Transfer Season

[Timothy A]

If you are a player who isn't getting a lot of playing time I don't think you're burning a bridge when you ask to go to portal. If you are a regular contributor, you probably are. But if you're a regular contributor you're going to find a new home, if you are looking for more for more playing time you may not find a new home.

But from the coaches perspective potential of losing a player could throw your roster instruction into a mess so perhaps it's not appreciated in any form when you want to transfer. It sure did screw up Wisconsin's roster last year. They could have used Grant and Greig to play big minutes, but they both left.

I wonder how the coaches at LIU and BU feel right now. And how do thier bosses feel? 2 big red flags there.

 

[ARM]

In some of these cases, the program was likely the party that made the decision. Throughout the last couple of years, we've seen teams in multiple sports saying that they were either not going to bring back their super seniors or would only be giving scholarships to selected players. Roughly 20 percent of the people with eligibility remaining are fifth-year players. Either they move, or they are occupying roster spots and cause others to move. I think we're going to see this increase in transfers until the class that were rookies during the Covid year have used up their extended eligibility.

 

[Sieve1]

In some of these cases, the program was likely the party that made the decision. Throughout the last couple of years, we've seen teams in multiple sports saying that they were either not going to bring back their super seniors or would only be giving scholarships to selected players. Roughly 20 percent of the people with eligibility remaining are fifth-year players. Either they move, or they are occupying roster spots and cause others to move. I think we're going to see this increase in transfers until the class that were rookies during the Covid year have used up their extended eligibility.

You hit the nail on the head. There are current committed HS seniors who must take a PG year because the college team still won’t have room, which backs up the following recruiting classes. There are also many uncommitted seniors who have decided to take a PG year in hopes that they will still find a home. There will be many more players than roster spots for a while. Most current college players know this and would only enter the portal if the coach has cut them/taken their scholarship money or the player is so miserable that she is willing to do anything to make a change, which may involve moving to a DIII program (if there is room) or not playing college hockey. I personally know players who are dealing with this and it’s terribly sad. In the end everyone wants to get a good education and have a memorable college experience -with or without hockey.

 

[robertearle]

You hit the nail on the head. There are current committed HS seniors who must take a PG year because the college team still won’t have room, which backs up the following recruiting classes. There are also many uncommitted seniors who have decided to take a PG year in hopes that they will still find a home. There will be many more players than roster spots for a while. Most current college players know this and would only enter the portal if the coach has cut them/taken their scholarship money or the player is so miserable that she is willing to do anything to make a change, which may involve moving to a DIII program (if there is room) or not playing college hockey. I personally know players who are dealing with this and it’s terribly sad. In the end everyone wants to get a good education and have a memorable college experience -with or without hockey.

Sad, but inevitable. COVID cost the college world as a whole X number of games that simply did not get played, could not be played. That translates into "X times 6 times 60" minutes of ice time that are lost forever. Minutes that somebody would otherwise have been able to log. They could have chosen to not have bonus 'COVID years' and that loss of ice time would have fallen entirely on those players in school at the time. One could view the bonus years as a mechanism to spread out the loss of those minutes over more players and more years, thereby decreasing the amount lost by any one payer of group/year of players. Yes, it's sad and it sucks for ALL those players, but it's an effort to make the best of a bad situation that nobody wanted.

 

[Still Eeyore]

But here, your "boss" knows you're reading the want ads. I have to think for a player to enter the portal and make their name known, they had better be farther along than 'just browsing'.

I suspect that this is changing. As usage of the transfer portal becomes more common, the stigma of using it will decline.

 

[Offsides Guy]

I suspect that this is changing. As usage of the transfer portal becomes more common, the stigma of using it will decline.

There is certainly no stigma on the part of coaches using the portal to add to their rosters. It used to be coaches valued loyalty in the players they recruited. They saw it as a positive sign if a player stayed with their high school or club team as opposed to leaving for a better opportunity. Now, those same coaches seek out talent that is wanting to leave the current team through the portal. They don’t seem concerned at all that a transferring player might turn around and transfer again if the player doesn’t like the situation at the coach’s school.

 

[ARM]

One could view the bonus years as a mechanism to spread out the loss of those minutes over more players and more years, thereby decreasing the amount lost by any one payer of group/year of players. Yes, it's sad and it sucks for ALL those players, but it's an effort to make the best of a bad situation that nobody wanted.

I can view it as an attempt to do that. The problem is that it gave a bonus of ~ 20 games to people who played the Covid year over what an athlete typically gets over the course of four seasons, while forcing others to deal with expanded rosters over the entirety of their careers.

As soon as Covid happened, there wasn't a way to make it fair to everyone. However, allowing some athletes to play more games than people normally do just exacerbated the shortage in shifts/minutes. Those student athletes were the most experienced and most likely to be given extra shifts and minutes, so like many NCAA decisions, it doesn't hold up well when inspected through a logical analysis of fairness.

 

[robertearle]

There is certainly no stigma on the part of coaches using the portal to add to their rosters. It used to be coaches valued loyalty in the players they recruited. They saw it as a positive sign if a player stayed with their high school or club team as opposed to leaving for a better opportunity. Now, those same coaches seek out talent that is wanting to leave the current team through the portal. They don’t seem concerned at all that a transferring player might turn around and transfer again if the player doesn’t like the situation at the coach’s school.

The transfer portal is, as best I understand it, a one-time thing. That is, an undergrad making a second transfer would have to sit out. It is literally known as the "one-time transfer exception".

(I don't know if a player who used the portal to transfer as an undergrad can then also transfer a second time as a "grad transfer".)

EDIT: No, a player who uses their one-time transfer as an undergrad is not eligible to make a 'grad transfer' and retain eligibility.

 

[robertearle]

I can view it as an attempt to do that. The problem is that it gave a bonus of ~ 20 games to people who played the Covid year over what an athlete typically gets over the course of four seasons, while forcing others to deal with expanded rosters over the entirety of their careers.

As soon as Covid happened, there wasn't a way to make it fair to everyone. However, allowing some athletes to play more games than people normally do just exacerbated the shortage in shifts/minutes. Those student athletes were the most experienced and most likely to be given extra shifts and minutes, so like many NCAA decisions, it doesn't hold up well when inspected through a logical analysis of fairness.

But at the time the NCAA set up all this, they didn't know how many, if any, games those participating might get. They didn't know if "the bonus" of 20 games would be 20 or 30 or 5. Had it been only a small number like five, and they had not set up the 'COVID year' process, those players playing in 2020 would have lost just about an entire season (and in the case of hockey and other winter/spring sports, losing a second set of championship competitions). Would that have been 'better', or would it have just concentrated the loss to a smaller group of players and a shorter period of time?

The NCAA in good faith tried to guess at a system that would be as fair as possible. Second-guessing after-the-fact seems kind of pointless to me. It is what it is, and it's nobody's fault.

The transfer portal, BTW, was not a part of the response to COVID; it was announced in 2019, as best I know. Clearly COVID has affected the way it is now being used. But again, unforeseen consequences of a bad situation that is nobody's fault.

 

[Offsides Guy]

The transfer portal is, as best I understand it, a one-time thing. That is, an undergrad making a second transfer would have to sit out. It is literally known as the "one-time transfer exception".

(I don't know if a player who used the portal to transfer as an undergrad can then also transfer a second time as a "grad transfer".)

EDIT: No, a player who uses their one-time transfer as an undergrad is not eligible to make a 'grad transfer' and retain eligibility.

Thanks for the clarification

 

[ARM]

The NCAA in good faith tried to guess at a system that would be as fair as possible. Second-guessing after-the-fact seems kind of pointless to me. It is what it is, and it's nobody's fault.

I posted roughly the same things at the time, so my comments aren't meant as an after-the-fact second guess. The NCAA is its usual heavy-handed self. I'd agree that there may have been good intentions at some point, but as with the RPI and PWR, the NCAA really doesn't think things through fully. Instead, in the case of its rankings, it makes an ill-thought decision and then attempts to put bandages on the problem; it doesn't seem capable of admitting that the initial solution may have been totally flawed and needs to be revisited.

I do concede that in the Covid case, there was never going to be a solution that is fair to all. Maybe they could have played a more lengthy season last year, w/o any extra years. That would still be flawed, because the Covid seniors had already lost their NCAA Tournament in 2020. I do think, and I thought at the time, that they have taken a bad situation and made it worse, prolonging its impact. It's basic economics that spending more shifts somewhere leaves fewer for others.

But yes, I can drop it, as we are where we are at this point.

 

[Still Eeyore]

I posted roughly the same things at the time, so my comments aren't meant as an after-the-fact second guess. The NCAA is its usual heavy-handed self. I'd agree that there may have been good intentions at some point, but as with the RPI and PWR, the NCAA really doesn't think things through fully. Instead, in the case of its rankings, it makes an ill-thought decision and then attempts to put bandages on the problem; it doesn't seem capable of admitting that the initial solution may have been totally flawed and needs to be revisited.

I think you are overestimating the practical consequences of the NCAA allowing the extra year. Had they not put a policy like this in place, I strongly suspect that so many players, and schools, would have opted out that there wouldn't have been a 2020-21 season. All of those players would have taken a redshirt, and we'd be exactly where we are now. The only reduction in the roster congestion would be from those players who had already used their redshirt year. In a sport like wrestling, where almost everyone redshirts their freshman year, things would be back to normal. In hockey, the difference would be minimal.

And, given that it was the promise of that extra year that got them to play last year, the NCAA would have to renege in a major way to change things now.

 

[robertearle]

I think you are overestimating the practical consequences of the NCAA allowing the extra year. Had they not put a policy like this in place, I strongly suspect that so many players, and schools, would have opted out that there wouldn't have been a 2020-21 season. All of those players would have taken a redshirt, and we'd be exactly where we are now. The only reduction in the roster congestion would be from those players who had already used their redshirt year. In a sport like wrestling, where almost everyone redshirts their freshman year, things would be back to normal. In hockey, the difference would be minimal.

And, given that it was the promise of that extra year that got them to play last year, the NCAA would have to renege in a major way to change things now.

While I mostly agree with you here, there is one not-small, not-huge difference; players on their own taking red-shirt years would not have extended their "five-year clock/window" to six years, while the NCAA 'extra year' did so. For many players, that wouldn't have changed things, but for some it would have 'moved them out' of the pipeline earlier than what will happen now.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

April 5th update from GPL...

Now in the Portal:
MICEALA SINDORIS Northeastern University
RACHEL WEISS Pennsylvania State University

 

[ZedLeppelin]

April 5th update from GPL...

Now in the Portal:
MICEALA SINDORIS Northeastern University
RACHEL WEISS Pennsylvania State University

Wow...Rachel Weiss wants to transfer from Penn State, too? If the portal players all get their wish, that will be six forwards from last season not coming back next season (including Natalie Heising, who is out of eligibility). I only see two forwards coming in next season, according to collegecommitments.com, which isn't always up-to-date.

 

[used2lurk]

Predicting Weiss has been recruited to Ohio state.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Predicting Weiss has been recruited to Ohio state.

Doesn't seem like so much of a prediction, but more like a certainty.

 

[zoofer]

Hi guys….so in trying to catch up and understand this portal thang, (seems that UNH has a handful on the list) being on the list can mean either you’re wanting/hoping to leave, testing the waters to see your value(here & there), or the coaching staff is sending you a message…..whatever the cause,(Covid, playing time, other issues), being on the portal doesn’t really necessitate a change will happen? So being on the portal might allow you to leave, might not….who decides the final outcome? So

 

[Scott_TG]

Hi guys….so in trying to catch up and understand this portal thang, (seems that UNH has a handful on the list) being on the list can mean either you’re wanting/hoping to leave, testing the waters to see your value(here & there), or the coaching staff is sending you a message…..whatever the cause,(Covid, playing time, other issues), being on the portal doesn’t really necessitate a change will happen? So being on the portal might allow you to leave, might not….who decides the final outcome? So

Here's some items about how the portal works:

1) A student who wants to transfer has to tell their current school's compliance office, who has two business days to list the player in the portal.
2) A student can have their contact info listed in the portal so any interested coaches can reach out, or they can withhold it and reach out on their own via their own connections to where they want to go.
3) A student can transfer as a scholarship student or walk-on. Or they can withdraw their name at any time.
4) Even if a student withdraws from the transfer portal, their current institution has no obligation to keep them on scholarship or on the team

There's no coach sending you a message as you put, as schools cannot list players unless they declare a desire to transfer. The final outcome is if they player finds a new program to play after being listed in the portal.

 

[ARM]

There's no coach sending you a message as you put, as schools cannot list players unless they declare a desire to transfer.

The message from the coach, if that is the case, comes prior to the portal, when the coach says: There's no scholarship money for you next year; or There's no room on the roster for you next year. The player doesn't have to transfer and can still get her degree from her current institution, but there's a strong likelihood her role in the program will be diminished.