scholly? 

[mu_hilltopper]

Looks like you've just given yourself a homework assignment that you're interested in and curious about. We'll anxiously await the facts to see if they match speculation.

Yeah, I let myself open to that.  Was fishing for someone else to do the work!  

Truly, I'm not sure what the speculation would be prior to knowing the numbers.  It wouldn't surprise me if the results had no correlation to anything..

Does the top 100 or bottom 220 have more transfers?  Could go either way.  The bottom 220 probably don't have too many kids dreaming about the NBA/ (more) delusions of grandeur.  (Well, semi-legitimately dreaming, anyhow.)

Private vs. Public may have no correlation to anything.   Nor might coaching age or tenure, as I wrote above.  

The data just might be one noisy mess.  <baiting> I imagine even Henry Sugar or John Pudner wouldn't be able to figure it out. </baiting>

Perhaps in the end, I care not.  If 40% is the average, I think we all want MU to be better than that.  

[avid1010]

Like it or not, we haven't made a substantial NCAA tourney run since 2003. (I realize injuries to McNeal 2007 and D James 2009 did not help our cause.

UW has big men, yet I don't see deep runs in the NCAA tourney. 

[avid1010]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

Nice bit of data....the article itself says the transfer % is unclear. 

[karavotsos]

Those articles were ridiculous.  First, why do they label college basketball players missing?  They're not like kids on milk cartons, or dogs that wander off.  I bet with minimal research you could figure out exactly what happened to them, so why not figure it out and give us some real stats.  Instead, you label them missing?  It's not hard to figure out there's an agenda there, though the articles are so poorly written its difficult to figure out what the agenda is.

Second, it seems unfair when twins who entered a program together, like the Wear twins at UNC, transfer together, to count that as 2 transfers or losses.  They only have one mind at this time, so they should only count as one lost person.

Finally, Wisconsin has no lost players because Bo and his players have the same standoff every year.  Bo looks at them and asks, 'where else can you go?'  The players look at him and ask, 'who else can you recruit?'  and they decide to stay together.

[IAmMarquette]

Those articles were ridiculous.  First, why do they label college basketball players missing?  They're not like kids on milk cartons, or dogs that wander off.  I bet with minimal research you could figure out exactly what happened to them, so why not figure it out and give us some real stats.  Instead, you label them missing?  It's not hard to figure out there's an agenda there, though the articles are so poorly written its difficult to figure out what the agenda is.

Second, it seems unfair when twins who entered a program together, like the Wear twins at UNC, transfer together, to count that as 2 transfers or losses.  They only have one mind at this time, so they should only count as one lost person.

Finally, Wisconsin has no lost players because Bo and his players have the same standoff every year.  Bo looks at them and asks, 'where else can you go?'  The players look at him and ask, 'who else can you recruit?'  and they decide to stay together.

Well done.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Finally, Wisconsin has no lost players because Bo and his players have the same standoff every year.  Bo looks at them and asks, 'where else can you go?'  The players look at him and ask, 'who else can you recruit?'  and they decide to stay together.

I admit, I chuckled.  Then I also realized they just simply win and win and win while teams with better athletes don't beat them and usually finish behind them in the standings.  They're doing something right.

[GGGG]

My guess is that 40% of freshmen don't transfer from Big East level programs that don't go through a coaching change.  So, out of the eight true freshmen that Buzz has recruited and signed for the past two seasons, three have already transferred out.  (And that doesn't include Newbill.)

Simply put, it's not good.  We can make all the excuses we want about parents, playing time and simple inability, but he has to do a better job of laying out expectations before the kids get here, communicating with them while they are here, or simply not signing bad talent.

BTW, I should have included Roseboro here too.  That would be 4 out of the 9 true freshman Buzz has brought to campus in the past two years have transferred out.

[TJ]

BTW, I should have included Roseboro here too.  That would be 4 out of the 9 true freshman Buzz has brought to campus in the past two years have transferred out.

That's 44%

Yeah!! We're better than average now!!!

[dw3dw3dw3]

http://www.ncpanow.org/more?id=0008


Interesting that the following schools are doing better in that department than we are

Wisconsin 0%
Michigan State 0%
Texas 0%
Texas A&M 7.1%
Duke 8.3%

Maryland, Clemson, Ohio State, LSU, UCLA, Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina, Syracuse, Xavier, Gonzaga, BYU, UCONN also doing better

A one year sample isn't really that interesting, especially between coaching changes.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Indeed, when you hear 50% of marriages end in divorce, you immediately want to get more classifications to get closer to your category.   Control for education or religion, and you get a different picture.  (I'm guessing the divorce rate of Marquette grads is less than half the national average.)

So .. 40% of freshmen transfer from the 323 NCAA teams.

I'd like to see the stat after .. throw out all coaching change transfers.  .. I'd be curious if the top 100 teams have a different rate than the bottom 200+ teams do.   Curious about public vs. private school transfers.  (Although that might not make much difference.)

Also .. head coach age and tenure might change the rate.  I suppose the older coaches know who is going to stick around, the younger coaches perhaps have a better "identifying" rate with kids .. so who knows.

Just throwing that out there.

I do find it kind of disgusting that a 40% stat would be thrown out when it's such an over-generalization.

Has anyone found out if this is for men's basketball or all of NCAA D1 sports?

I'd also like to see this number after controlling for drop outs, which I bet are counted as "transfers." How many players of the bottom 150 4-year institutions can't cut it with college generally and decide to quit? Would anyone be surprised if it is at least a quarter of all D1 "transfers"?

[ChicosBailBonds]

BTW, I should have included Roseboro here too.  That would be 4 out of the 9 true freshman Buzz has brought to campus in the past two years have transferred out.

Added note....Four out of 9 that didn't even get to the 2nd semester of their freshman year.

[GGGG]

Mbao did.  3 out of 9 didn't get to second semester.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I do find it kind of disgusting that a 40% stat would be thrown out when it's such an over-generalization.

Has anyone found out if this is for men's basketball or all of NCAA D1 sports?

I'd also like to see this number after controlling for drop outs, which I bet are counted as "transfers." How many players of the bottom 150 4-year institutions can't cut it with college generally and decide to quit? Would anyone be surprised if it is at least a quarter of all D1 "transfers"?

I'm trying to get it from the NCAA right now through a few buddies of mine that work for the NCAA.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Mbao did.  3 out of 9 didn't get to second semester.

I should have said 4 of 9 kids signed in the last two years that didn't make it to the second semester...hell, several didn't make it to the first semester day one of classes.

[Benny B]

My guess is that 40% of freshmen don't transfer from Big East level programs that don't go through a coaching change.  So, out of the eight true freshmen that Buzz has recruited and signed for the past two seasons, three have already transferred out.  (And that doesn't include Newbill.)

Simply put, it's not good.  We can make all the excuses we want about parents, playing time and simple inability, but he has to do a better job of laying out expectations before the kids get here, communicating with them while they are here, or simply not signing bad talent.

Whether 40% is the correct figure, the point is that Buzz didn't just make that number up... he's quoting NABC.  If you want to question the stat, take it up with Izzo.  If you want to compare MU against the mean, I would highly suggest (like others before me) that you consider taking a statistics course and pay attention to the chapter on "sample size."

That notwithstanding... Sultan: you work in higher education, correct?  I'm sure you've seen the entitlement issues that are relatively widespread amongst college students today.  And these are kids who haven't been coddled by basketball coaches and promised the world by their family, friends, agents, handlers, etc.  Throw in that part of the equation, and you'll find that many, if not most, college basketball recruits today are skewing their own sense of reality.  Why is the blame being placed on Buzz for A) setting false expectations or B) failing to set expectations when it is more likely that the recruits are the ones setting their own expectations regardless of what Buzz - or any other D-I coach for that matter - says?

The problem here is that MU is still a second-tier basketball school nationally (i.e. MU is a mid-major playing in a major conference), and it is not a destination that is even considered by 10% of the 4- and 5-star recruits out there.  If you're UNC, Duke, UCLA, etc., you have your pick of the litter and you can afford to toss aside someone of "questionable" character or who lacks mental fortitude.

For MU, the talent pool is much more shallow.  Therefore, in order to land 5-, 4- and serviceable 3-star recruits nationwide, you're going to have to overlook the "living-in-their-own-world" kids - particularly those passed upon by the bigger names for the aforementioned reasons - in order to attract sufficient talent to compete in the Big East.

Moral of the story - Either accept the fact that MU is going to deal with a seemingly inordinate number of transfers, or join the company of DePaul, USF & TCU at the bottom of that little chart to the left.

[StillAWarrior]

Whether 40% is the correct figure, the point is that Buzz didn't just make that number up... he's quoting NABC.  If you want to question the stat, take it up with Izzo.  If you want to compare MU against the mean, I would highly suggest (like others before me) that you consider taking a statistics course and pay attention to the chapter on "sample size."

That notwithstanding... Sultan: you work in higher education, correct?  I'm sure you've seen the entitlement issues that are relatively widespread amongst college students today.  And these are kids who haven't been coddled by basketball coaches and promised the world by their family, friends, agents, handlers, etc.  Throw in that part of the equation, and you'll find that many, if not most, college basketball recruits today are skewing their own sense of reality.  Why is the blame being placed on Buzz for A) setting false expectations or B) failing to set expectations when it is more likely that the recruits are the ones setting their own expectations regardless of what Buzz - or any other D-I coach for that matter - says?

The problem here is that MU is still a second-tier basketball school nationally (i.e. MU is a mid-major playing in a major conference), and it is not a destination that is even considered by 10% of the 4- and 5-star recruits out there.  If you're UNC, Duke, UCLA, etc., you have your pick of the litter and you can afford to toss aside someone of "questionable" character or who lacks mental fortitude.

For MU, the talent pool is much more shallow.  Therefore, in order to land 5-, 4- and serviceable 3-star recruits nationwide, you're going to have to overlook the "living-in-their-own-world" kids - particularly those passed upon by the bigger names for the aforementioned reasons - in order to attract sufficient talent to compete in the Big East.

Moral of the story - Either accept the fact that MU is going to deal with a seemingly inordinate number of transfers, or join the company of DePaul, USF & TCU at the bottom of that little chart to the left.

I'm guessing there are parts of this post that are not going to be terribly popular here, but I have to admit that I don't find much that I can honestly disagree with.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The problem here is that MU is still a second-tier basketball school nationally (i.e. MU is a mid-major playing in a major conference), and it is not a destination that is even considered by 10% of the 4- and 5-star recruits out there.  If you're UNC, Duke, UCLA, etc., you have your pick of the litter and you can afford to toss aside someone of "questionable" character or who lacks mental fortitude.

For MU, the talent pool is much more shallow.  Therefore, in order to land 5-, 4- and serviceable 3-star recruits nationwide, you're going to have to overlook the "living-in-their-own-world" kids - particularly those passed upon by the bigger names for the aforementioned reasons - in order to attract sufficient talent to compete in the Big East.

Moral of the story - Either accept the fact that MU is going to deal with a seemingly inordinate number of transfers, or join the company of DePaul, USF & TCU at the bottom of that little chart to the left.

Agree with a lot of this, but not toward the bottom.  There are many ways to skin the cat and plenty of very successful programs in places in the middle of nowhere, small school, poor recruiting base that get it done year in and year out without having to take some of the recruiting risks we have. 

[GGGG]

First off, I will agree that kids today are much more "coddled" than I was a generation ago.  But I also think that they are also much, much more mature and "with it" than I was at that age.  Coddling isn't always a bad thing.

But back to basketball, I think you are dealing with a false "either/or" here.  The choice isn't between dealing with transfers or being a bottom tier BE program.  I am of the opinion that MU can be a consistent winner and not have to deal with these issues.  And I have never disputed the 40% figure...I just think using it as an excuse is kind of lame when I doubt most BE-type programs who aren't going through coaching changes reach that figure.

Over the course of the past two years we have had two transfers due to lack of talent...players who should have never been offered.  And two transfers at the semester break due to playing time type issues.  Seriously, where has that happened before?

Look, I still like Buzz and hope for his success.  There just is *a lot* of smoke here.  And we can either write them off one at a time, or we can realize that there is a disturbing trend here.  Buzz is a goofy dude who flamed out quickly at his only other head coaching job.  There isn't a long record of stability with this guy and it worries me.

[Pakuni]

Look, I still like Buzz and hope for his success.  There just is *a lot* of smoke here.  And we can either write them off one at a time, or we can realize that there is a disturbing trend here.  Buzz is a goofy dude who flamed out quickly at his only other head coaching job.  There isn't a long record of stability with this guy and it worries me.

Whoa, whoa, whoa .... what?
What's the "smoke" you're finding here and what's the disturbing trend? That two kids have transferred in two years due to a perceived lack of playing time/opportunity? If that disturbs you, then I might suggest you're a tad bit sensitive about these things. I'm disappointed by the transfers, but definitely not disturbed.

Buzz didn't "flame out" at his last coaching job. He left for what he thought was a better opportunity. Given the fortunes of UNO basketball since, and where his career has gone since, it turns out he made an exceptionally wise and prescient decision, wouldn't you agree?

If you really want to understand how common transfers occur these days, check out this list.

http://justincollegesports.blogspot.com/2010/04/2010-college-basketball-transfers-april.html

Last year, there were 474 Division I transfers. Four of them were at MU, which is on the high side (though two of them - Roseboro and McMorrow - never actually played at MU). Among the many others with four or more ...

Virginia (hey, didn't some of you want that guy as MU's coach? Disturbing) Washington St.
UTEP
Utah
USC
UC-Riverside
UCLA (Howland runs a disturbing program)
St. Joseph's
St. Bonaventure
Southern Illinois
Rutgers
Providence (another favorite coaching candidate running a disturbing program)
Oregon
Ole Miss
Iowa State
Illinois State
Fordham
Duquense
Arizona State
Akron

And, I think if you look at the list, you'd find there are many, many programs that had at least three transfers last year, including the likes of Arizona, Baylor, UConn, Gonzaga, Illinois, NC State, Nebraska, Penn State, St. Louis and Utah State.

[GGGG]

Whoa, whoa, whoa .... what?
What's the "smoke" you're finding here and what's the disturbing trend? That two kids have transferred in two years due to a perceived lack of playing time/opportunity? If that disturbs you, then I might suggest you're a tad bit sensitive about these things. I'm disappointed by the transfers, but definitely not disturbed.

Buzz didn't "flame out" at his last coaching job. He left for what he thought was a better opportunity. Given the fortunes of UNO basketball since, and where his career has gone since, it turns out he made an exceptionally wise and prescient decision, wouldn't you agree?

Well, Pakuni, I am disturbed.  Many of the programs you listed had coaching changes that likely resulted in the large number of transfers.  MU didn't.  I don't like the trend.

And "flame out" was a bad phrase for the UNO job.  "Lack of dedication" would be a better phrase.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Well, Pakuni, I am disturbed.  Many of the programs you listed had coaching changes that likely resulted in the large number of transfers.  MU didn't.  I don't like the trend.

And "flame out" was a bad phrase for the UNO job.  "Lack of dedication" would be a better phrase.

lack of dedication, or a desire to get off of a sinking ship.

I thought the reasons that it was a wise move for Buzz to leave UNO had been pretty clearly established, especially the move to D3 and the lack of funding/support from the administration.

[Pakuni]

Well, Pakuni, I am disturbed.  Many of the programs you listed had coaching changes that likely resulted in the large number of transfers.  MU didn't.  I don't like the trend.

And "flame out" was a bad phrase for the UNO job.  "Lack of dedication" would be a better phrase.

Lack of dedication by whom?
The university that didn't provide promised facilities, per diems and academic support, and has since given up on the program entirely?
And what exactly have you seen from Buzz Williams that would lead you to believe he's not dedicated to his job?

Also, I actually tried to stay away from programs with coaching changes last year. Of the 19 programs I listed with four or more transfers (and there were more than 19 of them), only four of them had coaching changes. Of the 10 I listed with three or more (and there were more than 10 programs that I didn't list), none of them had coaching changes.  

[GGGG]

lack of dedication, or a desire to get off of a sinking ship.

I thought the reasons that it was a wise move for Buzz to leave UNO had been pretty clearly established, especially the move to D3 and the lack of funding/support from the administration.

I think the move to D3 happened after Buzz left. 

[GGGG]

Also, I actually tried to stay away from programs with coaching changes last year. Of the 19 programs I listed with four or more transfers (and there were more than 19 of them), only four of them had coaching changes. Of the 10 I listed with three or more (and there were more than 10 programs that I didn't list), none of them had coaching changes.  

Then it is a trend that disturbs me at places other than MU.

[Benny B]

Agree with a lot of this, but not toward the bottom.  There are many ways to skin the cat and plenty of very successful programs in places in the middle of nowhere, small school, poor recruiting base that get it done year in and year out without having to take some of the recruiting risks we have. 

I know that you're not implying that "no-risk" recruits exist?  I agree that some of the recruits Buzz has signed have been questionable at best, but the truth is that as long as free will exists, "no-risk" recruits will never exist.

Granted, there are some recruits that are "low-risk" and some that are "high-risk."  But how do you subjectively determine - with a discernible amount of accuracy - who is what before an NLI is printed up?  Should Buzz be profiling his recruits?  Should we be sending high school kids to pre-NLI counseling sessions?  Should we obtain Meyers-Briggs indicators for all of MU's recruits?

Listen... it's easy to place blame on Buzz for recruiting the wrong guys here, but let's not rush to judgment here.  Mistakes are inevitable, even in recruiting... but the only way to prevent a mistake is to make no attempt whatsoever.

Foresight is a cure that challenges the highest intellectual; hindsight is the elixir of the intellectually challenged.

[dw3dw3dw3]

I'm trying to get it from the NCAA right now through a few buddies of mine that work for the NCAA.

I don't believe I've used an emotion icon before, but I think this is what I'm going for: 

Hey NCAA buddy,
    I'm trying to prove to these people on this message board (where I kick ass everyday) that the coach of my alma mater runs a squirmy program.  He was recently quoted in the local newspaper saying that 40% of incoming recruits transferred in order to make himself look better, I'm calling bullcrap. Since you are one of my many very influential and important friends who works for the NCAA, could you make sure my hunches are correct in that this doesn't apply to Marquette's situation? If not, could you break down the data by race, religion, sex, country of origin, criminal record, traditional/athletic, program received the death penalty, coaching change, and average GPA (in both high school and college) so I can prove something to those message board idiots.
Thanks,
Your equally as important friend

[ChicosBailBonds]

lack of dedication, or a desire to get off of a sinking ship.

I thought the reasons that it was a wise move for Buzz to leave UNO had been pretty clearly established, especially the move to D3 and the lack of funding/support from the administration.

The move to D3 came several years later

[ChicosBailBonds]

I know that you're not implying that "no-risk" recruits exist?  I agree that some of the recruits Buzz has signed have been questionable at best, but the truth is that as long as free will exists, "no-risk" recruits will never exist.

Granted, there are some recruits that are "low-risk" and some that are "high-risk."  But how do you subjectively determine - with a discernible amount of accuracy - who is what before an NLI is printed up?  Should Buzz be profiling his recruits?  Should we be sending high school kids to pre-NLI counseling sessions?  Should we obtain Meyers-Briggs indicators for all of MU's recruits?

Listen... it's easy to place blame on Buzz for recruiting the wrong guys here, but let's not rush to judgment here.  Mistakes are inevitable, even in recruiting... but the only way to prevent a mistake is to make no attempt whatsoever.

Foresight is a cure that challenges the highest intellectual; hindsight is the elixir of the intellectually challenged.

Correct.  There is no such thing as a no risk recruit..we agree.  My issue (this applies to Crean and Buzz) is that we have dipped into the well on some kids that clearly had issues (Pakuni will interpret this to mean Murder I - Criminal - Life Sentence rapist) and other programs in the state steered clear from for a reason.  We seem to ignore a lot of red flags of late.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't believe I've used an emotion icon before, but I think this is what I'm going for: 

Hey NCAA buddy,
    I'm trying to prove to these people on this message board (where I kick ass everyday) that the coach of my alma mater runs a squirmy program.  He was recently quoted in the local newspaper saying that 40% of incoming recruits transferred in order to make himself look better, I'm calling bullcrap. Since you are one of my many very influential and important friends who works for the NCAA, could you make sure my hunches are correct in that this doesn't apply to Marquette's situation? If not, could you break down the data by race, religion, sex, country of origin, criminal record, traditional/athletic, program received the death penalty, coaching change, and average GPA (in both high school and college) so I can prove something to those message board idiots.
Thanks,
Your equally as important friend

Love it...that was creative and funny.  Well done.

[MerrittsMustache]

Correct.  There is no such thing as a no risk recruit..we agree.  My issue (this applies to Crean and Buzz) is that we have dipped into the well on some kids that clearly had issues (Pakuni will interpret this to mean Murder I - Criminal - Life Sentence rapist) and other programs in the state steered clear from for a reason.  We seem to ignore a lot of red flags of late.

Who were the red flags? Maymon because of his father. I'll give you that one. Who else?

[Lennys Tap]

Then it is a trend that disturbs me at places other than MU.

We totally get that you're disturbed.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

The move to D3 came several years later

what, 2 years?  I think it had to have been in the works for awhile too.  The AD just didn't wake up one day and say, "We're going D3!"

[ChicosBailBonds]

what, 2 years?  I think it had to have been in the works for awhile too.  The AD just didn't wake up one day and say, "We're going D3!"

Well, actually it was all predicated on the student vote and usage of student fees to keep them going.  If that vote passed, which was held AFTER Buzz left, then they would still be DI.  The vote didn't pass and that is when the dominoes fell.

http://blog.nola.com/tpsports/2009/05/uno_students_vote_against_athl.html

http://blog.nola.com/tpsports/2009/05/uno_students_defeat_fee_hike_f.html

[El Duderino]

I don't really care about an extra transfer or two so long as the team wins, kids who stay graduate at a good clip, and the kids who stay don't get in trouble off the court and thus embarrass the university.

College coaches today be it basketball or football have to recruit 18 year old coddled kids that often will feel they are already better as freshman than they really are and often they have family/friends in their ear who feel the same. Then when they don't get the minutes they feel they are entitled to, they want to transfer.

If the play on the court suffers because of excessive transfers, then i'll be concerned. If kids are brought in that don't take their academics seriously and/or get in trouble off the court, then Buzz better quickly reevaluate who he's bringing in.

Until that stuff happens, why should we as fans get all worked up because we've had one or two more transfers than the norm? College coaches don't get judged on their transfer rates, they get judged first on how many games he wins and then by how the kids perform in class and behave off the court.

[mu_hilltopper]

Scholarships and coaching time are a finite resource.  Signing a recruit is a huge investment in time and energy, both in recruiting effort, and coaching effort after that.  When that recruit transfers, your investment gets zeroed out. 

[Lennys Tap]

Scholarships and coaching time are a finite resource.  Signing a recruit is a huge investment in time and energy, both in recruiting effort, and coaching effort after that.  When that recruit transfers, your investment gets zeroed out. 

This is true, and if you look at the investment into Reggie Smith right now the value is zero. However, if you view his scholarship in terms of 4 years it is now open and whoever replaces him will put value back into that investment. If a non contributor replaces Reggie the investment will remain worthless or nearly so, but if a star takes his place the investment will turn out to be far greater in value than Reggie might have ever been.

[MerrittsMustache]

I don't really care about an extra transfer or two so long as the team wins, kids who stay graduate at a good clip, and the kids who stay don't get in trouble off the court and thus embarrass the university.

If the play on the court suffers because of excessive transfers, then i'll be concerned. If kids are brought in that don't take their academics seriously and/or get in trouble off the court, then Buzz better quickly reevaluate who he's bringing in.

Until that stuff happens, why should we as fans get all worked up because we've had one or two more transfers than the norm? College coaches don't get judged on their transfer rates, they get judged first on how many games he wins and then by how the kids perform in class and behave off the court.

Agree 100%

As I stated on a leadership thread...winning cures all. The best player to transfer from MU in the past decade was Odartey Blankson. MU went to the Final Four the year after he left so he was basically forgotten. A couple years later, fans were clamoring for the likes of Brandon Bell and Karon Bradley because MU lacked PG depth.

If you win, transfers are forgiven. If you struggle, transfers are ruining the program.

[NersEllenson]

Agree 100%

As I stated on a leadership thread...winning cures all. The best player to transfer from MU in the past decade was Odartey Blankson. MU went to the Final Four the year after he left so he was basically forgotten. A couple years later, fans were clamoring for the likes of Brandon Bell and Karon Bradley because MU lacked PG depth.

If you win, transfers are forgiven. If you struggle, transfers are ruining the program.

Amen...and also..if you win..you have good leadership..if you lose..you have bad coaching and no leadership.

[Benny B]

Amen...and also..if you win..you have good leadership..if you lose..you have bad coaching and no leadership.

And if you're all of the above in any given season, you're Marquette.

[jfmu]

Telep just posted an article about this. Its insider so I cant post it but if someone wants to here is the link.

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/blog?name=telep_dave&id=6080368&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fncb%2fblog%3fname%3dtelep_dave%26id%3d6080368

[Bocephys]

Breaking down college transfers to the NBA
February, 1, 2011
FEB 1
3:05
PM ET
EmailPrintComments
By Dave Telep, ESPN Recruiting
Shooting 3s ...
A few weeks ago, we touched on the subject of transfers. The deal here is that National Association of Basketball Coaches (NABC) reported this fall that 40 percent of all Division I signees turn into transfers by the end of their sophomore year. Yikes, that's a high number. We decided to look into transfers and what happens to them as NBA players.

1. Only five percent of NBA players transferred

There are 434 players that have seen minutes in NBA games this season. Out of that entire pool, only 22 saw time at more than one Division I program. Basically, of all the players in the NBA, only five percent of them transferred colleges. There are 87 international players and 27 kids who came straight out of high school to the NBA (prior to 2006 when the rule was set put in place).

A reasonable conclusion could be drawn that transfering colleges lessens your chance of playing in the NBA. One certainly doesn't improve his chances when he skips around programs, that much we are certain of.

2. What kind of transfer works?

When you decide to switch colleges, you either transfer to a higher-level school, a lower-level one or make a lateral move. Maurice Evans (Wichita State to Texas), Joey Graham/Stephen Graham (Central Florida to Oklahoma State) and Jason Williams transferred up and found success. Derrick Carcter (Louisville to UTEP), Jordan Crawford (Indiana to Xavier), Gary Forbes (Virginia to UMass), Dominic McGuire (Cal to Fresno) and Ime Udoka (South Florida to Portland State) took a theoretical step down in competition.

The bulk of transfers who made it to the NBA made lateral moves in college in terms of conference affiliation. The most recent example is Wesley Johnson who moved up from Iowa State to Syracuse but stayed in a BCS league. Danny Granger (Bradley to New Mexico) is one of the better pros to survive the transfer. Raja Bell's path took him from Boston U. to Florida International.

3. NBA players spend 2.39 years in college

Taking everything into account, the profile of the average NBA player indicates that he spends 2.39 years in college. The advent of the one-year wonder will continue to chip away at the number and the new collective bargaining agreement will surely impact it as well. If there's an age limit, that number will increase. Should kids be able to go prep to pros, the number will nose dive.

Out of the 434 players in the NBA, 347 of them spent time on a Division I campus. Mid- and low-major programs contributed 75 players to the NBA, meaning those players account for 21 percent of the former college players in the NBA. Here's the recruiting nugget. Since one in five of former college players went to a non BCS level team, that's a nice pitch for a mid-major school. However, in order to make it the NBA from a mid-major school, you'll need to spend 3.39 years in college, about one more season than it would take from a bigger school. The theory here is development and maturity are the keys to coming out of a mid-major and playing in the NBA.

Special thanks to Drew Cannon, a sophomore at Duke and the most reliable and intelligent intern anyone could ever ask for. Once Drew graduates, he will need a job so please, remember the name.

[Steve Buscemi]

here comes the uproar