|
Post by Hermit on Apr 21, 2015 22:34:31 GMT -5
I have to say....and I have said it before......things have changed. Players are leaving, I'm sure in some cases being politely asked to leave. So many transfers. It's not the way it used to be. Maybe I'm just getting old and not understanding the dynamics of college ball. But.......one and done......so many transfers.....the way the game is played today.....low scoring......nobody can shoot....coaches running to the money... I'm slowly starting to lose interest in this game..... Sorry, it's just not what it used to be.
|
|
|
Post by az63 on Apr 21, 2015 23:31:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by class70 on Apr 22, 2015 7:08:14 GMT -5
Informative article. It answers a question I had about this process. Apparently, many of the transfers have essentially been "fired" for poor performance.
|
|
|
Post by derhut on Apr 22, 2015 7:14:28 GMT -5
the situation is worse in college football..also, up until 5 or so years ago, D1 baseball players could transfer schools without even sitting out a year. At the southern schools, kids would sign with say Georgia..report to campus in the middle of August - 10 days prior to classes starting..baseball workouts would begin...men and boys were separated in a matter of 10 days..if it was readily apparent that one was not in the rotation...they would transfer to another D1 school prior to labor day and be eligible immediately !
The bottom line is that the NCAA is one messed up organization..
|
|
|
Post by mcspin on Apr 22, 2015 7:49:20 GMT -5
I have to wonder if potential recruits now look at the transfer history of a school to see if it's likely they'll be forced out if not productive. If so, eventually players would be less likely to seek schools where they might not get much floor time. This might actually help the A10 when a kid thinks that he's ACC level talent, when in reality, he's borderline and won't play much.
|
|
|
Post by thesenator on Apr 22, 2015 7:58:46 GMT -5
I have to wonder if potential recruits now look at the transfer history of a school to see if it's likely they'll be forced out if not productive. If so, eventually players would be less likely to seek schools where they might not get much floor time. This might actually help the A10 when a kid thinks that he's ACC level talent, when in reality, he's borderline and won't play much. i don't know if most hs kids would have the maturity/common sense to think of that, but i definitely think it is something mom and dad ought to point out...
|
|
|
Post by thesenator on Apr 22, 2015 8:15:26 GMT -5
I have to say....and I have said it before......things have changed. Players are leaving, I'm sure in some cases being politely asked to leave. So many transfers. It's not the way it used to be. Maybe I'm just getting old and not understanding the dynamics of college ball. But.......one and done......so many transfers.....the way the game is played today.....low scoring......nobody can shoot....coaches running to the money... I'm slowly starting to lose interest in this game..... Sorry, it's just not what it used to be. i certainly think there has been a greater exodus of players, hermit, but i think coaches changing jobs has gone on for a long time...our own coach donovan left bonas to go coach the knicks...he was before my time, but i suspect he could've coached basketball at bonas until the day he dropped if he wanted to...what's the old expression "the grass always look greener on the other side"...that's a question i'm going to ask him in heaven: "coach, if you had it all over to do again, would you have stayed at bonas?...
|
|
|
Post by sony on Apr 22, 2015 8:17:27 GMT -5
Big time College sports hasn't been about old alma mater and apple pie for many years! I, too, have lost a great deal of interest in the game, as hermit has. Street ball coaches have way more influence than High School coaches on kids, even more so on the parents, and all are whoring them out, very often, for their own self interests. All this goes back to the days when Sonny Vaccaro began running kids for sneakers. Sorry to wax poetic, but I too miss the innocence of days long gone by!
|
|
|
Post by az63 on Apr 22, 2015 8:44:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by res on Apr 22, 2015 8:55:53 GMT -5
Sorry to wax poetic, but I too miss the innocence of days long gone by! I don't disagree with you, sony, but days long gone by weren't nearly as innocent as we remember them to be. In some ways they might have even been worse.
|
|
jim62
Junior Member
Posts: 377
|
Post by jim62 on Apr 22, 2015 8:55:58 GMT -5
Any all of this makes me wish we could go back to the days before all of the mega-conferences, when many of the schools were independent and no automatic berths in post-season tournaments.
I too have lost some interest because of the way the deck is stacked.
It's all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!
And that's a sorry situation.
|
|
|
Post by faffy444 on Apr 22, 2015 9:07:05 GMT -5
I have to say....and I have said it before......things have changed. Players are leaving, I'm sure in some cases being politely asked to leave. So many transfers. It's not the way it used to be. Maybe I'm just getting old and not understanding the dynamics of college ball. But.......one and done......so many transfers.....the way the game is played today.....low scoring......nobody can shoot....coaches running to the money... I'm slowly starting to lose interest in this game..... Sorry, it's just not what it used to be. hermit i agree with you. the game is now 2nd rate. a lot of reasons for its decline, paramount among those reasons in my mind is the 3 pt shot. its made the game a farce. it leads to lower shooting percentages, hence lower scoring. there are numerous other reasons as well. look at what i call momentum breakers that are built into the game today. 4 t.v. time outs each half. the use it or lose it time out at the end of the first half. the video replays that stall the game. coaches running up and down the side lines ranting and raving taking away from the on court play. how about the lack of coaching, hence fundamentals that the players bring with them now. many moons ago kids went to hoops camps to hone their skills , now they play aau ball under the tutelage of street coaches. its more about displaying their athleticism for a schorloship than learning to play. with 351 D1 teams now @ 13 per team thats 4563 D1 players a year. even with a population of 315 million in the usa its near difficult to come up with that many D1 players. back in the 1970's you had about 175 D1 teams , this makes for a lot of guys who wouldnt be D1. hence a watered down product. now ive heard it said they want to go to a 30 second clock , eventually leading to a 24 second clock so teams can have more possesions to score more points. what a laugh. with a 24 second clock you'll end up with more turnovers, more frantic shot selection,and less scoring. also hearing they want to widen the lane to promote more drives to the hoop in hopes of putting more points on the scoreboard. another joke. narrow the lane and bring the big man back into the game which would raise scoring, make for a more efficient sport, and might help promote a mid range game again. too many guys become head coaches today because they were good baby sitters, i mean recruiters. also there is too much drooling over prospects who are mediocre players , but can jump out of the gym, or change ends in a heart beat. the players today are atheletes first, body builders second, entertainers third, and players fourth. it all makes for a lousy sport. im done ranting now.
|
|
|
Post by res on Apr 22, 2015 9:39:34 GMT -5
The only way to get the big man in the game and to promote the mid-range jumper is to get rid of the 3-pt. shot. I'm all for it, but it will never happen.
|
|
|
Post by ceharv on Apr 22, 2015 9:40:13 GMT -5
On the other hand, just because things were one way as we were growing up and into our interest with college sports, esp. hoops, doesn't mean that was the right or only way. Everything evolves, and yes money changes everything - why profess shock or outrage that it impacts sports? I am sure that there were many back in the day we now fondly recall, who thought those days were much worse then the good old days they remembered when kids played sports as pure amateurs, for the pure love of the game. (remember "Chariots of Fire" - the outrage of traditionalists at the use of a coach who was paid to coach? It's the same thing and reminds me of discussions of music. People who grew up loving big bands hated the change to rock, and us old rockers tend to dislike the influence of rap. Things change! Also I recall that there were always transfers in and out of a school in the general student population - but of course guys on 'ships were the ones restricted by NCAA rules - is it right to restrict their freedom of movement b/c they've got a talent that has allowed them to accept a ride? I thought the objective was to treat them MORE like regular students, not less? If so, that works two ways. And do coaches really change jobs at a greater rate then other workers, particularly highly-paid execs? I don't profess to have the answer statistically, but from observation - the answer is no. But whenever I might be losing interest, It seems an AN comes around,, or a Posely scores two game-winning drives in a week, and all is right with the hoops world. So my suggestion is to relax, enjoy, and don't over-analyze. Accept it for the reason you originally became interested - it's a game played by kids attending the same school you are - or did. And expect more changes and roll with them b/c they'll come whether you like it or not.
|
|
|
Post by agoo on Apr 22, 2015 10:16:31 GMT -5
The mid range game is gone because its not an efficient way to score. Note this article from nba.com: www.nba.com/2014/news/features/john_schuhmann/11/14/numbers-notebook-shot-selection-is-everything/New York, LA Lakers, and Minnesota took the most midrange shots in league and they're three of the four worst teams in the league. Without finding the numbers, I'm sure this also applies to the college game. In order to average a point per shot, you have to hit 50% of your midrange jumpers, which is significantly above the NBA average. To do the same from three point range, you need to shoot 33%, which is below what Andell shot last year, and Posely and Jay were in range of that number. Midrange shots also rarely result in trips to the line. Not that threes do either, but when you consider the close range shot is a much higher percentage shot than both mid and 3 point range shots, AND you're much more likely to get a trip to the line out of it, you can really see why the midrange game is going away. Midrange shooting isn't gone because its not a skill that's taught any more, its gone because it doesn't make sense.
|
|