DeCuire weighs in on Transfer issues

At the beginning of today's press conference, TDC went off on a tangent about the nature of transfers. One would suspect it was directed at the Satterwhite, Gaskin and Steadman issues this year:
[media]https://twitter.com/ShaunRainey/status/1362137881360232448?s=20[/media]


[media]https://twitter.com/ShaunRainey/status/1362138052483633156?s=20[/media]

Not sure if I am completely on board with his stance, but submitted for your perusal and discussion.

Welp,
there you have it....
:thumb:

Here are my two cents on the issue:

1. Travis is obviously frustrated that he invested roster space in three guys that found a way to crap all over him in different ways. Moreover, he invested heavily in three transfers that were expected to provide the team with key leadership and it didn't work out. I'd be frustrated to, because he looks across the conference and at his roster and understands how fine the line is between good and great.

2. HOwever, I disagree with the general premise that it is the system's fault. He was throwing a ton of shade at Steadman who decided to throw in the towel, and tap out. For that, Steadman does deserve a lot of the hate. Travis recruited the kid, from the same portal from a moribund program like SJSU, and will do so again in the spring to recruit kids that don't want to be where they are at. That UM roster has had deficiencies in it the past three or four years. He's chased transfer after transfer to fill those gaps. Some worked out well (Rorie, Dorsey, Manuel) and others flamed out significantly. This team has flaws, of which their recruiting strategy as well as program culture is or has some role in. To me it is a two way street.

3. For me, this was a response that reflected internal and external stress over the glare those transfers. He's answering those questions, in part because he's getting a lot of questions. Part of the reason I asked the question about Mens/Women's program question in the Steadman thread, was he was bound to get a lot questions from the Schweyen side of the coin considering how close in time-frame to her dismissal last spring. He did good to answer them, he was honest about his opinion on the matter but I don't think it was hardly an isolated opine.

-- Just my thoughts on the issue.

If you don't understand it now you ain't gonna.

Ask this thread too, ratio 1:4

Here's the full video that also includes discussions about the upcoming games against EWU.

Travis DeCuire addressed "the elephant in the room" earlier today when it comes to Steadman's transfer from #GrizHoops. It turned into a thoughtful, important conversation.

WATCH: Montana Griz Hoops - DeCuire on EWU & Steadman

Click to expand...

https://skylinesportsmt.com/watch-montana-griz-hoops-decuire-on-ewu-steadman/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3p-DlIKs8w&feature=youtu.be

After listening to TD, I can honestly say that I have a new found respect for him.We usually only get to see their antics on the floor, at games. He is a good man and a good coach. You will be lucky to keep him at UM for as long as you can.

Grizfan-24 said:

Here are my two cents on the issue:

1. Travis is obviously frustrated that he invested roster space in three guys that found a way to crap all over him in different ways. Moreover, he invested heavily in three transfers that were expected to provide the team with key leadership and it didn't work out. I'd be frustrated to, because he looks across the conference and at his roster and understands how fine the line is between good and great.

2. HOwever, I disagree with the general premise that it is the system's fault. He was throwing a ton of shade at Steadman who decided to throw in the towel, and tap out. For that, Steadman does deserve a lot of the hate. Travis recruited the kid, from the same portal from a moribund program like SJSU, and will do so again in the spring to recruit kids that don't want to be where they are at. That UM roster has had deficiencies in it the past three or four years. He's chased transfer after transfer to fill those gaps. Some worked out well (Rorie, Dorsey, Manuel) and others flamed out significantly. This team has flaws, of which their recruiting strategy as well as program culture is or has some role in. To me it is a two way street.

3. For me, this was a response that reflected internal and external stress over the glare those transfers. He's answering those questions, in part because he's getting a lot of questions. Part of the reason I asked the question about Mens/Women's program question in the Steadman thread, was he was bound to get a lot questions from the Schweyen side of the coin considering how close in time-frame to her dismissal last spring. He did good to answer them, he was honest about his opinion on the matter but I don't think it was hardly an isolated opine.

-- Just my thoughts on the issue.

Click to expand...

I didn’t view it as shade on Steadman, specifically. He’s the obvious one that comes to mind because he just left....but I DO think they need to do something about the system. They’ve overcorrected and now it’s SO easy to switch that it’s become a free for all. 171 players in the portal MID SEASON? That’s just crazy....how do you build team, unity, cohesion, mission, vision, etc., with that kind of fluidity?

AZGrizFan said:

Grizfan-24 said:

Here are my two cents on the issue:

1. Travis is obviously frustrated that he invested roster space in three guys that found a way to crap all over him in different ways. Moreover, he invested heavily in three transfers that were expected to provide the team with key leadership and it didn't work out. I'd be frustrated to, because he looks across the conference and at his roster and understands how fine the line is between good and great.

2. HOwever, I disagree with the general premise that it is the system's fault. He was throwing a ton of shade at Steadman who decided to throw in the towel, and tap out. For that, Steadman does deserve a lot of the hate. Travis recruited the kid, from the same portal from a moribund program like SJSU, and will do so again in the spring to recruit kids that don't want to be where they are at. That UM roster has had deficiencies in it the past three or four years. He's chased transfer after transfer to fill those gaps. Some worked out well (Rorie, Dorsey, Manuel) and others flamed out significantly. This team has flaws, of which their recruiting strategy as well as program culture is or has some role in. To me it is a two way street.

3. For me, this was a response that reflected internal and external stress over the glare those transfers. He's answering those questions, in part because he's getting a lot of questions. Part of the reason I asked the question about Mens/Women's program question in the Steadman thread, was he was bound to get a lot questions from the Schweyen side of the coin considering how close in time-frame to her dismissal last spring. He did good to answer them, he was honest about his opinion on the matter but I don't think it was hardly an isolated opine.

-- Just my thoughts on the issue.

Click to expand...

I didn’t view it as shade on Steadman, specifically. He’s the obvious one that comes to mind because he just left....but I DO think they need to do something about the system. They’ve overcorrected and now it’s SO easy to switch that it’s become a free for all. 171 players in the portal MID SEASON? That’s just crazy....how do you build team, unity, cohesion, mission, vision, etc., with that kind of fluidity?

Click to expand...

This is the new ncaa, do you think they care about those things..if it isn't money go away.

I have a ton of respect for Travis, and when you listen to the full excerpt you'll understand why.

I truly believe he is in the game for the right reasons and is a great steward for the program. He is an excellent ambassador for the Athletic Program, the University and Missoula. I don't think that is always necessarily the case, but we as a program are lucky to have the guy. Sometimes I really wonder if the athletic department, campus and community is capable of returning the favor.

Travis isn't perfect and I do think in the last year some of the warts have shown through a bit. Whether it is on the court style, locker room or recruiting decisions I think it is easier this year than others to fixate on some of those negatives. This team is struggling for every reason that Travis described and a number others. Not an easy job to have this year. Regardless of where you are at. I greatly appreciate the fact that Travis is able to talk so freely and earnestly about those issues. What I noticed in the full interview is how tired he looked but at least he addressed the issues and gave some much needed insight.

I sort of attacked the transfer issue from an old school perspective, in that it is a two-way street. Maybe in this new environment it isn't the most appropriate way to look at one of the 170 players in the portal. I know the kids have the baggage when they come, and it has to be a calculated risk in bringing the kid into the program. you have to accept those issues and hope with time you can reach the kid and maximize that potential. If there is no risk to a one-time transfer, coaches are going to have to adapt to that environment, good or bad. Whomever is going to develop and have roster continuity is going to have a serious advantage over those who have to wade into what is a highly unpredictable market.

Grizfan-24 said:

I have a ton of respect for Travis, and when you listen to the full excerpt you'll understand why.

I truly believe he is in the game for the right reasons and is a great steward for the program. He is an excellent ambassador for the Athletic Program, the University and Missoula. I don't think that is always necessarily the case, but we as a program are lucky to have the guy. Sometimes I really wonder if the athletic department, campus and community is capable of returning the favor.

Travis isn't perfect and I do think in the last year some of the warts have shown through a bit. Whether it is on the court style, locker room or recruiting decisions I think it is easier this year than others to fixate on some of those negatives. This team is struggling for every reason that Travis described and a number others. Not an easy job to have this year. Regardless of where you are at. I greatly appreciate the fact that Travis is able to talk so freely and earnestly about those issues. What I noticed in the full interview is how tired he looked but at least he addressed the issues and gave some much needed insight.

I sort of attacked the transfer issue from an old school perspective, in that it is a two-way street. Maybe in this new environment it isn't the most appropriate way to look at one of the 170 players in the portal. I know the kids have the baggage when they come, and it has to be a calculated risk in bringing the kid into the program. you have to accept those issues and hope with time you can reach the kid and maximize that potential. If there is no risk to a one-time transfer, coaches are going to have to adapt to that environment, good or bad. Whomever is going to develop and have roster continuity is going to have a serious advantage over those who have to wade into what is a highly unpredictable market.

Click to expand...

Good post.

Extremes always hide the truth. The truth is generally somewhere in the middle.

Over the past generations, power has shifted away from the sports establishment toward the players. Remember the "Reserve Clause" in major league baseball? Patently unfair, an injustice that ownership got away with for years thanks to a complicit Supreme Court. Eventually, the reserve clause was overturned and players were allowed free agency--the right to bargain their talent in an open market, just like all the rest of us. So with the NBA. Of course, salaries went through the roof, the while owners continued to see huge appreciation in the value of their franchises..

And now the same is happening in the NCAA. The cynical phrase "student athlete" has for years masked the fact the colleges are making tons of money off the "student athlete" while basically treating these athletes unfairly--not only not paying them nearly their market value (see the billion dollar contract for the Big Dance), but also restricting their ability to be "free agents" in the marketplace. In a way, the old transfer rules are a dull reflection of the old reserve clause that bound a player to one team for his entire playing career. Coaches come and go and yet players were always obligated to stick it out--or spend a year of their four year tenure not playing.

What happened to Gaskin on his transfer was absurd. He had to sit out a year in what seemed a capricious decision by the NCAA, while other kids in similar circumstances got to play, no problem. Same thing happened to Steadman. Why should he have had to sit out a year? Do you have to sit out a year if you change jobs?

Now those rules are changing. In effect, the market is going to the talent--as it always does.

With this background, you either adjust to the new reality of the sports world, or you whine and complain about. And for somebody like DeCuire, who is "old school" in so many ways (the three point shot being one biggie), this adjustment seems to make him sore, a source of extended complaint. Meantime, we haven't heard a peep out of any of the many players who've transferred out of this program. I'd like very much to hear about their experiences playing for DeCuire.

I see "Old Runner," our good friend from Weber, has chimed in. I presume from his name that he too, like so many on this board, are "old school" when it comes to the treatment of "student athletes." Most of you here are DeCuire fans, and support him absolutely. And make no mistake, I too am a DeCuire fan.

But we must acknowledge the new realities of the sporting world, even as it affects our Griz basketball program. You might not like the changes but change is the one constant in life. Either you adjust--or you get left behind. That's the end all and be all of the way the world works.

citay said:

That's the end all and be all of the way the world works.

Click to expand...

citay said:

Extremes always hide the truth. The truth is generally somewhere in the middle.

Over the past generations, power has shifted away from the sports establishment toward the players. Remember the "Reserve Clause" in major league baseball? Patently unfair, an injustice that ownership got away with for years thanks to a complicit Supreme Court. Eventually, the reserve clause was overturned and players were allowed free agency--the right to bargain their talent in an open market, just like all the rest of us. So with the NBA. Of course, salaries went through the roof, the while owners continued to see huge appreciation in the value of their franchises..

And now the same is happening in the NCAA. The cynical phrase "student athlete" has for years masked the fact the colleges are making tons of money off the "student athlete" while basically treating these athletes unfairly--not only not paying them nearly their market value (see the billion dollar contract for the Big Dance), but also restricting their ability to be "free agents" in the marketplace. In a way, the old transfer rules are a dull reflection of the old reserve clause that bound a player to one team for his entire playing career. Coaches come and go and yet players were always obligated to stick it out--or spend a year of their four year tenure not playing.

What happened to Gaskin on his transfer was absurd. He had to sit out a year in what seemed a capricious decision by the NCAA, while other kids in similar circumstances got to play, no problem. Same thing happened to Steadman. Why should he have had to sit out a year? Do you have to sit out a year if you change jobs?

Now those rules are changing. In effect, the market is going to the talent--as it always does.

With this background, you either adjust to the new reality of the sports world, or you whine and complain about. And for somebody like DeCuire, who is "old school" in so many ways (the three point shot being one biggie), this adjustment seems to make him sore, a source of extended complaint. Meantime, we haven't heard a peep out of any of the many players who've transferred out of this program. I'd like very much to hear about their experiences playing for DeCuire.

I see "Old Runner," our good friend from Weber, has chimed in. I presume from his name that he too, like so many on this board, are "old school" when it comes to the treatment of "student athletes." Most of you here are DeCuire fans, and support him absolutely. And make no mistake, I too am a DeCuire fan.

But we must acknowledge the new realities of the sporting world, even as it affects our Griz basketball program. You might not like the changes but change is the one constant in life. Either you adjust--or you get left behind. That's the end all and be all of the way the world works.

Click to expand...

Quality post. :thumb:

I’m not sure how you get “sore” or “extended complaint” out of that video. He was asked a question, and he answered it, from the heart. We piss and moan on this board about TD’s “close to the vest” approach, how he never opens up, and as soon as he does, he’s viewed as “sore” or complaining....

Can’t have it both ways, Citay. i saw nothing wrong with anything he said. Then again, I’m probably old school too.

AZGrizFan said:

I’m not sure how you get “sore” or “extended complaint” out of that video. He was asked a question, and he answered it, from the heart. We piss and moan on this board about TD’s “close to the vest” approach, how he never opens up, and as soon as he does, he’s viewed as “sore” or complaining....

Can’t have it both ways, Citay. i saw nothing wrong with anything he said. Then again, I’m probably old school too.

Click to expand...

No exact quotes here; just a sense of what I thought Travis said, in brief:

A player from a losing team in a competitive conference comes to Montana to enhance his reputation as a basketball player so can make more money playing professional basketball. But then the light at the end of the tunnel dims, partly because of the playing time for freshmen and sophomores, and the player leaves the team. BUT. Travis says he was not calling out any one individual.

Yes he was! Clearly.

So let's say this self-same mystery player with many other offers chose Montana. He first had to waste a year of his life sitting because of the arbitrary power of the NCAA, a largely corrupt power body in my opinion, while losing a year of his short shelf life as a professional player. What promises was he made when he transferred here? We don't and we won't know; this player knows if he says any thing bad about a coach or a school it will hurt his reputation and diminish his other opportunities. Of course, people on a board like this one who have never met this young man can tee off on his character largely without recrimination.

So, Az, another rule of life: There are two sides to every story. You haven't heard both sides. And you never will.

Yes citay, I agree with most everything you are saying.

I am old, but wouldn't paint myself as old school. I was once sitting at a table with several other 'old' Weber fans and nearly got run out of the restraunt for pointing out that shooting 33% from three was exactly the same as shooting 50% from two. The game has changed quite dramatically. I think it all started with John Wooden and all of the success he had at UCLA. I think you would call what he was doing 'old school'. What has changed since then? Recruiting has changed, the three point shot, the shot clock, and some restrictions on D were added. There are some other minor things to change as well.

What was once considered a good shot under Wooden's system may be less good today. For instance, a mid range 2 may be the worst shot in college basketball in today's game. Likewise, a long 3 might be considered better. In Wooden's day there were no restrictions on how many players you could recruit to your school. If your school had enough money, you could bring in 100 players and have a huge tryout to see who may dress each week. He would often sign players just to keep them out of the hands of his opponents. That can not be done today, although, some of the bigger programs play fast and loose with the walk on rules. The shot clock makes it hard to work for the perfect shot. You are often forced to take poor shots or lose the ball anyway.

Today's high efficiency game would be shots at the rim or 3 point shots, with nothing inbetween.

High efficiency D used to be packing the paint and forcing lower percentage, outside shots. That is certainly not the case today. Todays game is all about creating possessions and maximizing your efficiency with those possessions. When was the last time any of us saw a four corners stahl offense?

Vetting transfer players is no different than vetting HS players. They are all a crap shoot and can wash out of your program in a hurry. The distinction is that D1 transfers will have footage of them playing against other D1 talent. You don't get that with a HS kid. Also, transfers have already been away from home for a while and have less adjustment to just living.

citay said:

AZGrizFan said:

I’m not sure how you get “sore” or “extended complaint” out of that video. He was asked a question, and he answered it, from the heart. We piss and moan on this board about TD’s “close to the vest” approach, how he never opens up, and as soon as he does, he’s viewed as “sore” or complaining....

Can’t have it both ways, Citay. i saw nothing wrong with anything he said. Then again, I’m probably old school too.

Click to expand...

No exact quotes here; just a sense of what I thought Travis said, in brief:

A player from a losing team in a competitive conference comes to Montana to enhance his reputation as a basketball player so can make more money playing professional basketball. But then the light at the end of the tunnel dims, partly because of the playing time for freshmen and sophomores, and the player leaves the team. BUT. Travis says he was not calling out any one individual.

Yes he was! Clearly.

So let's say this self-same mystery player with many other offers chose Montana. He first had to waste a year of his life sitting because of the arbitrary power of the NCAA, a largely corrupt power body in my opinion, while losing a year of his short shelf life as a professional player. What promises was he made when he transferred here? We don't and we won't know; this player knows if he says any thing bad about a coach or a school it will hurt his reputation and diminish his other opportunities. Of course, people on a board like this one who have never met this young man can tee off on his character largely without recrimination.

So, Az, another rule of life: There are two sides to every story. You haven't heard both sides. And you never will.

Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with any player’s character (to me)....but I have zero problem with TD’s approach or what he said about the system and the inherent problems with that system. The only reason it appears he was calling out a certain player was because this all came to a head AFTER that certain player had abruptly left the team.

As a side note, has anyone ever attempted to get any of these departing players to talk? Any reporters ever reach out to them?

This conversation is excellent by the way.

From my perspective as a coach, though my knowledge of life inside of a gym as hoops coach is a bit limited in recent years, two things stuck out to me as entirely relevant and powerful that Travis mentioned:

1. For a decade I coached either FB, Baseball or Basketball in south central Idaho. Our community was bordered roughly equidistantly from four other communities and varying size of schools. Some super competitive, others not so much. What blew my mind, that kids would change schools and engage in 40 to 50 mile commutes just to get a 'better' opportunity in one sport or another. Had a player that I coached as Freshman, switched schools two more times by the time he was a senior. That kids were willing with their parents support to change schools was a real struggle for me for a while. Hard not to resent or vilify a kid, but in reality there was a tacit connection many times between the kids and parents. Some went as far as renting places in other communities to make the transfers quicker and more conducive for their kid. Maybe the transfers in some cases were legit opportunities, but the vast number of them kids were running away from adverse results.

I understand Travis point completely about transferring being a red-flag for a high school kid. I can however see in a cultural environment, where it is supported and in fact even expected. Here in San Diego, the number of kids who play at Helix (public Charter School, home of Reggie Bush) who are from the charter school boundary is shockingly low. There two most recent top tier FBS recruits all started in other communities in San Diego or even far away as schools in Riverside County. The same is true for schools like Foothills (where DCH played) Christian where most of their kids began in other programs but because of talent and exposure they went elsewhere. What is astounding is the regions best hoops recruit Mikey Williams, started at his home school of San Ysidro, claimed he was going stay for his whole career is now at a prep-school in North Carolina. He got absolutely lambasted for staying at San Ysidro for a year. So not surprising in the least that these kids bolt for 'better' opportunities.

2. I made this point earlier but I think it still stands and Travis mentioned it as much about how off this year is. These programs and the value of programs like Montana might have are in the development of a community. Really struck me how isolated these kids are this year. I have made this point for years about why programs at either the high school or college level are successful. Talent helps, but culture is important. Travis isn't for every kid who steps in the door, but i do get the sense that the feeling regardless of where they end up that those kids might get that he and the program cares. I don't know, I have heard a ton of coaches speak to that before, but it just struck different yesterday listening to him talk about it.

AZGrizFan said:

citay said:

No exact quotes here; just a sense of what I thought Travis said, in brief:

A player from a losing team in a competitive conference comes to Montana to enhance his reputation as a basketball player so can make more money playing professional basketball. But then the light at the end of the tunnel dims, partly because of the playing time for freshmen and sophomores, and the player leaves the team. BUT. Travis says he was not calling out any one individual.

Yes he was! Clearly.

So let's say this self-same mystery player with many other offers chose Montana. He first had to waste a year of his life sitting because of the arbitrary power of the NCAA, a largely corrupt power body in my opinion, while losing a year of his short shelf life as a professional player. What promises was he made when he transferred here? We don't and we won't know; this player knows if he says any thing bad about a coach or a school it will hurt his reputation and diminish his other opportunities. Of course, people on a board like this one who have never met this young man can tee off on his character largely without recrimination.

So, Az, another rule of life: There are two sides to every story. You haven't heard both sides. And you never will.

Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with any player’s character (to me)....but I have zero problem with TD’s approach or what he said about the system and the inherent problems with that system. The only reason it appears he was calling out a certain player was because this all came to a head AFTER that certain player had abruptly left the team.

As a side note, has anyone ever attempted to get any of these departing players to talk? Any reporters ever reach out to them?

Click to expand...

Good to hear from you Az. Them Texas plates had me worried. We all thought your power was out and you only had bourbon to drink around your burning fireplace fire of busted up furniture. I guess the 10% of renewable energy in the Texas power grid really threw a monkey wrench into the other 90%, eh? Leave it to them f'ing liberals to screw things up.

I've got a good customer in El Paso that I was worried about. But El Paso isn't on the Texas grid so he's just fine. But what the hell. Maybe you're still in Arizona or Timbuktu. Me, if I were in Texas, I'd just get on a plane and fly down to Cancun using my daughter as an excuse.

citay said:

AZGrizFan said:

This has nothing to do with any player’s character (to me)....but I have zero problem with TD’s approach or what he said about the system and the inherent problems with that system. The only reason it appears he was calling out a certain player was because this all came to a head AFTER that certain player had abruptly left the team.

As a side note, has anyone ever attempted to get any of these departing players to talk? Any reporters ever reach out to them?

Click to expand...

Good to hear from you Az. Them Texas plates had me worried. We all thought your power was out and you only had bourbon to drink around your burning fireplace fire of busted up furniture. I guess the 10% of renewable energy in the Texas power grid really threw a monkey wrench into the other 90%, eh? Leave it to them f'ing liberals to screw things up.

I've got a good customer in El Paso that I was worried about. But El Paso isn't on the Texas grid so he's just fine. But what the hell. Maybe you're still in Arizona or Timbuktu. Me, if I were in Texas, I'd just get on a plane and fly down to Cancun using my daughter as an excuse.

Click to expand...

Your first paragraph is spot on. is there a camera somewhere in my living room???? :shock: