[petersalas]

I completely agree! My point wasn’t to agree that people should make assumptions about players, but more so to say it wasn’t fair to trash the program and make statements that can harm a coach or program in a very ugly way. 

Carrington is a pro athlete in the WNBA.  I agree that it is not fair to post assumptions about why a player transferred or how it has gone for her.  I don't think trashing your former program is a great look either.  Every program has players who are not happy with some aspect of the program.  I mean, we have 9 zillion transfers, which says it all.  

Stanford has had much fewer than other programs, which I am glad is the case.  I'm not sure how I would feel if a big chunk of the team I rooted for transferred out every season and another batch transferred in.  Kinda hard to get attached to players when you know many of them won't stick around.  If I was a UA fan, for example, I would be cautious about being emotionally attached to the team.  A lot of the fun of college sports for me has been watching players on our team and other teams develop, watching teams adjust as players improve and stars graduated after four years, all that stuff.  Musical chairs is not very appealing to me.  

The transfers and NIL bring college sports perilously close to pro sports but without the contracts and rules that restrict where pro players can go.  I've been watching more and more of the WNBA.  The league is light years better than it was in the early days.  The level of basketball is much higher than college.  Hate missed bunnies?  Much fewer of those in the pros.  If college basketball is just going to be quasi pro basketball but with insane player movement, I might as well just go ahead and watch the pros.  The basketball is higher quality and player movement makes sense in that fans can follow their team, the roster, the salary cap, trades, etc., and enjoy that aspect rather than an unregulated mess like college transfers are now.

[petersalas]

I completely agree! My point wasn’t to agree that people should make assumptions about players, but more so to say it wasn’t fair to trash the program and make statements that can harm a coach or program in a very ugly way. 

Carrington is a pro athlete in the WNBA.  I agree that it is not fair to post assumptions about why a player transferred or how it has gone for her.  I don't think trashing your former program is a great look either.  Every program has players who are not happy with some aspect of the program.  I mean, we have 9 zillion transfers, which says it all.  

Stanford has had much fewer than other programs, which I am glad is the case.  I'm not sure how I would feel if a big chunk of the team I rooted for transferred out every season and another batch transferred in.  Kinda hard to get attached to players when you know many of them won't stick around.  If I was a UA fan, for example, I would be cautious about being emotionally attached to the team.  A lot of the fun of college sports for me has been watching players on our team and other teams develop, watching teams adjust as players improve and stars graduated after four years, all that stuff.  Musical chairs is not very appealing to me.  

The transfers and NIL bring college sports perilously close to pro sports but without the contracts and rules that restrict where pro players can go.  I've been watching more and more of the WNBA.  The league is light years better than it was in the early days.  The level of basketball is much higher than college.  Hate missed bunnies?  Much fewer of those in the pros.  If college basketball is just going to be quasi pro basketball but with insane player movement, I might as well just go ahead and watch the pros.  The basketball is higher quality and player movement makes sense in that fans can follow their team, the roster, the salary cap, trades, etc., and enjoy that aspect rather than an unregulated mess like college transfers are now.