ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½

With the transfer portal and legal payouts, college basketball players are constantly jumping program to program (to program to program, some playing for four teams in four years).

“It really erodes the concept of team,â€� ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½ University men’s basketball coach Josh Schertz said. “And then what you have is guys playing for the wrong reasons. Guys are playing to try to put up numbers because they want to increase their value in the portal. Or guys don’t care, because they already have something (agreed upon) and they know they’re leaving.

“Coaching has always been challenging in any sport. To get people to buy in and to sacrifice for each other and give up for the good of the team — all stuff that, innately, is against human nature — has been (a struggle) for the eternity of coaching. Now you’re adding these other factors to it? They make it impossible if you’re dealing with those things, because there’s no way to do it if people have one foot out the door.�

SLU’s Schertz first shared his ideas on 101.1 ESPN’s show “The Morning After,� and he elaborated to me by phone Monday. His idea is simple. Basketball players should be allowed to transfer one time and play automatically the next season. But if they want to transfer again, they’ll have to sit out a year (like the old days).

Also, if a player’s coach leaves for another school, the player is allowed to transfer and play right away (even if the player had previously transferred). Same for players who graduate but still have a year of eligibility.

“It would slow the portal a little bit, because people would have to think that they want this kid to sit out a year and then play,� Schertz said. “I think it would make decisions maybe a little more cleaner. Kids are getting pulled in so many different directions. So it would clean up a lot of what we’re dealing with, both in the portal and in terms of, like, tampering. Would it solve it? No, would it? Would it mitigate it some? Yes.

“But the way it’s constructed right now, it (hurts competitive equity) with annual free agency, and then NIL without a salary cap — I know they’re saying it’ll be revenue sharing, and they’re going to have a cap. I’ll believe it when I see it.�

Schertz was very honest about the current state of the game. He said as early as the end of November, other teams are already identifying players who aren’t playing much — or are playing well and could fit at a bigger school. Third parties reach out to the players and talk money.

“That tampering goes on all year …� he said. “By January, talking to (coaching) friends of mine, a lot of players know where they’re going (to transfer). … There’s no other market in the world that has unlimited free agency and no salary cap.�

Schertz spoke of player contracts and multi-year deals — and buyouts. Coaches, yes, leave schools all the time — but there are buyouts involved.

And he thinks players’ salaries should be public.

“I don’t think there should be this shroud of secrecy over what somebody’s being paid,� he said. “And right now, the way it’s set up, there’s so much misinformation intentionally. Agents are misrepresenting because they want to drive prices higher.�

At first, I disagreed with another idea Schertz had.

He wants to expand the NCAA Tournament.

I initially went into defense mode. Why would anyone want to mess with the perfect bracket and the perfect setup in sports?

But after hearing his explanation, I realized it still won’t tarnish the 64-team bracket we all love — it’ll just add more play-in games prior. And it’ll theoretically allow mid-majors like SLU more chances to get into The Big (Albeit A Bit Bigger) Dance.

Right now, there are 68 teams in the tournament — 60 teams are automatically seeded, while the other eight play in the “First Four� play-in games. Those four winners give you 64 total team.

Schertz wants it expanded to a 76-team field — 52 automatically seeded and then 24 teams in 12 play-in games. So 12 plus 52 gives you the standard 64-team bracket.

He believes it’ll make the regular season even more meaningful and, thus, competitive. And it should get conferences such as the Atlantic-10 more bids than just the annual automatic win for the conference tourney champ.

“If you look at the last five years,� he said, “the high majors and power conferences are doing everything they can — and it’s in their self interest, which I understand — to monopolize the tournament and get as many bids as possible. Why is that? Because money. The more bids you get, the more units for your league, the further you get, right? So they’re not going to open up more opportunities for mid-majors to get in.�

But more bids overall could, possibly, do that.

And it could encourage power conferences to schedule games against mid-majors — it doesn’t happen much anymore. Maybe Mizzou (from the Southeastern Conference) would then play a team such as SLU. Less risk.

Mid-majors could thus nab more wins against big teams … and boost their resumes for the expanded 76-team field. A team like Schertz’s Indiana State squad in 2024 might’ve made it in (instead, the Sycamores advanced to the title game of the NIT).

“Because the end of the day,� Schertz said, “what makes the NCAA Tournament great isn’t a bad high-major upsetting a good high-major. It’s the Cinderellas.

“It’s not based on a team that was 5-13 in the Big Ten upsetting a team that was 14-4 in the SEC. It is the David and Goliath, the ability in basketball, unlike most sports, where that’s a real thing — because of 3-point line, and you only have five players in the court, all these differences (that can lead to upsets). It’s not like football. Just two years ago, Florida Atlantic and San Diego State were playing in the Final Four. That’s what is the romanticism of the tournament. We’re losing that a little bit in in the chase of the money in the Super leagues. … All that is designed to keep teams like St Louis out of the NCAA Tournament, barring an automatic qualifier.�