• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Transfer portal

There has to be contracts with teams or none of this will get fixed. Pay them directly instead of this behind the back stuff. Also, we have to take advantage of this by getting more talent from lower levels too and play the game. Maybe get some immediate impact high school guys that are being passed over now (even if only for a year). The good news is that while we don't have the resources of the big boys, we can reload every year if we scout good enough as well. We also lose guys to our benefit each year, like Pop, who wasn't going to play here anyway. Is it the best system? Clearly not. But I don't think we have to be complete victims either. We are not at the bottom of the chain fortunately, we are in the middle. The big school are gaining and losing guys every year too, and we saw that can hurt those teams as well, despite having big names, when they don't develop chemistry.

When I think about it, Rienk probably leaves as a grad transfer in the old system anyway. Pop didn't play much. So basically Zek is the first big hit we have taken. And really he was an average player with some potential, but a long way to go. I think we can get just as good of a player in the portal if we play it right and strike at the right time. The staff just has to be good at scouting and projections. I think they should hire like a full time scout or two, baseball style, to watch potential portal targets every year. Where it hurts is not being able to develop team chemistry, and I think even major team fans hate the way this is going. We all love sports because we get to know players/teams and watch them grow. No one gets to do that now. I have to imagine, after the 5th year stuff is done, the NCAA is going to have to do something to stop the madness, because no one is happy.
 
When they first started talking about paying players, I was envisioning a system where they signed contracts and were paid directly by the university they played for. This NIL crap where outside sources are paying these kids with no guarantees and no contracts signed is ridiculous and is going to ruin the game.

Like I said on the other thread, if average players with potential like Zek are enticed by entering the portal, we'll be rooting for a brand new team every year, and I don't think anyone wants that.

Agreed, Tommy. Example: Murray St.
 
There has to be contracts with teams or none of this will get fixed. Pay them directly instead of this behind the back stuff. Also, we have to take advantage of this by getting more talent from lower levels too and play the game. Maybe get some immediate impact high school guys that are being passed over now (even if only for a year). The good news is that while we don't have the resources of the big boys, we can reload every year if we scout good enough as well. We also lose guys to our benefit each year, like Pop, who wasn't going to play here anyway. Is it the best system? Clearly not. But I don't think we have to be complete victims either. We are not at the bottom of the chain fortunately, we are in the middle. The big school are gaining and losing guys every year too, and we saw that can hurt those teams as well, despite having big names, when they don't develop chemistry.

When I think about it, Rienk probably leaves as a grad transfer in the old system anyway. Pop didn't play much. So basically Zek is the first big hit we have taken. And really he was an average player with some potential, but a long way to go. I think we can get just as good of a player in the portal if we play it right and strike at the right time. The staff just has to be good at scouting and projections. I think they should hire like a full time scout or two, baseball style, to watch potential portal targets every year. Where it hurts is not being able to develop team chemistry, and I think even major team fans hate the way this is going. We all love sports because we get to know players/teams and watch them grow. No one gets to do that now. I have to imagine, after the 5th year stuff is done, the NCAA is going to have to do something to stop the madness, because no one is happy.

There is no way universities or the NCAA will ever pay the players or make them sign a contract with financial language. That would make them employees and the NCAA and universities are dead set against that. That would make athletes eligible for worker compensation. That is why the NCAA and their legal team created the term “student athlete”, decades ago under the leadership of Walter Byers. That is what created this. Athletes grew tired of the NCAA and universities making millions and even billions in TV revenue, advertising, tickets, merchandise and more while they received no financial compensation for playing, the sale of their jerseys or an injury.
 
Rob Martin a 5-10 freshman point guard at Indiana State enters the portal. He is from St Louis and played very sparingly this year at Indiana State.
 
Marcus Domask-
https://verbalcommits.com/players/marcus-domask

Lance Jones rumored to be next.


One other MVC player in the Portal-
Indiana State freshman Rob Martin- he played in only 12 games, and scored just 11 points this past season-
https://gosycamores.com/sports/mens-...ob-martin/7044

Marcus Domask statement- he is also entering the NBA Draft while maintaining his college eligibility.
https://twitter.com/marcusdomask1/st...79497419489281

FsakDclWcAEmAlP


I talked to someone with coaching experience who does not believe Domask is a high major player, and certainly not an NBA player. So where will he go? He is 6'6", and not very athletic. He won't be able to guard high-major forwards, and he's not quick enough to guard the bigger guards. He is an average to slightly above average shooter (he shot 44.7% this season and 34.8% from three- stats below).
He is a nice player at the mid-major level, and he is similar to the types of shooters that Greg Gard seems to like. So Wisconsin might have interest in him. But can he defend well enough to get playing time?
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba.../marcus-domask
 
Marcus Domask statement- he is also entering the NBA Draft while maintaining his college eligibility.
https://twitter.com/marcusdomask1/st...79497419489281

FsakDclWcAEmAlP


I talked to someone with coaching experience who does not believe Domask is a high major player, and certainly not an NBA player. So where will he go? He is 6'6", and not very athletic. He won't be able to guard high-major forwards, and he's not quick enough to guard the bigger guards. He is an average to slightly above average shooter (he shot 44.7% this season and 34.8% from three- stats below).
He is a nice player at the mid-major level, and he is similar to the types of shooters that Greg Gard seems to like. So Wisconsin might have interest in him. But can he defend well enough to get playing time?
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba.../marcus-domask

Yeah, I am really interested in seeing how some of these "Top MVC" players perform after they leave. Given how weak the MVC was this year, I am starting to wonder if some of the top players who went in the portal already are going to have a rude awaking when they arrive at their new school.
 
I read a disturbing article by Palm Beach Post whereby the FAU Coach stated his players are being poached by middlemen even as they are going to play in the final four. They are wanting them to transfer and that there is big money out there for them. That needs to stop!
 
I read a disturbing article by Palm Beach Post whereby the FAU Coach stated his players are being poached by middlemen even as they are going to play in the final four. They are wanting them to transfer and that there is big money out there for them. That needs to stop!

This is happening all over because it is not being regulated. The college players are not suppose to be contacted until they decide on their own to go into the portal. They also were not to be promised money until they actually were on campus with the team they were going to play with that season. That was when The NIL people could offer them money for promotions or whatever else . This pay to play was not how this whole thing was suppose to work period. This is why I was against this from the start because there is no way to police it.
 
Yeah, I am really interested in seeing how some of these "Top MVC" players perform after they leave. Given how weak the MVC was this year, I am starting to wonder if some of the top players who went in the portal already are going to have a rude awaking when they arrive at their new school.

I don't feel like the MVC was as weak as the 'experts' made it out to be...especially the top tier teams. Drake should have beat the team that ended up in the Final Four. BU lost to a team that made the NIT Final Four. Look at C-USA - who has a FF team in FAU and both of the teams in the NIT final. FAU's best non-conf win was Florida (finished 8th in SEC) and they lost to Ole Miss (finished 13th in SEC). UNT lost all non-conf games against good competition. UAB's best win was against Georgia (finished 11th in SEC). I don't think anyone would say that C-USA knocked it out of the park in the Non-con season. A big difference? C-USA only had 3 teams that were north of 200 in the NET rankings. MVC had 6 teams above 200 (with one at 350). I think that helped C-USA put 3 teams in the top 60 of NET rankings. Even then, they still were a one-bid league.

If the MVC bottom tier can become less awful...it will bolster the top tier's rankings and increase the chances of a 2-bid league.
 
I don't feel like the MVC was as weak as the 'experts' made it out to be...especially the top tier teams. Drake should have beat the team that ended up in the Final Four. BU lost to a team that made the NIT Final Four. Look at C-USA - who has a FF team in FAU and both of the teams in the NIT final. FAU's best non-conf win was Florida (finished 8th in SEC) and they lost to Ole Miss (finished 13th in SEC). UNT lost all non-conf games against good competition. UAB's best win was against Georgia (finished 11th in SEC). I don't think anyone would say that C-USA knocked it out of the park in the Non-con season. A big difference? C-USA only had 3 teams that were north of 200 in the NET rankings. MVC had 6 teams above 200 (with one at 350). I think that helped C-USA put 3 teams in the top 60 of NET rankings. Even then, they still were a one-bid league.

If the MVC bottom tier can become less awful...it will bolster the top tier's rankings and increase the chances of a 2-bid league.

I agree, the bottom of the MVC really really hurt the conference this year. However, I completely disagree with your assessment on how weak the MVC was this year. Neither Drake or BU had a signature win all season, unless you count the games they played against each other. Maybe Drake with the MSU game. BU was 1-7 against good teams, with the sole win against Drake, and every one of the losses by double digits. The difference is that BU and Drake didn't win a post season game and the CUSA teams sure have. That is the difference, and enough for me to say the MVC was weak this year. Also note the good records by the top MVC teams was likely just due to the terrible rosters of the bottom MVC teams, along with the addition of 2 more conference games.
 
Neither Drake or BU had a signature win all season, unless you count the games they played against each other.

What is a signature win and who gets to define that? And just to be clear, if you play another team that would be a signature win, but that teams only signature win came against you, then those wins don't count as signature wins? I'm just trying to understand here.
 
What is a signature win and who gets to define that? And just to be clear, if you play another team that would be a signature win, but that teams only signature win came against you, then those wins don't count as signature wins? I'm just trying to understand here.

And there in lies the stupidity of it all....it's all relative. Dumber yet is that when we beat Drake, they were only a quad 2 team at the time, but by the time we lost to them in the tourney they were then considered a quad 1. LOL ITS THE SAME TEAM!!!

So stupid
 
And there in lies the stupidity of it all....it's all relative. Dumber yet is that when we beat Drake, they were only a quad 2 team at the time, but by the time we lost to them in the tourney they were then considered a quad 1. LOL ITS THE SAME TEAM!!!

So stupid

I do believe the quadrant of the win changes as the team does though. So Bradley would get credit for whatever the opponent is at year's end. I believe it is only top 30 teams in a home game that qualify though as Quad 1, so the Drake win at home would never have been quad 1 for Bradley at any point this year.
 
I agree, the bottom of the MVC really really hurt the conference this year. However, I completely disagree with your assessment on how weak the MVC was this year. Neither Drake or BU had a signature win all season, unless you count the games they played against each other. Maybe Drake with the MSU game. BU was 1-7 against good teams, with the sole win against Drake, and every one of the losses by double digits. The difference is that BU and Drake didn't win a post season game and the CUSA teams sure have. That is the difference, and enough for me to say the MVC was weak this year. Also note the good records by the top MVC teams was likely just due to the terrible rosters of the bottom MVC teams, along with the addition of 2 more conference games.

I agree with you. Bradley was a top 2 team in the conference, and we did really badly against anyone of significance outside the conference, and really badly against Drake 2 out of 3 times (the other top 2 team in conference). Not just sort of bad, but really bad. If a top two team in your conference isn't competitive against good teams (multiple times over), then that shows the conference isn't that good unfortunately. In no world were we good enough to be a tournament team this year. The system did not look poorly upon us, we just didn't step up in the big games (which Wardle indicated when asked about tournament consideration).
 
Back
Top