TPM quote from above:
"IMO, maybe wrong, I believe more transfers occur because the player really isn't happy with his situation. They think the grass is greener on the other side. I also believe that many coaches have a hard time getting their players to buy in to their philosophy, they just aren't good at communicating that to the team, so they lose players because the player doesn't understand their is no I in team. That's just my perception."
There seems to be an invisible line that separates the focus on "team first" and "me first" here.......X Is this where the transition occurs that we see so much in pro sports and at times college sports; in the summer between senior year of HS and freshman year of college? Posters on this site excoriate parents and kids who dare to jockey/transfer from one HS to another due to lack of PT. The message here is ALWAYS, "don't be a quitter, buy in to the coach's system, No "I" in team, you'll be sending the wrong message to your kid if you let them jump to another HS, let them grow and learn the lesson, challenge them, life isn't fair, etc. etc. etc."
Yet suddenly one year later in college it's a no brainer to bolt because "John" (no longer "Johnny") is not getting the PT he thinks he deserves. These are the same issues we discuss in HS, it's just 4-years later, isn't it? I get the fact that now there's pro careers on the line and needed development for said pro aspirations, I get that. So is THAT the reason for the "me first" transition? But then, isn't that what the grumblers who ride the pine in HS were talking about? But for them it was college aspirations as opposed to pro? And they were told to basically suck it up, life ain't fair?
One of the players I reference anonymously in OP went from one elite P-5 to another elite P-5 via a JUCO in year #2. He is obviously not a case of coaches misreading his abilities during the recruiting process, I doubt that many layers of recruiters make that same mistake. He's in the right pond. Maybe it was an issue of chemistry, or the kid's personality or attitude (highly doubt it) but it's clear to several sets of P-5 staffs that he's got the "stuff." No idea what his "whys" are but I just can't help but feel that in this one case, if he had stuck around at school #1, he'd of contributed more as a sophomore and then Jr. Isn't that what Mid-Atlantic Dad's stats posted above suggest? instead of hitting the EJECT button and taking the exit ramp for Rt. #4-2-4?
Is baseball chivalry dead in college? Is sitting the bench in college as a freshman and then partially sophomore year, buying in to coach's philosophy, and the role he has given you, "waiting your turn," NOT an option? I thought that was what "team" was all about? Let's be honest most of these guys were kids who never missed a starting AB or inning in the field from 8yo thru 18yo. That was something other kids had to deal with. Now for the first time in their lives, they are not a starter, maybe even RS'd for freshman year, and it's so unacceptable that they transfer?
Now if it is painfully apparent kid has zero shot of ever contributing and coaches tell him that, then I completely see the transfer option. But if it's simply the lumps and bumps of life? I just have a hard time calling a kid a sucker for sticking it out and hoping for a break. But then the issues BackstopDad presents above kick in big time. His post is is highly valid on this scenario. You're a sophomore or junior busting your butt, not catching a break AND you're missing out on the phenomenal social life that makes college so much fun? That's a major problem.
I'm not faulting any kid for navigating his path in college ball how he sees fit. I'm just trying to understand where the line is regarding the importance of the team's overall success and a player's baseball aspirations and need for development.