Junior college. Boyd, Carlisle, Kilgore and Gill all jc transfers and won the nit championship. Better than last place

Neither Dyson or Davis is worth retaining. They have no offensive skills.

Golden One said:

---

Neither Dyson or Davis is worth retaining. They have no offensive skills.

---

But both are athletic, have experience, are good/solid defenders and are better than having an empty ride

BearSD said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Entering the transfer portal used to mean, "I am going to transfer". But now it's "maybe".

---

It's more than maybe. As I understand it, once a player puts his name in the transfer portal, his current team is released from any scholarship obligations, and the player can only "go back" if the coaching staff wants the player back and has a scholarship available. So, unless a player is taking bad advice, he only puts his name in the portal if he's either sure he's not coming back or he already has a promise from his current team that he can come back if he decides against transferring.

---

Holy crap.
Wow.

You know, what if Wyking had just kept McCullough and Winston on the team one more year. With this easier rule that has no penalty, they might have transferred of their own accord.

HoopDreams said:

---

Golden One said:

---

Neither Dyson or Davis is worth retaining. They have no offensive skills.

---

But both are athletic, have experience, are good/solid defenders and are better than having an empty ride

---

You mean like the two empty scholarship slots we held last year?
I'll have to agree.

Let's recall, the point of this sports experiment is to develop young men. You can't do that if you kick them all off your team because you think they are not good enough.
Failed system.

concordtom said:

---

Let's recall, the point of this sports experiment is to develop young men. You can't do that if you kick them all off your team because you think they are not good enough.
Failed system.

---

Unfortunately, CT -that premise evaporated many, many decades ago. The premise is to make money as an entertainment entity. Any other context is delusional at this point.

Not just last year

Two seasons ago and three seasons ago we gave a scholarship to a walk on. Yeah, they contributed but it's not the way to build a program

concordtom said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Golden One said:

---

Neither Dyson or Davis is worth retaining. They have no offensive skills.

---

But both are athletic, have experience, are good/solid defenders and are better than having an empty ride

---

You mean like the two empty scholarship slots we held last year?
I'll have to agree.

---

BeachedBear said:

---

To clarify, 5 Cal players ever entered their names in the Transfer Portal. There are over 400 players in the Transfer Portal currently.

I believe the purpose of the Transfer Portal is to allow players to see if more attractive opportunities as well as colleges and coaches know that scholarships may become available.

As I understand things, a college may replace a player while in the Transfer Portal and use their scholarship for a new recruit or transfer. Furthermore, I understand that transfer rules now allow for an exception to the 1-year wait rule.

One-time transfer exception: If you never have transferred from a four-year school, you may use a onetime exception to compete immediately at a Division I or II school. To qualify for this exception, you must meet all the following conditions: You are in good academic standing and are making progress toward your degree at your current school. You would have been considered academically eligible to compete had you stayed at your current school. You have a written release agreement from your current school stating it does not object to you receiving a transfer exception.

Personally, I'm glad to see the transfer rules for student athletes get more in line with the real world. The one year sit out rule was to discourage players and coaches from a constant recruiting process. This moves the needle back in the other direction, but maybe not so chaotic as some would have feared in the past.

As for Cal's five. My completely personal guess at likelihood of transfer are:

Davis - 99%
Sueing - 75%
JHD - 67%
McNeil - 45%
Vanover - 30%

Lots of reasons to transfer and lots of reasons to stay. Each player has his own metrics and the only two reasons that I can think of for why a player WOULD NOT enter the transfer window are:

1. The pain of the recruiting process outweighs any problems with current situation.
2. Possibility of losing their scholarship and ending up in a worse situation (I only think this applies to JHD in Cal's case).

---

Gotta love the NCAA. Souse pointed out that the rule has recently changed. Since I cut and paste this last Friday, below is what is on the NCAA transfer website this morning:

One-time transfer exception: If you transfer from a four-year school, you may be immediately eligible to compete at your new school if you meet ALL the following conditions:

• You are transferring to a Division II or III school, or you are transferring to a Division I school in any sport other than baseball, men's or women's basketball, football (Football Bowl Subdivision) or men's ice hockey. If you are transferring to a Division I school for any of the previously-listed sports, you may be eligible to compete immediately if you were not recruited by your original school and you have never received an athletics scholarship.
• You are academically and athletically eligible at your previous four-year school.
• You receive a transfer-release agreement from your previous four-year school.

Civil Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Ccajon2 said:

---

Calm down concord tom! Even assuming DAVIS, JHD, and suing are gone, who knows who we get in return. What if JoJo Henderson, Jaylen Brown (both NV) and the Georgia Lithuanian guard (sargiunas) decides to follow his coach here.

---

Okay, well, if these transfers all had to sit a year, would you THEN agree with my panic?
I've been reading the news wrong. Entering the transfer portal used to mean, "I am going to transfer". But now it's "maybe". Further, incoming transfers would have previously not been eligible. That's a whole different situation.

Fox will indeed have a TON of work to do IMMEDIATELY!!!!

---

The press has been getting it wrong, too, reporting that these players have declared their intent to transfer, rather than their intent to consider their transfer options.

The non-grad transfers still have to sit out a year. One slight difference now is that the NCAA has been more likely to waive the "sitting out a year" requirement when the student athlete claims some sort of extenuating circumstances (such as a sick family member).

---

Actually, players in the transfer portal that haven't transferred before only need to sit out a year if the original coach requires it.

---

Really? Oh. Never mind.

Really?!?

---

Per Beachy's post near the top of this page:

One-time transfer exception: If you never have transferred from a four-year school, you may use a onetime exception to compete immediately at a Division I or II school. To qualify for this exception, you must meet all the following conditions: You are in good academic standing and are making progress toward your degree at your current school. You would have been considered academically eligible to compete had you stayed at your current school. You have a written release agreement from your current school stating it does not object to you receiving a transfer exception.

---

deleted

concordtom said:

---

Let's recall, the point of this sports experiment is to develop young men. You can't do that if you kick them all off your team because you think they are not good enough.
Failed system.

---

BeachedBear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Let's recall, the point of this sports experiment is to develop young men. You can't do that if you kick them all off your team because you think they are not good enough.
Failed system.

---

Unfortunately, CT -that premise evaporated many, many decades ago. The premise is to make money as an entertainment entity. Any other context is delusional at this point.

---

Yeah, well, then you gotta pay the players.
You can't have it both ways!!!!!!!!

concordtom said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Let's recall, the point of this sports experiment is to develop young men. You can't do that if you kick them all off your team because you think they are not good enough.
Failed system.

---

Unfortunately, CT -that premise evaporated many, many decades ago. The premise is to make money as an entertainment entity. Any other context is delusional at this point.

---

Yeah, well, then you gotta pay the players.
You can't have it both ways!!!!!!!!

---

Personally, I would prefer that they get out of the entertainment business, but I get your point. Once money is involved, it rarely goes backwards.

The last few CBAs in the NBA have had 50% of the revenue going to players (give or take a percent or four). If that was the case in NCAA sports, I wonder how the conferences and chancellors would view Football and Mens Basketball? I'm sure they'll continue this economic model for as long as they can get away with it.

Cal is never going to pay players. In fact, almost no colleges are going to play players for the simple reason that they cannot afford to pay them. Paying players will result in Ivy style scholarships based on need, and a step toward true student athletes.

LOL.

But the coaches can get paid millions right?

bearchamp said:

---

Cal is never going to pay players. In fact, almost no colleges are going to play players for the simple reason that they cannot afford to pay them. Paying players will result in Ivy style scholarships based on need, and a step toward true student athletes.

---

BeachedBear said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

To clarify, 5 Cal players ever entered their names in the Transfer Portal. There are over 400 players in the Transfer Portal currently.

I believe the purpose of the Transfer Portal is to allow players to see if more attractive opportunities as well as colleges and coaches know that scholarships may become available.

As I understand things, a college may replace a player while in the Transfer Portal and use their scholarship for a new recruit or transfer. Furthermore, I understand that transfer rules now allow for an exception to the 1-year wait rule.

One-time transfer exception: If you never have transferred from a four-year school, you may use a onetime exception to compete immediately at a Division I or II school. To qualify for this exception, you must meet all the following conditions: You are in good academic standing and are making progress toward your degree at your current school. You would have been considered academically eligible to compete had you stayed at your current school. You have a written release agreement from your current school stating it does not object to you receiving a transfer exception.

Personally, I'm glad to see the transfer rules for student athletes get more in line with the real world. The one year sit out rule was to discourage players and coaches from a constant recruiting process. This moves the needle back in the other direction, but maybe not so chaotic as some would have feared in the past.

As for Cal's five. My completely personal guess at likelihood of transfer are:

Davis - 99%
Sueing - 75%
JHD - 67%
McNeil - 45%
Vanover - 30%

Lots of reasons to transfer and lots of reasons to stay. Each player has his own metrics and the only two reasons that I can think of for why a player WOULD NOT enter the transfer window are:

1. The pain of the recruiting process outweighs any problems with current situation.
2. Possibility of losing their scholarship and ending up in a worse situation (I only think this applies to JHD in Cal's case).

---

Gotta love the NCAA. Souse pointed out that the rule has recently changed. Since I cut and paste this last Friday, below is what is on the NCAA transfer website this morning:

One-time transfer exception: If you transfer from a four-year school, you may be immediately eligible to compete at your new school if you meet ALL the following conditions:

• You are transferring to a Division II or III school, or you are transferring to a Division I school in any sport other than baseball, men's or women's basketball, football (Football Bowl Subdivision) or men's ice hockey. If you are transferring to a Division I school for any of the previously-listed sports, you may be eligible to compete immediately if you were not recruited by your original school and you have never received an athletics scholarship.
• You are academically and athletically eligible at your previous four-year school.
• You receive a transfer-release agreement from your previous four-year school.

---

Looks like the transfer rule is very fluid--sort of like a "rule of the week". Who knows what it will be next week. What a complete joke.

Relatively few schools are paying the coaches millions. For instance, DeCuire, formally assistant at Cal, and head coach at Montana just signed for three years at 175,000 per year (plus incentive bonuses). Or, how about University of New Hampshire advertising the position at 59,000 annually? Or, Wofford's coach (an NCAA Tournament team) at 161,000. The facts show two things: only a few coaches get paid big salaries, and, a college doesn't have to pay exorbitantly to get a good coach.

bearchamp said:

---

Relatively few schools are paying the coaches millions. For instance, DeCuire, formally assistant at Cal, and head coach at Montana just signed for three years at 175,000 per year (plus incentive bonuses). Or, how about University of New Hampshire advertising the position at 59,000 annually? Or, Wofford's coach (an NCAA Tournament team) at 161,000. The facts show two things: only a few coaches get paid big salaries, and, a college doesn't have to pay exorbitantly to get a good coach.

---

It's mind boggling that after just 2 years, Wyking made $5M from us. In the 5 years he's been at Montana he has not made a grand total of $1M yet. This is 5 years of actual work, not 2 years and a buyout. SIGH.

bearchamp said:

---

Cal is never going to pay players. In fact, almost no colleges are going to play players for the simple reason that they cannot afford to pay them. Paying players will result in Ivy style scholarships based on need, and a step toward true student athletes.

---

And so what's wrong with that?

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

LOL.

But the coaches can get paid millions right?

bearchamp said:

---

Cal is never going to pay players. In fact, almost no colleges are going to play players for the simple reason that they cannot afford to pay them. Paying players will result in Ivy style scholarships based on need, and a step toward true student athletes.

---

---

You mean MULTI-millions.

KoreAmBear said:

---

bearchamp said:

---

Relatively few schools are paying the coaches millions. For instance, DeCuire, formally assistant at Cal, and head coach at Montana just signed for three years at 175,000 per year (plus incentive bonuses). Or, how about University of New Hampshire advertising the position at 59,000 annually? Or, Wofford's coach (an NCAA Tournament team) at 161,000. The facts show two things: only a few coaches get paid big salaries, and, a college doesn't have to pay exorbitantly to get a good coach.

---

It's mind boggling that after just 2 years, Wyking made $5M from us. In the 5 years he's been at Montana he has not made a grand total of $1M yet. This is 5 years of actual work, not 2 years and a buyout. SIGH.

---

How much/long/terms is Fox's deal?

bearchamp said:

---

Cal is never going to pay players. In fact, almost no colleges are going to play players for the simple reason that they cannot afford to pay them. Paying players will result in Ivy style scholarships based on need, and a step toward true student athletes.

---

Sorry Champ, but pay for play is on the way.

ESPN ranked the non-grad transfers. Sueing at #13. McNeil at #17. Vanover at #45. Dyson unranked.

Jordan Brown is #7. Charlie Moore is #37.

Grad transfers are in a separate ranking.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/26530279/college-basketball-transfer-rankings-2019-20-2020-21

oski003 said:

---

ESPN ranked the non-grad transfers. Sueing at #13. McNeil at #17. Vanover at #45. Dyson unranked.

Jordan Brown is #7. Charlie Moore is #37.

Grad transfers are in a separate ranking.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/26530279/college-basketball-transfer-rankings-2019-20-2020-21

---

The first real test for Fox is whether he can land any of the highly-rated transfers. Let's hope he passes the test.

BearSD said:

---

oski003 said:

---

ESPN ranked the non-grad transfers. Sueing at #13. McNeil at #17. Vanover at #45. Dyson unranked.

Jordan Brown is #7. Charlie Moore is #37.

Grad transfers are in a separate ranking.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/26530279/college-basketball-transfer-rankings-2019-20-2020-21

---

The first real test for Fox is whether he can land any of the highly-rated transfers. Let's hope he passes the test.

---

So far his GPA is low:

1) opening speech
2) assistant coach selection
3) very insecure player retention/recruiting situation

All this with the background of --

1) Fired at Georgia 2 seasons ago after 9 mostly underwhelming seasons
2) Not a great recruiter
3) Didn't coach college for a year so no pipeline or kids ready to come here with him

Let's see you reverse this trend with a vengeance Coach Fox because it's not pretty.

concordtom said:

---

KoreAmBear said:

---

bearchamp said:

---

Relatively few schools are paying the coaches millions. For instance, DeCuire, formally assistant at Cal, and head coach at Montana just signed for three years at 175,000 per year (plus incentive bonuses). Or, how about University of New Hampshire advertising the position at 59,000 annually? Or, Wofford's coach (an NCAA Tournament team) at 161,000. The facts show two things: only a few coaches get paid big salaries, and, a college doesn't have to pay exorbitantly to get a good coach.

---

It's mind boggling that after just 2 years, Wyking made $5M from us. In the 5 years he's been at Montana he has not made a grand total of $1M yet. This is 5 years of actual work, not 2 years and a buyout. SIGH.

---

How much/long/terms is Fox's deal?

---

Hasn't been announced yet. Probably gonna be five years, because that's the way it goes. Gonna be a salary commensurate with his P5 head coaching experience, figure somewhere between 1.5-1.9/yr.

If we're lucky, maybe we can write semi-favorable buyout terms into the contract, but even that, there's only so much that can reasonably be done.

What a racket!

What do you want to be when you grow up, son..
A college basketball coach.

Only downside is your family has to pick up and move regularly and you are on the road a lot.
Much more lucrative that being an army brat.