[81alum]

I am not sure that long "rebuilding" efforts can work anymore, in the era of the transfer pandemic.  

I'm not even sure that most programs can be successful by primarily recruiting high school students, when their toughest competition recruits experienced and proven college-level winners.

I hope, for Stanford's sake, that the traditional approach can be made to work at this one unique university, even if it is no longer the norm elsewhere.

To what extent does your prediction account for the change in transfer rules now supposedly only allowing players to transfer without penalty once, barring extreme circumstances? That seems like it could be a fundamental change. Part of why the "transfer pandemic" has been so revolutionary is how efficient it makes the talent market. Going from essentially unlimited transfers to one transfer seems like it could change all that big time.

This is the change that Tara referenced in an interview last year (then just a potential change) as being necessary to tamp down the chaos.  We can hope that this will be enough to restore some hope to academically inclined 4 year institutions.  Perhaps this new rule and the expiration of the COVID year will return ICA to something a little more stable and traditional.

But do we know that a one-transfer rule will survive court challenge?  How loosely will "extreme circumstances" be interpreted?  Is a change of coaches an "extreme circumstance"?  Homesickness?  I have my doubts that this genie will go back in the bottle.  I worry that we have seen a paradigm-shift in intercollegiate athletics.  And, for that matter, does it matter if all the best talent transfers once rather than twice?  One free transfer is quite enough for the rich programs to lure top talent away from "rebuilding" programs.

[81alum]

I am not sure that long "rebuilding" efforts can work anymore, in the era of the transfer pandemic.  

I'm not even sure that most programs can be successful by primarily recruiting high school students, when their toughest competition recruits experienced and proven college-level winners.

I hope, for Stanford's sake, that the traditional approach can be made to work at this one unique university, even if it is no longer the norm elsewhere.

To what extent does your prediction account for the change in transfer rules now supposedly only allowing players to transfer without penalty once, barring extreme circumstances? That seems like it could be a fundamental change. Part of why the "transfer pandemic" has been so revolutionary is how efficient it makes the talent market. Going from essentially unlimited transfers to one transfer seems like it could change all that big time.

This is the change that Tara referenced in an interview last year (then just a potential change) as being necessary to tamp down the chaos.  We can hope that this will be enough to restore some hope to academically inclined 4 year institutions.  Perhaps this new rule and the expiration of the COVID year will return ICA to something a little more stable and traditional.

But do we know that a one-transfer rule will survive court challenge?  How loosely will "extreme circumstances" be interpreted?  Is a change of coaches an "extreme circumstance"?  Homesickness?  I have my doubts that this genie will go back in the bottle.  I worry that we have seen a paradigm-shift in intercollegiate athletics.  And, for that matter, does it matter if all the best talent transfers once rather than twice?  One free transfer is quite enough for the rich programs to lure top talent away from "rebuilding" programs.