What makes the transfer portal effective?

[blion72]

if you think about it, the "portal" is nothing but a website and backend database. It actually, is a pretty trivial platform compared to many systems, and could easily have been built in a computer science class by a group of undergrads. Nobody could claim it is novel, and in fact somewhat trivial. I think there are a couple elements that make for its effectiveness:

• It provides a visible way for player to show they are interested in transferring. the prior process was much more difficult, and also was constrained by rules.
• It provides a market place for players and teams to engage to make transfers efficient.
• A couple items that are NOT, due to the portal but were rule changes that are even more important than the website
  • The NCAA eliminated the rule about a team making the first contact to the player. This allowed the team to make moves the instant they see the player is available. They still cannot make contact before a player is in the portal.
  • The NCAA now allows the player to make ONE transfer without sitting out for a year. After that, they still have to sit out a year. Quinn Ewers already used his first free year, so if he moves again he has to sit. This free year may be the engine that makes the whole thing go.

Another hidden factor in the process is the actual transfer. Historically, when a player would transfer, the academic process to get enrolled in the new school was NOT instant. I there are no articulation agreements with the prior school, they have to find out what courses transfer and what the player's academic standing will be on arrival. In some schools this can take a couple months if it is fast tracked. Somehow, schools have now found a way to make this move faster, as players cannot deal with contingent offers.

some suggest NIL could be part of the process, which again has nothing to do with the technology. I am not sure how NIL can be used in a fast moving marketplace, as the school is the one seeking the players.

 

[GrimReaper]

if you think about it, the "portal" is nothing but a website and backend database. It actually, is a pretty trivial platform compared to many systems, and could easily have been built in a computer science class by a group of undergrads. Nobody could claim it is novel, and in fact somewhat trivial. I think there are a couple elements that make for its effectiveness:

• It provides a visible way for player to show they are interested in transferring. the prior process was much more difficult, and also was constrained by rules.
• It provides a market place for players and teams to engage to make transfers efficient.
• A couple items that are NOT, due to the portal but were rule changes that are even more important than the website
  • The NCAA eliminated the rule about a team making the first contact to the player. This allowed the team to make moves the instant they see the player is available. They still cannot make contact before a player is in the portal.
  • The NCAA now allows the player to make ONE transfer without sitting out for a year. After that, they still have to sit out a year. Quinn Ewers already used his first free year, so if he moves again he has to sit. This free year may be the engine that makes the whole thing go.

Another hidden factor in the process is the actual transfer. Historically, when a player would transfer, the academic process to get enrolled in the new school was NOT instant. I there are no articulation agreements with the prior school, they have to find out what courses transfer and what the player's academic standing will be on arrival. In some schools this can take a couple months if it is fast tracked. Somehow, schools have now found a way to make this move faster, as players cannot deal with contingent offers.

some suggest NIL could be part of the process, which again has nothing to do with the technology. I am not sure how NIL can be used in a fast moving marketplace, as the school is the one seeking the players.

The business of transfer credits is a red herring unless the athlete cares about it and I imagine some don't.

Case in point. Neighbor's daughter started out a School A. After two years, the school dropped the program in which she was enrolled. She decided to transfer. School B, which was clearly her favorite, would not accept any (zip, zero, maru, nada) credits from School A. So she enrolled as a freshman at School B.

Yes, I know the NCAA flaunts language about progress-toward-degree, but that's window dressing. Every school knows how to get around it.

 

[blion72]

The business of transfer credits is a red herring unless the athlete cares about it and I imagine some don't.

Case in point. Neighbor's daughter started out a School A. After two years, the school dropped the program in which she was enrolled. She decided to transfer. School B, which was clearly her favorite, would not accept any (zip, zero, maru, nada) credits from School A. So she enrolled as a freshman at School B.

Yes, I know the NCAA flaunts language about progress-toward-degree, but that's window dressing. Every school knows how to get around it.

I think Coach Franklin indicated that it takes 40 days to complete a player's transfer to Penn State, which is the central university and college actions. That is what I meant by the transfer process. Not so much there class standing, which is what you mentioned, but the actual time/latency in the process to complete the player getting set up where they can actually register for courses. The academic processes in all schools would not be in the hands of the coaches and ADs but rather the faculty and associated administrators. That has to be a problem at every university. Maybe the more open access low rated academic schools would have a faster process.