Most basketball players would rather get poked in the eye by the opposition then by their own coach. Overloaded Ivy League basketball rosters become an inflammatory issue when programs intentionally expand the size of their bench beyond reasonable standards and do so to the detriment of the players in the program. The debate centers not on the number of players in the program, but how those numbers came to be.We published several posts during the last few months concerning excessively large basketball rosters at some of Cornell's rival schools in the Ivy League. As a point of reference, during July we posted the projected roster sizes of each of the Ivy League teams during the next two years. In some cases, these Ivy League schools had rosters of as many as 16 players recruited directly out of high school.
This post is a continuation of that discussion and addresses the distinction between programs that intentionally overload their rosters and those that do not intentionally plan to overload. This post also distinguishes a program's recruited players (includes recruited walk-ons) from the non-recruited players.
Rosters can also fluctuate in size due to unexpected and unintentional factors such as medical red-shirts wherein players spend an extra fifth season in the program due to prior injury. But an even more popular cause of unexpected roster growth is the addition of transfers.
Contrary to popular belief, transfers from four-year institutions are not truly recruited players in the traditional sense. This is because NCAA rules prohibit the "new acquiring" schools from initiating contact with players interested in transferring to a new school. Instead, the recruit must first contact the potential school(s) of which he is interested in attending before any discussion may take place. A release from the former school is also a precondition of contact.
With respect to recruiting of high school athletes, either party may initiate that first contact and in virtually all cases, it is the school which initiates contact with the high school athlete. No releases need to be signed. Thus, in the game of adding transfers, these veteran players seeking new homes are quite often unexpected pleasant surprises landing on a college program's roster.
The NCAA's Transfer Handbook provides detail on the process of transferring between Division I programs. It states in part as follows:
When it comes to Ivy League recruiting, the Cornell Big Red actually have the most controlled and responsible roster size. While the Big Red currently have twenty players in the program, nearly one-third of the team during 2009 consists of transfers, or players which first contacted Cornell and not the other way around.
In other words, Cornell only recruited fourteen members of its 2009-2010 team and of that group, six will be seniors this season.
The balance of the team from 2009 consists of players transferring in from schools such as Kentucky, Colorado, St. Bonaventure and UMass.
Did Cornell plan to recruit these transfers? No. Could Cornell have denied them a place in the program? Certainly. But can you imagine a basketball scenario of an Ivy League school turning down a potential USC or Kentucky transfer? You probably can't and neither can we.
Cornell Basketball's acquisition of transfers is consistent with the University's mission.
Cornell, "the first American University" is one of the most unique higher education institutions in the world because it is both a private, Ivy League university and simultaneously holds status as the land-grant university for New York State. As a New York State "state-assisted college" with membership in the State University of New York (SUNY) system, Cornell has a unique responsibility and mission to conduct education, research and public service programs that will benefit the people of the state. This alliance with SUNY also includes a firm commitment to admitting and educating transfer students, both athletes and non-athletes.
Consistent with the University Motto, "where any person can find instruction in any study," Cornell Basketball has an established tradition of taking in transfer players.
Of the six transfers on Cornell's 2009 roster, five transferred from Division I programs out of the Big 12, SEC, Atlantic-10 and Summit conferences. In fact, since 2000, Cornell Basketball has successfully recruited fourteen transfers.
This post is a continuation of that discussion and addresses the distinction between programs that intentionally overload their rosters and those that do not intentionally plan to overload. This post also distinguishes a program's recruited players (includes recruited walk-ons) from the non-recruited players.
***
In today’s college basketball recruiting landscape, coaches are taught to sit in living rooms of prospects and sell their college program to the best of their ability. These coaches promise world class academics, impressive athletic facilities, high profile schedules/opponents and media exposure. Another huge selling point to high school prospects is playing time, the old phrase, “Join us and you will play right away!” The reality is everyone on the team has an equal chance to play by earning the coaching staff's respect in practices and in games. Starting positions are never guaranteed. Coaches want to win, and the players that give them the best chance to win, will play.
But those chances of earning minutes dwindle for each player as team rosters become overcrowded with too many bodies. For example, if there are four point guards on a roster, one to two of those point guards will never see meaningful game action during the season. And because there are no scholarships or caps on roster sizes in the Ivy League, some Ivy schools intentionally recruit as many as 16-18 players, many of which play the same position as their teammates in the very same recruiting class.
While no competitive basketball player wants to sit on the bench, some are willing to do so because of the love of the sport, commitment to team unity and to experience being part of a championship squad.
But few players will want to sit on a bench when their coach, their friend during the recruiting process, makes promises of playing time during the recruitment sales pitch, then within the same recruiting class cycle or in the subsequent recruiting class cycle recruits other players in the exact same position area. It is even more distressing when those other new prospects receive the same exact promises of immediate playing time.
One Ivy League program which is most engaged in the over-expansion of its roster is Harvard. Specifically, even if Harvard does not add another single player to its program during the next two years, the Crimson already assured themselves a roster of no fewer than 14 players for the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 seasons. Nevertheless, we have identified twelve reported "extended offers" by the Crimson coaching staff to current uncommitted high school seniors to join the Harvard program. In fact, Harvard has made offers and received verbal commitment from point guards in the classes of 2008, 2009, and 2010. And we know Harvard is recruiting point guards in the classes of 2011 and 2012 as well.
The Crimson Basketball staff certainly give new meaning to the song, "Ten Thousand Men of Harvard."
By the close of the current recruiting cycle, we expect Harvard's roster to expand to no fewer than 16 players for 2010 through 2012 and possibly as many as 20 players. In each case, these players were deliberately sought after and lured during the recruiting process to attend Harvard.
For Harvard's coaches, it is a great strategy.
The coaching staff brings in as many talented players as it can each season. There are no scholarships, so it costs Harvard next-to-nothing to bloat the roster. Once the roster is finalized, the coaches can begin to evaluate the talent. The best players will rise to the top and earn regular minutes. The rest will be ostracized on the far end of the bench, maybe even summarily cut from the program, prematurely ending their basketball careers.
But those chances of earning minutes dwindle for each player as team rosters become overcrowded with too many bodies. For example, if there are four point guards on a roster, one to two of those point guards will never see meaningful game action during the season. And because there are no scholarships or caps on roster sizes in the Ivy League, some Ivy schools intentionally recruit as many as 16-18 players, many of which play the same position as their teammates in the very same recruiting class.
While no competitive basketball player wants to sit on the bench, some are willing to do so because of the love of the sport, commitment to team unity and to experience being part of a championship squad.
But few players will want to sit on a bench when their coach, their friend during the recruiting process, makes promises of playing time during the recruitment sales pitch, then within the same recruiting class cycle or in the subsequent recruiting class cycle recruits other players in the exact same position area. It is even more distressing when those other new prospects receive the same exact promises of immediate playing time.
One Ivy League program which is most engaged in the over-expansion of its roster is Harvard. Specifically, even if Harvard does not add another single player to its program during the next two years, the Crimson already assured themselves a roster of no fewer than 14 players for the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 seasons. Nevertheless, we have identified twelve reported "extended offers" by the Crimson coaching staff to current uncommitted high school seniors to join the Harvard program. In fact, Harvard has made offers and received verbal commitment from point guards in the classes of 2008, 2009, and 2010. And we know Harvard is recruiting point guards in the classes of 2011 and 2012 as well.
The Crimson Basketball staff certainly give new meaning to the song, "Ten Thousand Men of Harvard."
By the close of the current recruiting cycle, we expect Harvard's roster to expand to no fewer than 16 players for 2010 through 2012 and possibly as many as 20 players. In each case, these players were deliberately sought after and lured during the recruiting process to attend Harvard.
For Harvard's coaches, it is a great strategy.
The coaching staff brings in as many talented players as it can each season. There are no scholarships, so it costs Harvard next-to-nothing to bloat the roster. Once the roster is finalized, the coaches can begin to evaluate the talent. The best players will rise to the top and earn regular minutes. The rest will be ostracized on the far end of the bench, maybe even summarily cut from the program, prematurely ending their basketball careers.
***
Rosters can also fluctuate in size due to unexpected and unintentional factors such as medical red-shirts wherein players spend an extra fifth season in the program due to prior injury. But an even more popular cause of unexpected roster growth is the addition of transfers.
Contrary to popular belief, transfers from four-year institutions are not truly recruited players in the traditional sense. This is because NCAA rules prohibit the "new acquiring" schools from initiating contact with players interested in transferring to a new school. Instead, the recruit must first contact the potential school(s) of which he is interested in attending before any discussion may take place. A release from the former school is also a precondition of contact.
With respect to recruiting of high school athletes, either party may initiate that first contact and in virtually all cases, it is the school which initiates contact with the high school athlete. No releases need to be signed. Thus, in the game of adding transfers, these veteran players seeking new homes are quite often unexpected pleasant surprises landing on a college program's roster.
The NCAA's Transfer Handbook provides detail on the process of transferring between Division I programs. It states in part as follows:
Generally, if you’re now going full-time to an NCAA or National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) four-year school and you want to transfer to a different NCAA school to play, your current school’s athletics director must give written permission to the new coach or member of the athletics staff before you or your parents can talk with one of them. That’s called having a permission-to- contact letter. You may write to any NCAA school saying that you’re interested in transferring, but the new coach must not discuss transfer opportunities with you unless he or she has received written permission from your current school.
***
When it comes to Ivy League recruiting, the Cornell Big Red actually have the most controlled and responsible roster size. While the Big Red currently have twenty players in the program, nearly one-third of the team during 2009 consists of transfers, or players which first contacted Cornell and not the other way around.
In other words, Cornell only recruited fourteen members of its 2009-2010 team and of that group, six will be seniors this season.
The balance of the team from 2009 consists of players transferring in from schools such as Kentucky, Colorado, St. Bonaventure and UMass.
Did Cornell plan to recruit these transfers? No. Could Cornell have denied them a place in the program? Certainly. But can you imagine a basketball scenario of an Ivy League school turning down a potential USC or Kentucky transfer? You probably can't and neither can we.
***
Overloaded Ivy League basketball rosters become an inflammatory issue when programs intentionally expand the size of their bench beyond reasonable standards and do so to the detriment of the players in the program. Thus, the debate centers not on the number of players in the program, but how those numbers came to be.
***
Cornell Basketball's acquisition of transfers is consistent with the University's mission.
Cornell, "the first American University" is one of the most unique higher education institutions in the world because it is both a private, Ivy League university and simultaneously holds status as the land-grant university for New York State. As a New York State "state-assisted college" with membership in the State University of New York (SUNY) system, Cornell has a unique responsibility and mission to conduct education, research and public service programs that will benefit the people of the state. This alliance with SUNY also includes a firm commitment to admitting and educating transfer students, both athletes and non-athletes.
Consistent with the University Motto, "where any person can find instruction in any study," Cornell Basketball has an established tradition of taking in transfer players.
Of the six transfers on Cornell's 2009 roster, five transferred from Division I programs out of the Big 12, SEC, Atlantic-10 and Summit conferences. In fact, since 2000, Cornell Basketball has successfully recruited fourteen transfers.
Below is a list of recent transfers to join Big Red during Coach Steve Donahue's tenure:
- 1999-2000-Greg Barratt 6’9”-
- 2000-2001-Ryan Cheesman 6’6”
- 2002-2003-Jed Ronalds 6'10" Cal San Diego
- 2003-2004-Stevan Marcetic 6’9”
- 2004-2005-Ryan Rourke 6’8”
- 2005-2006-Ugo Ihekweazu 6’5”
- 2005-2006-Jason
- 2007-2008-Collin Robinson 6’0”
- 2007-2008-Jeff Foote 7’0”
- 2007-2008-Andre Wilkins 6’5”
- 2008-2009-Marc Van Burck 6'11" Salt Lake C.C. via University of Colorado
- 2008-2009-Max Groebe 6'4" University of Massachusetts (currently active)
- 2008-2009-Mark Coury 6'9" University of Kentucky (currently active)
- 2009-2010-Anthony Gatlin 6'8" Centenary College (currently active)
Harvard assistant coach Yanni Hufnagel is also a Cornell graduate and a former transfer to Cornell (from Penn State).
(Note: The Cornell Basketball Blog is not affiliated with either Cornell University or the Cornell Basketball program. All views contained herein are our own.)
(Note: The Cornell Basketball Blog is not affiliated with either Cornell University or the Cornell Basketball program. All views contained herein are our own.)
No comments:
Post a Comment