PennStateHoops.com Discussion Forum

Ed's Transfers/Departures


#1

I thought I’d list all of the transfer and departures from Ed during this tenure, and you can comment as to what impact they have had on the progress of the program. I defined departures as those players other than transfers who did not complete their eligibility at PSU. I’ve broken the list into two groups and my groupings are my own sense

Group I - Player initiated transfers/departures

Brandon Cameron
DeForrest Riley-Smith
Rob Summers
Jan Jagla
Chris Babb
Bill Edwards
Andrew Ott

Group 2 - Ed initiated Transfers/Departures

Marlon Simth
Aaron Johnson
Milos Bogatec
Max DuBois
Joonas Suatomo
Schuyler King
Nikola Obradovic
Taran Buie

Wow. 15 transfer/departures in eight season. Sounds like a lot, and I’m pretty sure it’s more transfers than Jerry Dunn. But, to me, unlike Dunn, these transfers really don’t look like they hurt us very much. And none of the transfers looked like problems in the program until the three transfers in the 2009-2010 season. Jerry’s transfers proved to be a house falling apart. A lot of Ed’s transfers were more a -cleaning house or fixing recruiting mistakes.

Which transfers hurt us? I’m looking at this list and I’m seeing very few, if any. I would have loved to keep Riley-Smith. I first thought that Marlon’s transfer was a minus, but then I heard about his academic problems. so that may not have been such a loss.

Babb. Ott. Edwards - You would think on the surface we were hurt by those transfers, but would we really have been a better tea if they stayed? Babb played well down the stretch of that season, but was not happy. Ott was getting beat out late for playing time by Sasa. And Edwards, though he was athletic and passionate, made way too many dumb mistakes, which indicated to me why he wasn’t getting offers from other majors. If those three had stayed, Billy Oliver would have received very little playing time. Frazier’s may have been less, and he wouldn’t have developed the way he did. We also probably had seen very little of Jermaine Marshall. The contributions of Frazier. Oliver, and Marshall were plusses this season, and will be plusses over the next couple of seasons.

Nice to put this out in the x]context of a successful season.

So, had Ed’s transfers/departures hurt the program? In my mind, not really.


#2

I wouldn’t put Ott in this category. Jagla, either, for different reasons.

These guys could have helped us: Riley-Smith, Marlon, Babb, Edwards, HoJo, Taran.

I wish everyone on that list well, but the only ones that really bummed me out were Riley-Smith, Marlon and Babb. If Taran would not so clearly benefit from a change of scenery, his loss would be the most difficult to take, but as it is, it could benefit both parties.


#3

I think having more a bench last year could have really helped us. A veteran like Babb definitely would have helped and Edwards would have improved a lot after a whole year.


#4

Andrew Ott was also a transfer in. In the final analysis, he felt he wouldn’t see much PT this year and decided to move on. In hindsight, he would have really helped out this year.

I think you have to say that Skyler King and Stanley Pringle were also transfers-in since they came from the JUCO ranks.

I think the team played much better without Buie, so I think his departure was a net positive. Even though he was highly rated, I’m not sure he was ever going to be a good big ten guard.

I never was a Bil Edwards fan, so I didn’t mind losing him.

I did hate to lose Chris Babb - I thought he would have been a big factor this year.

I’m not sure, but wasn’t a medical condition behind the transfer of Marlon Smith?

No thoughts on the others.


#5

On the surface, that’s what it was made to look like. There’s more to the story, but his stroke/blockage in his brain served as a great disguise to use. The real issue as to why he transferred was academic.


#6

[quote=“Great Santini, post:4, topic:2353”]Andrew Ott was also a transfer in. In the final analysis, he felt he wouldn’t see much PT this year and decided to move on. In hindsight, he would have really helped out this year.

I think you have to say that Skyler King and Stanley Pringle were also transfers-in since they came from the JUCO ranks.[/quote]

And add Travis Parker to that list.


#7

[quote=“Great Santini, post:4, topic:2353”]Andrew Ott was also a transfer in. In the final analysis, he felt he wouldn’t see much PT this year and decided to move on. In hindsight, he would have really helped out this year.

I think you have to say that Skyler King and Stanley Pringle were also transfers-in since they came from the JUCO ranks.

I think the team played much better without Buie, so I think his departure was a net positive. Even though he was highly rated, I’m not sure he was ever going to be a good big ten guard.

I never was a Bil Edwards fan, so I didn’t mind losing him.

I did hate to lose Chris Babb - I thought he would have been a big factor this year.

I’m not sure, but wasn’t a medical condition behind the transfer of Marlon Smith?

No thoughts on the others.[/quote]

Ott was the toughest loss. This past season, we could have REALLY used another big body. Maybe he wasn’t all -conference material, but as the final regular season game against Ohio State showed, where poor Billy Oliver had to try covering Sullinger, we could have used some size.

I was high on Bill Edwards. I thought he was going to be a really good player. I still do. His basketball IQ and instincts were fantastic. It will be interesting to follow him this coming season.

Does Obradovic really count? He graduated. I don’t think that should be held against neither him nor the team. Same with Ott.


#8

I would venture a guess that Marlon Smith transfered because PSU was not going to medically clear him to play. That is just my feeling.

Seemed a lot like the Aaron Jack situation.


#9

We can debate that, but for purposes of my post, I included all deparetures before the eligitillity ran out, that did not result in the player going to the NBA (yes, Jagla had those dreams).

Ott, Suantomo, and Obradovic graduated, but they did not use all of their eligility.


#10
[quote="Great Santini, post:4, topic:2353"]I'm not sure, but wasn't a medical condition behind the transfer of Marlon Smith?[/quote] On the surface, that's what it was made to look like. There's more to the story, but his stroke/blockage in his brain served as a great disguise to use. The real issue as to why he transferred was academic.

Smith didn’t exactly have a smooth career after he left PSU, either.


#11

So did Suotamo.

Also Bogetic told me personally that he decided to leave and was not forced out. In retrospect, I believe him. I also believe that Obradovic’s departure was player initiated. If they were both forced out, why wouldn’t they have both left at the same time? Also Milos was getting playing time and Nikola wasn’t. Nikola would have been the logical one to ask to leave. Yet he stayed and Milos left. That leads me to believe that the decision to go wasn’t forced on them. Milos chose to go because he hated the conditioning program. Nikola left because he saw a unique opportunity to get an MBA with his final year of eligibility (my understanding is that the MBA program at PSU won’t take you if you are on the basketball team - supposedly Morrissey tried that route and was turned down).


#12

My breakout between the Player initiated and Ed initiated transfers were just “educated” gueses on my part. Those who know more can “reshuffle” my list and will get no argument from me.


#13

Thanks 78 for the list. But, I don’t put much stock into the “why” players left. I doubt many of the real reasons did not become public.


#14

Sorry, but that is incorrect. There was a larger academic problem (I have spoke to him first-hand about his transfer).


#15

It’s not that the PSU MBA program is basketball biased, it’s that their curriculum doesn’t have the wiggle room necessary for someone who participates in a varsity sport. I’ve known three athletes & one cheerleader over the years who wanted to start their MBA during their final year of NCAA eligibility. The two walk-ons & the cheerleader quit the sport to start their MBA, the one scholly player stuck with the sport.

There are some academic programs that are virtually impossible for athletes due to scheduling and time commitments. Architecture & Landscape Architecture are two prime examples. With 4 hr design studios 3-5 days a week, it doesn’t allow much scheduling flexibility. Plus the fact that students need to put in a minimum 20 hrs a week out of class in the studio if they just want to get by. More if you want to get decent grades.

Some athletes have started in these programs but ended up switching majors. Tony Bobulinski, a wrestler, started in Architecture but switched to either Electrical or Nuclear Engineering, was on the deans list all but one semester, BigTen Academic Athlete of the year, and other academic awards. It wasn’t that he wasn’t smart enough for the program, he just could work the schedule. There was another wrestler who stuck with both until his fifth year Arch thesis. His name escapes me. Jen Reimers did basketball, volleyball & an 5 yr LArch degree.

Also, Eddie George went back to OSU to finish his LArch degree and has his own firm now. George is the only major college football player that I can ever remember being enrolled in a professional Arch or LArch program. While Andrew Luck got a lot of publicity for going back to finish his Arch degree at Stanford, it’s actually a BS in Engineering with a specialization in Architectural Design, not the professional 5yr degree. Less design studios means more flexibility in scheduling. Doesn’t mean it’s easier academically, just easier to schedule.

I remember when Myron Rolle signed with FSU, some people were questioning why someone who was so focused on academics would go there when FSu was infamous for letting their players skate. One of the reasons was that FSU’s pre-med curriculum was able to mesh with his football schedule. I’d say it worked out for him.


#16
[quote="UncleLar, post:11, topic:2353"](my understanding is that the MBA program at PSU won't take you if you are on the basketball team - supposedly Morrissey tried that route and was turned down).[/quote]

It’s not that the PSU MBA program is basketball biased, it’s that their curriculum doesn’t have the wiggle room necessary for someone who participates in a varsity sport. I’ve known three athletes & one cheerleader over the years who wanted to start their MBA during their final year of NCAA eligibility. The two walk-ons & the cheerleader quit the sport to start their MBA, the one scholly player stuck with the sport.

There are some academic programs that are virtually impossible for athletes due to scheduling and time commitments. Architecture & Landscape Architecture are two prime examples. With 4 hr design studios 3-5 days a week, it doesn’t allow much scheduling flexibility. Plus the fact that students need to put in a minimum 20 hrs a week out of class in the studio if they just want to get by. More if you want to get decent grades.

Some athletes have started in these programs but ended up switching majors. Tony Bobulinski, a wrestler, started in Architecture but switched to either Electrical or Nuclear Engineering, was on the deans list all but one semester, BigTen Academic Athlete of the year, and other academic awards. It wasn’t that he wasn’t smart enough for the program, he just could work the schedule. There was another wrestler who stuck with both until his fifth year Arch thesis. His name escapes me. Jen Reimers did basketball, volleyball & an 5 yr LArch degree.

Also, Eddie George went back to OSU to finish his LArch degree and has his own firm now. George is the only major college football player that I can ever remember being enrolled in a professional Arch or LArch program. While Andrew Luck got a lot of publicity for going back to finish his Arch degree at Stanford, it’s actually a BS in Engineering with a specialization in Architectural Design, not the professional 5yr degree. Less design studios means more flexibility in scheduling. Doesn’t mean it’s easier academically, just easier to schedule.

I remember when Myron Rolle signed with FSU, some people were questioning why someone who was so focused on academics would go there when FSu was infamous for letting their players skate. One of the reasons was that FSU’s pre-med curriculum was able to mesh with his football schedule. I’d say it worked out for him.

I got an MBA at Penn State Harrisburg which was mostly a part time program for working professionals. There always seemed to be a couple of Penn State employees from University Park in the program. How they could commute twice a week to Harrisburg for night classes, I never figured out. The Smeal MBA program was full time only with little to no flexibility on schedule, so their choices were Harrisburg or an hour and a half farther down the road in Great Valley.


#17

A buddy of mine looked into it, but the commute from where he currently works and lives wasn’t going to work. I’m all for programs trying to accommodate athletes to a point. However, you can’t expect them to completely re-structure their program for one or two people.

I also suspect that some schools like Cincy or Louisville that have a long tradition as a commuter school might have more flexibility in their scheduling rather than traditional residential colleges. Also, traditionally city schools tend to have more flexibility in their programs to allow for returning students, etc.

I know Duke received some bad press from ESPN & others because a high percentage of their basketball players are Sociogy majors when compared to the entire Duke student body. I’m willing to bet that flexability in scheduling plays a role with that. If it’s a legit major available to all Duke students, should it matter if 100% of Duke basketball players major in Sociology?


#18
[quote="JohnT, post:16, topic:2353"]I got an MBA at Penn State Harrisburg which was mostly a part time program for working professionals. There always seemed to be a couple of Penn State employees from University Park in the program. How they could commute twice a week to Harrisburg for night classes, I never figured out. The Smeal MBA program was full time only with little to no flexibility on schedule, so their choices were Harrisburg or an hour and a half farther down the road in Great Valley.[/quote]

A buddy of mine looked into it, but the commute from where he currently works and lives wasn’t going to work. I’m all for programs trying to accommodate athletes to a point. However, you can’t expect them to completely re-structure their program for one or two people.

I also suspect that some schools like Cincy or Louisville that have a long tradition as a commuter school might have more flexibility in their scheduling rather than traditional residential colleges. Also, traditionally city schools tend to have more flexibility in their programs to allow for returning students, etc.

I know Duke received some bad press from ESPN & others because a high percentage of their basketball players are Sociogy majors when compared to the entire Duke student body. I’m willing to bet that flexability in scheduling plays a role with that. If it’s a legit major available to all Duke students, should it matter if 100% of Duke basketball players major in Sociology?

OF COURSE it should…??? Give me a break. Flexibility…what a Flexible word…


#19

I can’t seem to find a free version of the article that I was looking at, but here’s the two paragraphs about the ‘unusually high number of players studying sociology’

Not so royal blue - Duke’s shining image is looking a little tarnished
The Washington Times - Saturday, January 18, 2003
Author: Jon Siegel

The ESPN show suggested some players are taking "easy" classes and majors to get their degrees and noted that an unusually high number of players are studying sociology, which is considered a light course taken by only a small percentage of the student body.

According to this season’s media guide, three of the seven players who have decided on majors chose sociology. Williams, the second overall pick by the Chicago Bulls, graduated in three years with a sociology degree. Boozer, a second-round pick by Cleveland, also was a sociology major.

3 of 7 who have decided on majors is 43% - the criticism is based on the fact that 43% of the Duke student body do not major in Sociology.

So, looking at Penn State’s yearbook/media guide and I see the following majors listed:

Recreation, Park & Tourism Management
Recreation, Park & Tourism Management and African & African American Studies
Recreation, Park & Tourism Management and Labor & Employment Relations
Communications
Communications
Finance
Finance
Undecided
Undecided
Undecided
Undecided
Undecided
Undecided

3 of 7 who have decided on majors is 43% - Do you think that 43% of the students at PSU are Recreation, Park & Tourism Management majors?

If you want to throw in a ‘Yeah, but’ exception that two of those were able to swing double majors in 5 years, lets look at:

2 of 7 who have decided on majors is 29% - Do you think that 29% of the students at PSU are majoring in Communications? Do you think that another 29% of the students at PSU are majoring in Finance?

Granted, some majors are easier than others. If it’s a valid major offered by the university, why should it matter if 29, or 43 or 100% of basketball players have the same major?

Now if someone were to find that of the 6,500 undergrads at Duke, only 100 are sociology majors, and 75 of those are athletes, then I might start rolling my eyes.