Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3778
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
04-04-24 05:20 PM - Post#367006
In response to penn nation
Totally agree.
I stopped watching NBA basketball about 25 years ago because it had become unwatchable for me, and focused my attention on NCAA men's. I didn't really pay a whole lot of attention to the women, as I didn't find that game to be particularly exciting. I've now completely flipped on that. I'm increasingly finding the men's game to be uncompelling, and the women's game to be extremely entertaining. I've also really been enjoying the WNBA.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8258
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
04-04-24 06:26 PM - Post#367010
In response to SRP
The only problem with the current system is that it is reducing fan interest in the NCAA men’s tournament and the sport in general. Lack of continuity in rosters makes the storylines and identification with teams weaker.
It may be the only problem, but it is a very big one that will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs in a very real way.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4914
Reg: 02-04-06
|
04-04-24 08:23 PM - Post#367016
In response to Streamers
The women’s college game still has player continuity and storylines. See the Clark/Reese rematch this year. And of course Clark’s long-ball game is accessible to everybody.
BTW, here’s Rick Pitino “clarifying” his remarks about not enjoying coaching this year’s St. John’s team. His point about the MAAC getting poached may resonate with the concerns we all have about the Ivies.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1087104792572723 ?fs=...
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3778
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
04-05-24 11:04 AM - Post#367041
In response to SRP
The women's game-- college and pro-- has another thing going for it: the teams actually run plays! And they play team defense!
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
'24-'25 Transfer Portal
04-05-24 01:24 PM - Post#367054
In response to SRP
The only problem with the current system is that it is reducing fan interest in the NCAA men’s tournament and the sport in general. Lack of continuity in rosters makes the storylines and identification with teams weaker. The first weekend of the tournament still does great, what with all the marketing of bracketology and betting, but ratings are softening. Zach Edey and Purdue are the only long-running storyline left this year. NC State’s run and their charismatic big guy may have pulled in some extra eyeballs, and UConn may be enough of a dominant heavy to make the final against either one of these plucky contenders a compelling story. But last year’s final had horrible ratings. And God forbid if Alabama upsets UConn.
Couldn't agree more. I've watched less college basketball this year than probably since before I started college more than 25 years ago. Part of that is my general displeasure of the direction of Penn's program (I think Coach Donahue is even worse equipped for this new recruiting world than he was for the old world in recruiting where he wasn't strong), but an even bigger part is the general demolition of what made college basketball great... players being "one of you" as a student, regional rivalries that matter, etc.
I blame college football... I was never a big fan (NFL is where it's at for me), but now it's ruined college basketball as well.
If even Ivy team's no longer hold on to continuity and retain the majority of it's best players, then my interests will continue to trend towards 0. I'm not interested in following a game of musical chairs.
I'm sure all across college basketball, I'm not alone in this feeling. I think the only way things change this path ahead is if people stop watching. Will be interesting to see what the market decides.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32837
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: '24-'25 Transfer Portal
04-05-24 01:30 PM - Post#367057
In response to Mike Porter
That would indeed be a rich irony, if the constant striving for profit by non-profit universities resulted in killing the golden goose they were seeking to pluck.
|
sparman
PhD Student
Posts: 1347
Reg: 12-08-04
|
Re: '24-'25 Transfer Portal
04-05-24 02:47 PM - Post#367058
In response to palestra38
I'm sure some people will push for eliminating nonprofit status, but when you look at the footprint of the two main leagues, it's hard to imagine the congressional reps jeopardizing their jobs by voting against the prevailing sports religion in those states.
|
JDP
Masters Student
Posts: 577
Reg: 11-23-04
|
04-05-24 05:26 PM - Post#367064
In response to Silver Maple
Why I enjoy watching Ivy Women's basketball. A high level of competition across the league, played in a style that I enjoy.
|
weinhauers_ghost
Postdoc
Posts: 2140
Age: 64
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
|
04-06-24 02:16 AM - Post#367081
In response to JDP
I am in total agreement with Mike Porter's contention that college hoops is being ruined by power conference football. As a NYC native who went to an Ivy, I've never cared about power conference football, and I despise what the conference realignments it has driven have done to long-standing basketball rivalries.
I have watched mostly Ivy and mid major basketball this past winter, and beyond that, I have mostly paid attention to the high academic schools in power conferences, meaning the Northwesterns and Stanfords of that particular world.
|
CM
Masters Student
Posts: 424
Reg: 10-11-18
|
04-06-24 06:22 AM - Post#367082
In response to weinhauers_ghost
The effective dissolution of the old Big East at the altar of football was the canary in the coal mine. It's not been the same since, for me.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
04-06-24 08:52 PM - Post#367085
In response to CM
Amen. Even though the Big East is quite strong right now, I will never forget the old rivalries with Georgetown, St. Johns, Uconn, Villanova, and Syracuse when they were all in their prime. Providence, Seton Hall, and Boston College each also had some good years too. The conference rivalries were so intense. Those teams didn't need TV contracts and NIL to have fire. The games were like parking lot rumbles.
I don't hold anything against ACC basketball, but I won't shed a tear if the conference is shattered. They all made a greed play for football, and it would only be justice if the conference is ruined because of football.
The effective dissolution of the old Big East at the altar of football was the canary in the coal mine. It's not been the same since, for me.
|
rbg
Postdoc
Posts: 3058
Reg: 10-20-14
|
04-07-24 08:26 PM - Post#367087
In response to Penndemonium
Clark Slajchert has cut his list to 8 - USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Michigan, Davidson, San Francisco and Utah State.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/pe nn-transf...
|
Go Green
PhD Student
Posts: 1149
Age: 52
Reg: 04-22-10
|
04-08-24 09:28 AM - Post#367102
In response to Go Green
t's true. He basically has to decide what's more important: getting top recruits and sending them or the NBA after one year or winning more titles. Big Blue Nation is clearly more interested in the latter.
UK says Coach Cal is staying.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story...
It appears that both Coach Cal and UK will get their respective wishes.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/john-caliparis -stunni...
|
Bruno
PhD Student
Posts: 1420
Loc: Brooklyn, NY
Reg: 11-21-04
|
04-09-24 08:37 AM - Post#367145
In response to Go Green
Perfect storm for Ivies and I worry about how competitive we are in five years. For a decade we’ve been bringing in better talent than we have historically, and between NIL, the transfer rule changes and the higher profile of the league in general, the incentive to go to big conference team - even to take a much smaller role - is proving hard to overcome. We’re becoming a showcase league for our best talent, and fewer of our All-Ivy players will end up playing four years with us.
Maybe that’s not unique to the Ivies, but I’d argue we are more vulnerable to that than most conferences given our unique fact pattern.
| LET'S go BRU-no (duh. nuh. nuh-nuh-nuh) |
|
gokinsmen
Postdoc
Posts: 3671
Reg: 02-06-10
|
'24-'25 Transfer Portal
04-09-24 03:25 PM - Post#367166
In response to Bruno
It may be time to reinstate the one-year waiting period for transfers.
Waivers would still be granted in special situations - e.g. head coach leaves suddenly; family emergency makes a player stay close to home. But otherwise, transfers would go back to losing a year of eligibility by leaving.
I feel like programs are already sick of the current portal, even the ones that can reload with top talent. It's just exhausting to have to completely rebuild your team every spring in addition to normal high school recruiting.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32837
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: '24-'25 Transfer Portal
04-09-24 03:50 PM - Post#367167
In response to gokinsmen
I don't think it would hold up in court absent a contract for a term. In other words, a true professional contract. While we are in this netherworld of pseudo-contract, and players are paid through a questionable "NIL Collective" setup, you can't really limit the options of a player---he is just capitalizing (in fiction) on his name and likeness, which the Supreme Court has said college athletes have the right to do. As long as there is not an employment contract like NBA players have, I don't think you can shut the portal.
|
gokinsmen
Postdoc
Posts: 3671
Reg: 02-06-10
|
'24-'25 Transfer Portal
04-09-24 04:59 PM - Post#367172
In response to palestra38
It wouldn't be shutting down the portal - just going back to pre-2021 rules. That is to say, the way it's always been until very recently. Players can still transfer if they want. They just won't have immediate eligibility without extenuating circumstances.
As a result, I don't think the courts would have a say - the NCAA was the one who changed the transfer rules to begin with. But I don't think even they expected this much chaos. It's gotten out of control.
|
Chip Bayers
Professor
Posts: 7001
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
|
04-09-24 06:22 PM - Post#367174
In response to Penndemonium
Amen. Even though the Big East is quite strong right now, I will never forget the old rivalries with Georgetown, St. Johns, Uconn, Villanova, and Syracuse when they were all in their prime. Providence, Seton Hall, and Boston College each also had some good years too. The conference rivalries were so intense. Those teams didn't need TV contracts and NIL to have fire. The games were like parking lot rumbles.
Except Dave Gavitt created the Big East as a TV conference, and sold it to ESPN to headline Big Monday BITD. Boeheim, for example, sold LA kid Stevie Thompson on the fact his family would be able to see him on national TV constantly if he came to the cold and isolation of upstate NY.
|
Go Green
PhD Student
Posts: 1149
Age: 52
Reg: 04-22-10
|
04-10-24 06:09 AM - Post#367184
In response to Chip Bayers
Except Dave Gavitt created the Big East as a TV conference, and sold it to ESPN to headline Big Monday BITD. Boeheim, for example, sold LA kid Stevie Thompson on the fact his family would be able to see him on national TV constantly if he came to the cold and isolation of upstate NY.
Yep. Although the Big East didn't hurt any other conferences, it did hurt a lot of independent programs that were relevant prior to the formation of the BE. Among others, Iona, (then) Detroit, DePaul (although it eventually joined the BE) were competitive programs until the BE was formed.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21212
Reg: 12-02-04
|
04-10-24 08:15 AM - Post#367190
In response to Go Green
DePaul's basketball history was rich, but aside from the Mikan era the height of its basketball prowess actually coincided with the formation of the Big East through its initial decade.
TV was important here, too--the Blue Demons had many of their games during this time on WGN which was a superstation back then.
|
