Transfer Portal--just rumination
by NOBBYDOMER (2021-04-14 17:52:56)

Can't have a message that doesn't mention Baba--I understand his decision.
Anyway, I think I saw recently that the ACC is changing their transfer rule i.e. can transfer within Conference, no problem.
Any way 1) I understand and endorse the point of view that athletes are the ones producing revenue and success--yep, they get scholarships.
2) But, I hate what's it's done for fans, i.e. big shopping mart out there....look at UCONN, with w/o exception gets #1'and then gets the 6'4" OSU transfer
3) But personally, I hate it when the Patberg's, Boley, and latest 3 leave the school...it all becomes so mercenary.
Anyway, just how I feel. I will always think an ND degree is special.
Having said this I hate that Conn, Lville, Baylor, etc. get richer in their efforts.


What is the message to a player your have recruited
by sixtythreer  (2021-04-14 19:11:16)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

relative to her playing time, when you bring in a transfer who figures to get much of that same playing time?

I can't imagine any coach recruiting a highly ranked player not telling the recruit, "Come here, and you'll play!" And I can't imagine a player who wants to play in the WNBA who does not want to be on the floor to show her skills.

Here are some dates: Draw your own conclusions as to cause and effect, or coincidence,

Jan. 5, 2017. Lili Thompson announces she's transferring to ND.

April 10, 2017 Patberg and Boley announce they are transferring from ND.

At that time, I can recall Mike posting here something along the lines of "don't worry about
Boley's transfer; somebody better is transferring in."

June 1, 2017, Jess Shepherd announces she is tranferring in to ND.

May 26, 2019 Sniezek announces she is transferring in to ND.

June 26, 2016. Jordan Nixon announces she is transferring from ND.

My conclusion: taking a transfer may be conter-productive.

Shepherd clearly turned out great. I have doubts about the others.


Your timeline of events is missing some key components
by rjp172  (2021-04-15 11:40:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

2015-16 Patberg tears ACL

2016-17 Patberg gets mono. Slow recovery. Playing behind Allen. Plays in 22 games around 8 mins a game averaging 1 pt, 1 rebound, and .5 assists.

Nothing about that would make me comfortable if the program I coached to 5 of the previous 6 F4's was going to be solely in the hands of a player not fully recovered from injury or illness.

Doing the right thing for the program and bringing in a 2nd pg is what MM is supposed to do.

If Patberg didn't want to compete or play behind a pg with more experience that's on her. The Ali Patberg that has done so well at IU after another year of redshirting and working on her game wasn't what she was when at ND.

The same can be rationale can be applied to Nixon and Sniezek. Nixon had injuries and if I recall a concussion.

Missed 2 five game stretches with injuries in 2017-18. ND didn't have a back up pg. Nixon very well could/should have been the starter. Not like it would have been hard to keep her in the game over Sniezek given her scoring deficiencies.

Nixon was incredible in the NCAAT after a redshirt year at T A&M.

Boley is the one that I hate because her S16 performance against Ohio State was incredible. I thought the general consensus was that because of Turner's ACL injury in the 1st round against Purdue that it was going to be expected of Boley to play in the post and that's not what she wanted or saw her future.

My conclusion is that a coaches responsibility is to the program and that means if you're unsure about a position as important as pg and don't have a back-up you take a transfer. The players who transferred either did so for reasons not related to the roster or thought they would play behind a transfer. More power to them.

Under no circumstance do I think a coach should not take a transfer for a position in need because you don't want to upset or lose a player that you have no idea if they are going to pan out in said position.

I can't imagine a coach of an elite program telling a recruit that they'll play when they have AA or ACC career leaders in that players respective specialty ahead of them. Those coaches tell the players that they'll be given an opportunity to compete for playing time.

I will admit that I find it hard to accept that more playing time couldn't have been found for all of the players mentioned before their transfer.


Good analysis. The message sent to the players already
by maverick  (2021-04-16 15:22:36)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

on the roster should be "You want playing time work your butt off and earn it". Now though players seem to bail when they dont get their way, taking the path of least resistance


I don’t think Ivey had a message last year.
by 2ndstreeter  (2021-04-17 10:41:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Pretty much seemed to be grasping at a plan. Her total misuse of Campbell on what was a team lacking in her skills spoke volumes about her approach.


I concede Muffet has reason to take Lili.
by sixtythreer  (2021-04-15 17:05:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The question I raised was, what does it say to a player when you bring in a recruit who bids fare to take significant minutes from a player you recruited? I concluded taking the transfer can be counter-productive.

I was not examining the question from the coach's perspective; simply from the players.

You point out that Patberg, got mono, that when she returned to the floor her body of work was underwhelming, and that a competent coach would be uncomfortable going with just Patberg at the point. I'm with you on those points.

And you ask, what was MM supposed to do? Like you, I think Muffet made the right move. She didn't know if Patberg would fully recover.

Like you, I think she brought in Lili to protect the program.

But now look at it for Ali's point of view. When she played behind Lindsay that year, Ali appeared to be on a short leash. If she turned the ball over, she almost immediately went to the bench. She had to know that Muffet had doubts about her play and her ability to play in the future. Why else would she bring in Lili?

As it turned out, taking Lili was counter-productive. Patberg transferred. Then to make things worse, Lili blew her ACL. We only found out that Ali could indeed play after she sat out a year at Indiana.

The transfer portal wasn't the blessing and the curse that it is today when Muffet took Lili. But today, unless your certain you are getting a far better player than you are likely to lose, a coach better think twice before taking a transfer.

Taking Shepherd was a no-brainer. But in taking Sniezek was the risk greater than the reward? I don't think so.