This is obviously a big generalization, but there are two very different kinds of players in the portal.

1. Players that have failed to get the kind of playing time at their current school who will likely have to move laterally or down to do so.

2. Players that have found success at their current school and are looking for a bigger challenge.

Most kids probably already know they fall into one category or another.

Also, considering that there are some 1500+ kids transferred in the portal, that still means there's nearly 200 D1 kids that moved into better programs.

The knee-jerk reaction is that the transfer portal may be more harmful to the average student-athlete than helpful. However, could there be a percentage of these student-athletes that have a red flag or two, such as academic issues or behavior/discipline issues, that has led to that percentage?

That's something that is probably impossible to track. Academic, personal, cultural, illness and other outside influences are all things that impact a decision to transfer. But I assume nobody is asking players to check boxes for their reasons.

As for the # of players stuck in the portal I'd have to believe that the extra covid year, increased red shirt flexibility (and programs managing them better) also lead to the increased supply of players relative to the demand of the respective teams.

And finally, as a coach and a program, I'd expect that some folks are more comfortable carrying fewer players knowing that the portal exists to plug any gaps.

Take Niele's decision to roll with 9 this year. While I think it's crazy this year, it also means that she's going into next year with 7 (8 if Jenna gets a waiver). I'd have to believe that a coach is comfortable with that because she knows there's hundreds of players available in the portal next year. So no need to look for one now.

The same could essentially be said about Brey's roster management going into next season. But he's always pretty much sucked at recruiting so I used Niele as the example, because the woman's team has the luxury of being more selective.

...is apples-to-oranges. The money going towards playing in the WNBA just isn't anywhere close to what's in the NBA. One can argue whether that's fair or equitable or whatever argument you want to make. However, it does change the dynamic of how recruiting goes for men versus women, and how the student-athlete approaches the process.

In the men's game, there are guys convinced they will be making a high 6- to 7-figure salary in a year. Do you think the academic side of things factors into their equation for most of those guys?

Women aren't seeing anywhere close to that money, and it's quite unusual for women to jump to the WNBA before at least finishing junior year. The recruiting conversations are much different there.

That is not to give a pass to Brey - I agree that he could be doing a better job recruiting.

I was simply stating my observations of the current states of the programs.

I used the women's team as an example because it seemed that Niele was comfortable with her squad and the transfers that she brought in. She apparently feels OK with the smaller squad.

Brey didn't quite fit the point I was making because he did try to bring in some other guys, but wasn't able to do so.

Seemed like a bit of a comparison to me, but I also understood the point you were making with Niele.

The worry I have about coaches that decide to go with a smaller roster, especially in a sport like basketball where your max numbers are pretty small anyway, is having a major injury. For example, Paige Bueckers just tore an ACL, which is likely to cause major problems for UConn this season.

The Citadel and Quinnipiac. 😎

Sure are a ton of number but when you break it down there is a very small pool of players ND can get and then those the big guys are going to be perusing as well.

ND should use when needed of course but still think high school players is where they should focus and develop them.