View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 18371 Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
|
NoDakSt
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 4929
Back to top |
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004 Posts: 18371 Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
Posted: 06/04/18 11:44 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Porter's father is a men's assistant coach at Missouri (and a former women's assistant coach). Her brother (Michael Porter, Jr.) is expected to be a top ten pick in the NBA Draft later this month. Another brother (Jontay Porter) is returning to school and expected to be one of Missouri's top interior players next year.
Bri Porter (another sibling) also played basketball for Mizzou. Coach Robin Pingeton is the Porter kids' aunt. Their mother, Lisa (Becker) Porter, played for the University of Iowa (and also played for the 1983 U.S. Olympic Festival North Team and 1985 USA R. Williams Jones Cup Team)
Mother, Lisa, played college basketball at Iowa, while his father, Michael, Sr., played collegiately at New Orleans.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013 Posts: 7884 Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
Posted: 06/04/18 11:48 am ::: |
Reply |
|
CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
Porter's father is a men's assistant coach at Missouri (and a former women's assistant coach). Her brother (Michael Porter, Jr.) is expected to be a top ten pick in the NBA Draft later this month. Another brother (Jontay Porter) is returning to school and expected to be one of Missouri's top interior players next year.
Bri Porter (another sibling) also played basketball for Mizzou. Coach Robin Pingeton is the Porter kids' aunt. Their mother, Lisa (Becker) Porter, played for the University of Iowa (and also played for the 1983 U.S. Olympic Festival North Team and 1985 USA R. Williams Jones Cup Team)
Mother, Lisa, played college basketball at Iowa, while his father, Michael, Sr., played collegiately at New Orleans. |
I think I read that she is also related somehow (niece maybe?) to Coach Pingeton. In any case, her Mizzou roots go deep and it wouldn't surprise me, depending on her major, to see her next move, post-graduation, to become a GA to to team.
_________________ Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009 Posts: 15838 Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
Posted: 06/04/18 12:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Well, there's a fine long-term solution to nothing. How highly-rated are the frosh?
_________________ Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013 Posts: 7884 Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013 Posts: 7884 Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013 Posts: 7884 Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014 Posts: 3521
Back to top |
|
Hoopsmom
Joined: 05 Apr 2017 Posts: 680
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 8:03 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I don’t know if this makes it better or worse, but from that list, 25 schools have three or more players transferring this year, accounting for almost half of the total transfers. I think the recruiting process, as a whole, is partly to blame for this. First, coaches can’t start calling the girls until September 1. They get to start calling the boys in June. Boys therefore can take more time doing unofficial visits to schools that they know are interested in them over the summer, whereas girls have to try to fit in a few visits during school. If they are in other sports like soccer or volleyball, it makes it very tough and therefore girls tend to take fewer unofficial visits. Also, scheduling home visits with coaches was difficult during the school year, when they are studying, playing fall sports, and also doing preseason workouts for their winter basketball season. I feel the top 50 or so girls are not as affected by this, because they are much more certain that they will be recruited more heavily, and startt visits at a younger age. This is more about the lower ranked girls, who are more heavily represented on the transfer list. Second, Some girls commit early, without having the time to visit as many schools as would be optimal. Whether it’s because the girls change (mature, etc..) or because of coaching changes, this causes more transfers in the long run.
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014 Posts: 3521
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 8:46 am ::: |
Reply |
|
How many of the multiple-transfer schools had HC changes? And how many schools with HC changes didn't have multiple transfers?
I think grad transfers ought to be excluded from any transfer analysis. They've completed their academic work at the school, which is why they're there, and they're moving on. Given that due to yearly summer school enrollment and the resultant ability of players to complete graduation requirements in 3 years, I think it's surprising there aren't more grad "transfers."
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11403
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 9:07 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Why do some consider transfers a negative? How many college students attend more than one school before graduation?
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67491 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 9:20 am ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
How many college students attend more than one school before graduation? |
About 1/3 of students at 4-year colleges transfer. Most of them switch to 2-year schools or community colleges.
_________________ The truth is like poetry
Most people hate poetry
|
|
Hoopsmom
Joined: 05 Apr 2017 Posts: 680
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 9:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I see 26 schools with three or more transfers. From these 26 schools, there are 100 girls transferring, and only 12 of them are grad transfers. The vast majority are freshman and sophomores. Some of the schools had a head coach change in the past year, but most others I do not know.
While my daughter’s transfer has worked out very well for her and for her new school, the experience was definitely a negative. We put a lot of time into her recruitment process, including visits and a lot of time researching schools and coaches. It was a very emotional decision, but a coaching change, with a style-of-play change, before she arrived negated everything she / we had put into it. It was extremely hard on her, and on the other two girls that left with her last year. In addition, 4 girls left the program when that coach first arrived, and three more have left this year. When you are put through the emotional ringer of this process, it is very hard to focus on your school work at the same time.
|
|
allenleavell
Joined: 28 Apr 2010 Posts: 677
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 12:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Some people just don't understand about college athletes grind and toll it takes on a family/athletes. My oldest had a coaching change after her freshman year. She had a good sophomore year played well but somewhat not happy. After her sophomore year she mentioned the coach she may graduate after her junior year and that she will be applying to Law School. The relationship went south during the junior year we just advise her to finish her Degree and move on. Hindsight 20/20 she probably should have left after freshman year. But we had to ask ourself is basketball more important than getting a degree.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11403
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 4:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
One of the most important questions any recruit must ask a coach is "How long is your contract?"
Of course, if the coach is successful, then finding a better job is always a possibility as well.
Again, the system is skewed so heavily towards the coaches and colleges that families often don't even know what questions to ask.
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Hoopsmom
Joined: 05 Apr 2017 Posts: 680
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 7:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
One of the most important questions any recruit must ask a coach is "How long is your contract?"
Of course, if the coach is successful, then finding a better job is always a possibility as well. |
The coach we signed with had been conference coach of the year the season before. Her contract had just been extended, so she should have bern there through most of my daughter’ career, but she had one marginal and one bad year and they booted her....
|
|
FrozenLVFan
Joined: 08 Jul 2014 Posts: 3521
Back to top |
Posted: 06/12/18 10:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
Why do some consider transfers a negative?... |
Because transferring schools is a difficult and emotionally wrenching process for the student and his/her family, whether it involves athletics or not. Looking at it purely as a change in basketball personnel is one-dimensional. It requires a tedious and anxiety-provoking repetition of the previous year's application process, a physical move, acclimation to a new school and new classmates/teammates/roommates, and starting all over. None of that is easy.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11403
Back to top |
Posted: 06/13/18 9:48 am ::: |
Reply |
|
FrozenLVFan wrote: |
ClayK wrote: |
Why do some consider transfers a negative?... |
Because transferring schools is a difficult and emotionally wrenching process for the student and his/her family, whether it involves athletics or not. Looking at it purely as a change in basketball personnel is one-dimensional. It requires a tedious and anxiety-provoking repetition of the previous year's application process, a physical move, acclimation to a new school and new classmates/teammates/roommates, and starting all over. None of that is easy. |
Agreed ... but obviously a transfer (basketball-related or otherwise) only occurs if there's enough unhappiness at the first school to justify the trauma.
Sure, some transfers are a mistake (looking back), but many work out well, despite the complications.
To me, it's an individual and family decision, and I don't like NCAA rules (that don't apply to coaches and administrators) that impede an individual and family's freedom of choice.
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
~UK~
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 364
Back to top |
|
NoDakSt
Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 4929
Back to top |
Posted: 06/15/18 5:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Raoulreporting that Natalie Chou is heading to UCLA
|
|
Brinx
Joined: 03 Oct 2013 Posts: 874 Location: CA
Back to top |
|
elsie
Joined: 08 Apr 2016 Posts: 279
Back to top |
Posted: 06/16/18 8:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
"To me, it's an individual and family decision, and I don't like NCAA rules (that don't apply to coaches and administrators) that impede an individual and family's freedom of choice."
there is a ton of money involved...recruiting someone..monthly stipend...scholarships and extra personal for training and academics...
seems the college puts in a lot of time and dough for a player...
shouldn't there be some responsibility on the players side?....like if you accept a 4 yr ride, we build the team around you and train you up, and then you ditch them without consequences...
I don't want to see a free for all in ncaa womens bb...its bad in the men's bb scene...
this isn't supposed to be professional sports....players shouldn't be "free agents" and go to the highest bidder at any time...
colleges should not be pulling scholarships for players they don't think measure up and players need to have some restrictions after accepting a scholarship....
its a two way street.
|
|
willtalk
Joined: 13 Apr 2012 Posts: 1114 Location: NorCal
Back to top |
Posted: 06/16/18 3:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Unlike Clay wants to believe, coach's and student athletes are not in the same situation. With coaches it's their job. Student athletes are still in training both in their chosen sport and academically. The student has the option of playing over seas if they believe they are already ready, like the frosh back up point guard at Oregon decided to do. We also need to remember that they are supposed to be student athletes with sports being secondary to their education.
I think the market value for student athletes is highly over rated. Some seem to equate the money that flows into college sports as implying that the student athlete is exploited. Well the only reason college sports is so lucrative is because of the Name brand of the college not so much that people would go to see athletes of that level play if they represented a lower level professional league. Think about the situation with minor league baseball.
Example- How many womens professional basketball leagues are there in the USA. The top league barely stays in the Red. Ok lets focus on the real college money makers. Basketball and Football. In general how many lower level professional leagues are there in the USA? What draws crowds to lower level teams is not their quality of play, but the allegiance of the fans. They have to be affiliated with and draw from a certain demographic. In baseball they represent cities. Simi pro teams also represent cities. College teams have an already built in demographic - their students, alumni and the city they are located in or close too. in fact the amount of Tv money leagues and schools can draw depends on their national brand. ND has a national following so they get their games telecast irregardless to their yearly record because they have a loyal team following. Were they a lower level professional team that following would disappear along with the money generated through it. If there was so much demand for professional sports every city in the USA would have a basketball and football team. It is the schools that created the popularity and demand not the athletes.
The reality is that the level of play of college teams without that College brand name or affiliation would have little to no value. So enough with this poor exploited college player mantra. They like most other student who are there to learn academically are there to enhance their future earning potential. They do not while in school represent a marketable product, other than the market hype created by their association with the college. Entertainment in general is valued less for actual quality and more through promotional hype.
Of course coaches also benefit from that hype as well. But two irrational wrongs do no make a logical right.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11403
Back to top |
Posted: 06/19/18 10:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
To take market value first, rather than just guess, why not let the market decide value? It could be that, if a bargaining agreement were in place, that college athletes would have little or no value, and the system would remain essentially the same.
Of course that wouldn't be true in football and men's basketball, but it's certainly conceivable that the market value for a women's basketball player would essentially be zero, and thus she would have to take what is offered.
My take, obviously, is that the schools and the NCAA recognize that the value of the athletes would be much higher in a free market and thus want to do everything they can to retain the status quo, which benefits them much, much more than it benefits students and families.
As for the investment made by the colleges, that is a free choice, and if it didn't make sense for colleges to recruit and offer scholarships, they would not do so. No one is forcing San Diego State, say, to get out and recruit women's basketball players -- but they choose to do so. And many of the players they recruit go to other schools before they enroll -- why should it be any different after they enroll?
And of course, coaches and administrators are at a different place in their careers, but so are bosses and employees. The difference in college sports is that there is no way for the employees to be paid what they're worth (whether it be zero or a lot) because the system eliminates or restricts their options.
Again, shouldn't all adults in the same industry have the same options? If coaches can change jobs, if bosses can change jobs, then why shouldn't athletes and employees?
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
|
|