The transfer portal has completely taken over the world of Division 1 Men’s College Basketball. The amount of options players have at moving around and choosing their own destiny has never been seen before, and is causing shockwaves for coaches and fans. The transfer portal has made it so a school can begin with a group of bonded players, and then have a whole new bunch of players from all across the country the next year. This raises the question of if the transfer portal is purely positive, out of control, or a little bit of both?

Looking at the perspectives of players, coaches, and fans can provide the most context within this question. In a podcast with myself and former sports writer Sam Flickinger we discussed our thoughts on each of these sides. Players would see almost downsides with the transfer portal. Like previously said the portal gives players the power to choose where they want to go based on playing time, media exposure, or other personal needs. The players get an almost trial and error type of system where they can spend a year or two at a school, then move on if they are unsatisfied, with little consequences. At the same time this can be concerning for players though as if many of them are looking to play right away without developing it could actually be hurting them. In our podcast Sam says, “It’s just not like it used to be,” referring to back when college basketball was more typical with younger players developing behind older ones and building programs up. This seems like a lost art now and looks to be damaging for players in many cases. 

For coaches there are many angles depending on the coaching style they prefer. For some coaches the transfer portal is great, as many coaches have the resources to bring in great players that are older and more experienced than high school recruits. It can allow some programs to lose most of their team but they quickly replace them with top tier transfer players who are just as good. Although for smaller schools or coaches who are not as good at developing relationships with players, the portal can be detrimental for their team. These schools may start off with a great team and have a great year, and the players will end up leaving for bigger schools at the end of the year putting the coach back at square one. Building a team with continuity and trust becomes very difficult with the portal for many teams and could require a change in that aspect. 

Lastly, from a fan point of view the transfer portal seems heartbreaking. For myself personally over the past couple of years I have watched players I love dominate for my favorite team, and then leave unexpectedly with little remorse. For fans it seems extremely difficult to build connections with individual players or even teams knowing that the whole thing could be broken up within a week in the offseason. For example, Kentucky men’s basketball coach John Calipari recently left his job coaching the Wildcats to coach at Arkansas and ended up bringing almost all of his best players with him. For Kentucky fans this was shocking as Calipari had been there for over a decade building a dynasty only to leave and take his team with him elsewhere. 

In conclusion, it would be unfair to the players to get rid of the transfer portal completely, as it provides much needed exposure that they would not have gotten otherwise. Instead I think putting some restrictions on what players could enter the portal would be beneficial. Implementing a rule such as requiring players to stay at their initial school for two years before they could transfer would be a good start.