@anotherparent posted:Where it applies to baseball is precisely the question of whether a team can be successful by bringing in a lot of transfers. That was the Sanders question, and at the moment it is not looking like a huge success.
As we were discussing on the other thread (you provided information, CBI!), some baseball colleges are not bringing in high school students at all, just transfers. It will be interesting to see, long-term, how successful those schools are.
I wonder if it's different for fall and spring sports? At least transfers in baseball have the fall to settle in, practice, etc. with the new team. Those football players got there in the summer and had to learn everything while playing games.
Can't compare baseball to football
What is the definition of huge success? And what is the timeframe? Again, Sanders stated that he needs about 7 or 8 dawgs.
Let's be realistic, they are better than last year's team. More competitive. Revenue is up.
It was known they had some deficiencies.
Next year they will get more talent, especially on the offense and defensive line.
At the skill positions, their goal is to get more depth.
As for baseball, it is getting older for many reasons. All which has been spoken about on this forum. It doesn't mean it will continue, but that is the one of the paths schools are taking to fill rosters.