(04-28-2018 06:16 PM)NYNightOwl Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 02:08 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  Cost to attend Wake Forest next year will be $62,538. Hopefully they have his desired major.

http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/cos...f6878.html

We don't know what other financial aid (if any) he might be getting from Wake Forest.

Interesting point in the article is that of the 75 private schools in the Best Value list, Wake is last in financial aid. They make the point that the debt limit graduates have at Duke and Davidson is less than at Wake.

(04-28-2018 08:38 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 07:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 03:42 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 03:35 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 11:33 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I think he was concerned about playing time at Rice next year, so he would rather pay to sit on the bench at a good program with good attendance than pay to sit on the bench at a program that is ... less successful.

Just me, but I would rather play in front of 1,000 than sit in front of 10,000.

Would it be the same if it was 100 not 1000?

Everyone has a different tolerance for what counts for them. That said, this is a common refrain amongst our transfers. It seems to be more than the crowd. Its sit on the bench and win by leaving or play and lose by staying.

for me, other things being equal, more or less, I would rather play in front of Mom and Dad and six others than ride the bench for 40minutes in front of 10,000. I doubt there are many competitors who would prefer sitting on a bench.

I say, other things being equal, more or less. I would rather ride the bench at Rice than start at West Cntral Podunk State. There are far more considerations than crowd size.

I don’t see crowd size as being a determinant in the decicision to be a sub somewhere else rather than a player here. A minor factor, maybe, but not a determining one. Other wise the decision would always be to transfer to the place with the best attendance.

I'm unclear - your first para said youd rather play than be on the bench. Second paragraph said youd ride the bench at Rice rather than start at podunk state.

WF is a very good school. And WF to us athletically is like Rice to podunk state. So based on your second paragraph, it's a reasonable and logical move to go there

Would you rather pay your way at a school with ACC stipend rates? (And ones that probably get paid on time, if rumors are true.) With ACC-level training tables and weight rooms? And practice time against ACC-caliber basketball players? And get coached by Danny Manning and his staff? (Although another bad season like this past one, and that staff is out.)

Or pay your way at Rice?

I think this also gets him closer to home, too.

(04-28-2018 08:38 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 07:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 03:42 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 03:35 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(04-28-2018 11:33 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I think he was concerned about playing time at Rice next year, so he would rather pay to sit on the bench at a good program with good attendance than pay to sit on the bench at a program that is ... less successful.

Just me, but I would rather play in front of 1,000 than sit in front of 10,000.

Would it be the same if it was 100 not 1000?

Everyone has a different tolerance for what counts for them. That said, this is a common refrain amongst our transfers. It seems to be more than the crowd. Its sit on the bench and win by leaving or play and lose by staying.

for me, other things being equal, more or less, I would rather play in front of Mom and Dad and six others than ride the bench for 40minutes in front of 10,000. I doubt there are many competitors who would prefer sitting on a bench.

I say, other things being equal, more or less. I would rather ride the bench at Rice than start at West Cntral Podunk State. There are far more considerations than crowd size.

I don’t see crowd size as being a determinant in the decicision to be a sub somewhere else rather than a player here. A minor factor, maybe, but not a determining one. Other wise the decision would always be to transfer to the place with the best attendance.

I'm unclear - your first para said youd rather play than be on the bench. Second paragraph said youd ride the bench at Rice rather than start at podunk state.

WF is a very good school. And WF to us athletically is like Rice to podunk state. So based on your second paragraph, it's a reasonable and logical move to go there

Yes, you are certainly unclear, by choice I think.

Other things being approximately equal was the key. Nothing at all approximately equal at West Central Podunk State. But Wake Forest and and Rice, much more approximately equal.

I said That other things being approximately equal, I did not see crowd size being a primary motive for a transfer, for a competitor. Players want to play. They don’t want to sit, no matter how many people are watching them sit.

Crowd size may be a factor, but likely way, way down the list. It doesn’t trump prestige of the institution, nor does it trump PT. If it was me, I would never sacrifice PT for crowd size. would you?

(04-04-2018 10:27 AM)Kayjay Wrote:  

(03-29-2018 11:22 AM)Kayjay Wrote:  

(03-26-2018 11:02 AM)Kayjay Wrote:  

(03-23-2018 10:17 AM)Kayjay Wrote:  

(03-21-2018 12:51 PM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  The scholarship limit is 13. There are 351 Division I programs. That equals 4563 players.

Thanks for the correction. UPDATE, as of today (March 23) there are now 211 transfers announced in D-1 hoops.

Further Update (March 26) There are now 241 transfers announced in D-1 hoops, including:

6 from Youngstown State,
6 from Maine,
7 from Pitt,
4 leaving The Citidel,
3 From Wyoming,
4 from Wake Forest,
4 USC Upstate,
3 San Jose State,
3 Oral Roberts,
4 NC State,
3 Louisiana Tech,
4 Fordham,
5 Evansville,
4 Dayton,
3 Cal Poly,
and 3 Bowling Green.

For those still paying attention, as of today (March 29), 311 Players have announced that they will transfer from their current Division 1 school.

Updated as of April 4, there are now 356 D-1 players intending to transfer to a new school, including Freshman 6-1 PG Tyler Maye from VCU.

Today's Update: As of April 30, there have been 545 D-1 Players who have annoucned their intent to transfer to another program.

(04-30-2018 11:59 AM)Kayjay Wrote:  Today's Update: As of April 30, there have been 545 D-1 Players who have annoucned their intent to transfer to another program.

Wow! And what's the number of U.S. colleagians (even one-and-dones) who make an NBA roster -- or another at-least-living-wage professional team roster -- each year?

There are 30 NBA teams. I'd say about 2-3 rookies per year will make a roster at the start of a season. Maybe another 1 or 2 might be 1st timers called up during a season? But out of that 100-125 players, maybe 1/5 of them are foreign? So perhaps 100 a year - give or take a few from year to year.

If you add in foreign teams, it's much more. But I'm not sure how much money some of those teams pay. Someone like Mike Harris has done decent for himself, mostly playing on foreign teams the last 15 years or so.

Obviously a majority of those transfers will never play competitive basketball again after they are done after college, outside of pickup games. I think one of the reasons the transfer epidemic is so widespread is that the rules are too lax. If more players had to sit out a year, it would be cut way down. The NCAA is also trying to get rid of 1-and-dones, even if it means allowing some high school players to go straight to the NBA again like they used to do two decades ago.

(04-30-2018 05:49 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  There are 30 NBA teams. I'd say about 2-3 rookies per year will make a roster at the start of a season. Maybe another 1 or 2 might be 1st timers called up during a season? But out of that 100-125 players, maybe 1/5 of them are foreign? So perhaps 100 a year - give or take a few from year to year.

If you add in foreign teams, it's much more. But I'm not sure how much money some of those teams pay. Someone like Mike Harris has done decent for himself, mostly playing on foreign teams the last 15 years or so.

Obviously a majority of those transfers will never play competitive basketball again after they are done after college, outside of pickup games. I think one of the reasons the transfer epidemic is so widespread is that the rules are too lax. If more players had to sit out a year, it would be cut way down. The NCAA is also trying to get rid of 1-and-dones, even if it means allowing some high school players to go straight to the NBA again like they used to do two decades ago.

As I mentioned before, the NCAA is going to eliminate the rule mandating that transfers must sit out one season. This change may occur this summer. It is already too late for Katie to bar the door ....

The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. It needs to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never.

It would also put the nail in the coffin on my (and hopefully many others') interest in college bball

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA.

The NCAA should make sure to hire a few thousand warm bodies to attend every Rice home game. That might actually make a difference.

Sad but true. In all honesty I think people would show up to watch a solid men's basketball team, but the transfers out undermine all the hard work. I do believe that Pera has the acumen to lead this program to big things. He knows basketball.

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

I disagree with this. It's a two way street. Having no sit outs for transfers would also potentially benefit Rice as kids that are at Duke, Texas, UNC, etc who are not getting any PT could sign with other schools immediately as well. It's up to your coaching staff to be well connected and know where the available talent is. What do you think Loyola of Chicago's inherent advantage was over its competition (or Rice for that matter)? It's current coach was 32-61 his 1st 3 years at the school. This was the 1st year in 7 years that Loyola even finished above .500 in its league.

Any school can win in NCAA basketball, including Rice.

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

(05-01-2018 07:26 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

Disagree with that because of the relative impacts of each transfer. If five physics undergrads transfer, it does not cripple a program. Plus, I know of no NCAA limits on physics scholarships.

The NCAA needs to find ways to get itself out of being an NBA development league, a la baseball, and stricter eligibility rules could help. That would encourage kids to either stick it out with the school they signed with or move to the D League or Europe, if they are interested in pro ball.

These restrictions would not keep students from pursuing their education and getting a scholarship for it. It would just discourage them from team hopping.

(05-01-2018 07:26 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

Ok. I get what you’re saying.
So... why are we having this discussion/phenomenon with just basketball ? Why not all sports? Why is basketball having this issue and not football/baseball and women’s sports? Why are the rules different in basketball?
Sincere question.

While I understand the merit to both points, I don't think it's good practice to recruit a player who's under scholarship at another school or university. Yes coaching staffs need to be vigilant in finding the decent players who aren't getting time, but how do you recruit them away without looking like slime?

I don't feel like this new era in college basketball benefits Rice in any way. As long as we're in a bad basketball conference, players aren't going to transfer in. They'll continue to use Rice as a stepping stone.

(05-01-2018 07:59 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:26 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

Ok. I get what you’re saying.
So... why are we having this discussion/phenomenon with just basketball ? Why not all sports? Why is basketball having this issue and not football/baseball and women’s sports? Why are the rules different in basketball?
Sincere question.

My take is that it's a confluence of factors, some of which are:

1) Basketball seems to have an extremely high number of players who think they have what it takes to make it to the NBA, as compared to other revenue sports, so players are more likely to chase that dream to the detriment of their education.

2) Compared to baseball, basketball only has the 1 and done rule, whereas baseball makes you stay in school for 3 years.

3) Basketball is a sport where a single player can make a difference. I think this creates a situation where good players are willing to transfer to make a good team even better (e.g. Evans), and then when that good player leaves, others follow suit because of how bad the team will be without them.

(05-01-2018 08:27 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:59 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:26 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

Ok. I get what you’re saying.
So... why are we having this discussion/phenomenon with just basketball ? Why not all sports? Why is basketball having this issue and not football/baseball and women’s sports? Why are the rules different in basketball?
Sincere question.

My take is that it's a confluence of factors, some of which are:

1) Basketball seems to have an extremely high number of players who think they have what it takes to make it to the NBA, as compared to other revenue sports, so players are more likely to chase that dream to the detriment of their education.

2) Compared to baseball, basketball only has the 1 and done rule, whereas baseball makes you stay in school for 3 years.

3) Basketball is a sport where a single player can make a difference. I think this creates a situation where good players are willing to transfer to make a good team even better (e.g. Evans), and then when that good player leaves, others follow suit because of how bad the team will be without them.

Additionally, basketball is a more free-flowing and uniform game than football. Easier to plug and play on a basketball court than transfer to another school for football and be learning a new playbook and new offensive/defensive scheme. There are definitely possessions in basketball games where no set play is called, but don't think you can say the same about football.

(05-01-2018 10:26 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 08:27 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:59 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:26 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:56 PM)Ourland Wrote:  The NCAA not requiring a transfer to sit out a year would be unforgivable. The rules need to go in the other direction. Players should have to sit out and lose a year of eligibility. A school like Rice has no chance of reversing it's basketball fortunes without significant help from the NCAA. Kids will keep transferring out. There's no invitation to the MWC without good football and basketball. Never. Profit margins are too slim to invite dead weight.

It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

Ok. I get what you’re saying.
So... why are we having this discussion/phenomenon with just basketball ? Why not all sports? Why is basketball having this issue and not football/baseball and women’s sports? Why are the rules different in basketball?
Sincere question.

My take is that it's a confluence of factors, some of which are:

1) Basketball seems to have an extremely high number of players who think they have what it takes to make it to the NBA, as compared to other revenue sports, so players are more likely to chase that dream to the detriment of their education.

2) Compared to baseball, basketball only has the 1 and done rule, whereas baseball makes you stay in school for 3 years.

3) Basketball is a sport where a single player can make a difference. I think this creates a situation where good players are willing to transfer to make a good team even better (e.g. Evans), and then when that good player leaves, others follow suit because of how bad the team will be without them.

Additionally, basketball is a more free-flowing and uniform game than football. Easier to plug and play on a basketball court than transfer to another school for football and be learning a new playbook and new offensive/defensive scheme. There are definitely possessions in basketball games where no set play is called, but don't think you can say the same about football.

Good point when comparing it to the other big, revenue sport.

(05-01-2018 11:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 10:26 AM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 08:27 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:59 AM)greyowl72 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 07:26 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  It is fundamentally unfair to impose restrictions on an athlete that are not imposed on a non-athlete. A student should be free to attend any university he/she chooses, without restrictions. A physics major who is on full academic scholarship is not penalized for transferring to another university that happens to have superior faculty and facilities.

Ok. I get what you’re saying.
So... why are we having this discussion/phenomenon with just basketball ? Why not all sports? Why is basketball having this issue and not football/baseball and women’s sports? Why are the rules different in basketball?
Sincere question.

My take is that it's a confluence of factors, some of which are:

1) Basketball seems to have an extremely high number of players who think they have what it takes to make it to the NBA, as compared to other revenue sports, so players are more likely to chase that dream to the detriment of their education.

2) Compared to baseball, basketball only has the 1 and done rule, whereas baseball makes you stay in school for 3 years.

3) Basketball is a sport where a single player can make a difference. I think this creates a situation where good players are willing to transfer to make a good team even better (e.g. Evans), and then when that good player leaves, others follow suit because of how bad the team will be without them.

Additionally, basketball is a more free-flowing and uniform game than football. Easier to plug and play on a basketball court than transfer to another school for football and be learning a new playbook and new offensive/defensive scheme. There are definitely possessions in basketball games where no set play is called, but don't think you can say the same about football.

Good point when comparing it to the other big, revenue sport.

Again, all good points, but it seems to me that the broader question is that by letting Basketball players to transfer freely, you’ve set up a huge discriminatory situation vis a vis Football etc. (Yeah. Yeah. It already is that way).
So, I’m a football player... a good one. I decided to come to Rice. After my first season the writing is on the wall. I think I’m really good and I want to transfer. But I have to sit out a year. My roommate, the basketball player feels the same. He transfers to UCLA and starts immediately.
Doesn’t seem fair.