So to not have to deal with free agency, players making demands, and billionaires dictating the direction of their organization, they're going to go to.....the NBA?
I would argue that restriction of movement is good for the players. How so? Recruits and players very much make decisions based upon team personnel, and opportunity. In the past, a recruit/player could look at a roster... and make some reasonable assumptions relating to positional depth, playing time, future opportunity, etc. Now, annual roster reconstruction makes these forecasts impossible, and makes the decisions much, much more difficult. Florida just saw Jalen Reed depart bc he perceived his opportunity as having changed due to portal additions. And what about the rare kid who did wait a couple years for "his turn", only to be passed over by an April addition? Also, in the pre-portal days . . . a coach recruited to anticipated needs... years in advance. This provided a greater depth of relationship between player/coach/school. That really has been impacted, as coaches cant make the same needs analysis nearly as early . . . and are instead left tapping into the portal. Folks forget that for every kids who exercises his freedom of movement . . . there is a roster spot taken elsewhere. And it may be a spot another player was recruited and/or waited on. I think the portal hurts the game, but also the kids.
'I don't know what the solution is': Isaiah Wong's money demands exposed college sports' complicated NIL issue
If I were Nevin Shapiro I would take out a full page ad in the Miami Herald titled "I've been vindicated!"
absolutely. Humans if left completely unchecked are a disaster waiting to happen. I'm just not a fan of overregulation or governments that overstep
Okay, this is more the New Jersey kind of response. A more "cultured" response would be "I am a man ahead of my time."
