johnb
08-08-2011, 03:44 PM
The front page links to the following article in SI:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/luke_winn/08/01/commitment.trends/2.html
In it, Winn talks at length about the epidemic of transfers and decommittments, both in high and college. From my read, there's some effort towards balance, but he seems most impressed by the Iowa player from Iowa City who had parents who played at Iowa and who, himself, stayed at Iowa despite a coaching change. That's all well and good, but I wouldn't lay too much blame on the kids. I'd emphasize to a greater extent several issues that he either alluded to minimally or left out.
Obvious are very early commitments, coaching/personnel changes, a decline in the team's fortunes (the latter seems to have contributed to the Rivers' decommittment from Florida), and NCAA penalties. I'd also liked to have read some discussion of how colleges seem to recruit based on talent rather than fit. It's not just an issue of recruiting and offering 4 small forwards but also the issue of rural schools targeting opposite-coast urban kids and vice versa. Sure, AAU hangers-on may contribute to nomadic lack of allegiance, but there's more--and that article didn't do the subject as much justice as it deserves. Further, I'm not sure that such changes are inevitably a bad thing. 5 high schools in 4 years is probably suboptimal, but a couple of transfers here and there may be completely fine
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/luke_winn/08/01/commitment.trends/2.html
In it, Winn talks at length about the epidemic of transfers and decommittments, both in high and college. From my read, there's some effort towards balance, but he seems most impressed by the Iowa player from Iowa City who had parents who played at Iowa and who, himself, stayed at Iowa despite a coaching change. That's all well and good, but I wouldn't lay too much blame on the kids. I'd emphasize to a greater extent several issues that he either alluded to minimally or left out.
Obvious are very early commitments, coaching/personnel changes, a decline in the team's fortunes (the latter seems to have contributed to the Rivers' decommittment from Florida), and NCAA penalties. I'd also liked to have read some discussion of how colleges seem to recruit based on talent rather than fit. It's not just an issue of recruiting and offering 4 small forwards but also the issue of rural schools targeting opposite-coast urban kids and vice versa. Sure, AAU hangers-on may contribute to nomadic lack of allegiance, but there's more--and that article didn't do the subject as much justice as it deserves. Further, I'm not sure that such changes are inevitably a bad thing. 5 high schools in 4 years is probably suboptimal, but a couple of transfers here and there may be completely fine