In other threads, there were some comments about how coaches have been leaving for greener pastures for years, and that players have become mercenaries in the transfer business.

So, I ask the question "have coaches really been doing it for years?". Sure, it gets a lot of press when coaches like John Groce leave places like Ohio for Illinois, or Archie Miller from Dayton to Indiana. But in the end, how many coaches leave jobs by choice? And of those leaving by choice, how many of the fans out there (including us on this board) wouldn't change jobs for a 50% or more pay raise? I'm pretty sure John Groce (as my examples) would still be at Illinois, or Tom Crean at Indiana given their choice.


I looked at the last three years of this. The number of coaches who have left are listed. Remember that roughly half of them left because they were relieved of their position. There are (I think) 351 D-1 head coaching jobs.

2017: 39 (11%)
2016: 51 (14.5%)
2015: 34 (10%)

Also interesting, since some say the transfers are an “epidemic”, it’s interesting, at least for this year, to see that the percentage of transfers (422 of 4,563 or about 9.5%) nationwide generally mirror the percentage of coaching changes.


http://www.verbalcommits.com/transfers/2017

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/18...

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/14...

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12...

Thanks. I'll grant you, I've only looked at 3 years. Trends could show it's much "worse" than ten years ago related to both coaching and player changes.

As we have discussed on here in the past, the problem would be continuous poaching of mid major and low major players by high majors. There would be little stability if sitting out a year was eliminated.

What charade? The vast majority of college athletes are true student athletes. You can't throw most of the students under the bus because of the handful that aren't. Particularly when a growing number of transfers each year are graduate transfers which means they have already graduated.

I agree. IMO it should be hard for players to transfer. Universities aren't offering basketball careers. They are offering education. They are willing to give you a free education, one that 99.9% of the students attending these universities will pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for, in exchange for you providing a service for them. I'm fine with letting recruits out of LOIs but once you have started classes both your and the school's commitments are binding. Remove the penalties and chaos ensues. Dumbing down the rules to facilitate the players who are not there to get an education is completely counterproductive IMO.

I think the grad transfer rule came from a good place but its practical application isn't turning out like it was intended (for the most par). It's turning smaller schools into minor league clubs for the big boys.

Student athletes is a buzz word feel good term. Many not most are in school simply to play ball for a few more years and provide us with some pretty good entertainment.

Overall, 80 percent of Division I men’s basketball players earned a degree in six years, up 3 points from last year. Of all African-American Division I student-athletes, 74 percent graduated within six years. These rates are all-time highs as well and based on student-athletes who entered college in 2009.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/afr...

Great point and very much related to something I just shake my head at - a university that has adults waiting outside classrooms to make sure the athletes attend class.

To be perfectly clear, this is the exception rather than the rule but it is a tad mind boggling that it does happen.

And some may say the system is gaming some student-athletes.

If these athletes are not taking advantage of the huge opportunity that is presented to them they are gaming themselves.

Almost certainly. Take your pick: staff, university, NCAA...

ps - I keep failing to get my thinking back on the topic of this thread. I guess I want to say that sure it sucks when you get emotionally invested in a coach and then they leave for greener pasture$. Concerning universities however, this is par for the course. Regular raises (if any) for faculty and staff rarely keep pace with "market value" for a given position. It's a bit of a running joke that to get a real raise you have to go somewhere else - because that market value will be a starting point in salary negotiations. In coaching we're talking more money than the average bear sure, but I think the principle is the same.

I think you'd see "gaming" both ways. Sixth men at P6 schools that think they should be starters would be poached by non-P6 schools. It would be a complete unadulterated mess.

Interesting in the same way his views on religion, philosophy,drug use, ISIS, racism and guns and other various subjects are interesting. It is an OPINION and reflects his views using the numbers he wants to make a point. I take it FWIW thinking it would be very interesting to be an athlete in his philosophy class at ND. (I say this thinking of Brother Bernie OSB teaching our philosophy class and I chuckle)

The numbers are improving according to some and multiple sources refute his postulation if you are looking for articles that have their own slant. Some of the links in the original article are not usable while others are old info. Current NCAA graph shows steady improvement...but those are the NCAA numbers and reflect *Their* interest. http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2016GSRImage_Cros... I read em all and take em FWIW. The NCAA and it's leadership are certainly pushing to show athletes are students first and they are ensuring many kids who would not otherwise get an education do so. They would love to trot around their numbers of higher graduation rates than the normal student population ....but there is always going to be the faction trotting out ideas and numbers showing what a detriment athletics are to the academic world. And there will always be contributors to message boards who trot out the article they want to support the view they want to stir the pot.

We can go back and forth as fans for years on this but I can look back on 30 years of treating athletes and see them now with kids of their own practicing in their Medical Offices, with their MBA's, Doctorates from MIT, teaching degrees, biz degrees, architecture. public health and a myriad of professions now as adults and tehy will all say "yeah I was an athlete at ..." long before they say...."I was a student at..." even though the education they got provided the basis for their career. So his story is right when he says " football and men’s basketball players (who are my primary focus here) identify themselves more strongly as athletes than as students, gave more weight in choosing their college to athletics than to academics"... But it only tells part of the story. Those same athletes are graduating at a higher rate and are being able to use the education from the BULK of the 351 D1 schools to go on into life with the one thing they can't take away once you earned it. Thanks for the article. Served to give me something to ponder over breakfast. Made me look up a few of our former athletes and see what they were up to... and think maybe this philosopher/opinionator may want to look further than ND and similar ranked unis to probe the schools that do not make up the "regulars" at March Madness or in the Top 8-10 BCS bowls.