Softball players leaving for next year.

[JMV JustMyView]

Coach Glasco has shown to be adept at using the transfer portal to add girls that he thinks will upgrade his roster. One would think that Glasco envisions that these transfers will be become starters or at a minimum, get significant playing time. From his willingness to build a roster through transfers, it made me wonder what affect this has on team chemistry? Does this instill any loyalty in the players to Coach Glasco knowing that he is always checking the transfer portal looking for players that he feels are better than what he already has? If I am a high school kid being recruited by Glasco, would his proclivity towards using the transfer portal be something that would affect my decision to attend UL? Let's say that Glasco is able to get Konwent to transfer to UL. The fans would be excited but I wonder about the reaction from the girls on the team affected by that transfer (Curry, Gremillion, Boswell and Hudek if she returns) and from the players not directly affected by this transfer. I realize that you want your players to compete. It just appears that Glasco is constantly looking for the next best thing and his attitude towards his players is one of "you're good enough for me right now but I am always looking for something better".

Every school uses the portal and if you talk to kids that play for Glasco they love him and he is loyal. You can still be loyal and upgrade your roster. He is here to win not make friends.

[JMV JustMyView]

If you are not looking to upgrade your roster at all times, then you do not need to be in coaching. Look at Coach Napier, the last couple of seasons he has added some transfers in late after recruiting. Some of these have been very good and some have been OK but everyone of these players has made the team better on the field.

I look at a couple of players, Nick Ralston was a complete hit, he was as good of an H Back as we could have wanted and made us a much better team. Brendann Johnson who transferred here from UTSA gave us depth, even though he has decided to transfer out for next year. He played mostly on special teams.

I don't care who you are, you should always be looking to make your team better. I trust these coaches are doing their homework on these kids and are going to make sure that they are quality kids who are not only going to help the team on the field, but off the field and in the locker room as well.

I would be more upset if Coach Glasco was not bringing in these types of transfers.

Glasco uses the same model Robe used. He tells kids when he recruits them he is always looking for someone to take there place. Up front and honest about it, personally I love that style it keeps kids from getting comfortable. Glasco will never have a problem getting kids to commit to come to UL. Top 10 rankings, #1 RPI, best fans it's and easy sell.

[JMV JustMyView]

Coach Glasco has shown to be adept at using the transfer portal to add girls that he thinks will upgrade his roster. One would think that Glasco envisions that these transfers will be become starters or at a minimum, get significant playing time. From his willingness to build a roster through transfers, it made me wonder what affect this has on team chemistry? Does this instill any loyalty in the players to Coach Glasco knowing that he is always checking the transfer portal looking for players that he feels are better than what he already has? If I am a high school kid being recruited by Glasco, would his proclivity towards using the transfer portal be something that would affect my decision to attend UL? Let's say that Glasco is able to get Konwent to transfer to UL. The fans would be excited but I wonder about the reaction from the girls on the team affected by that transfer (Curry, Gremillion, Boswell and Hudek if she returns) and from the players not directly affected by this transfer. I realize that you want your players to compete. It just appears that Glasco is constantly looking for the next best thing and his attitude towards his players is one of "you're good enough for me right now but I am always looking for something better".

Konwent would be a upgrade over 3 of those kids you listed.

[SportyCajun459]

Konwent would be a upgrade over 3 of those kids you listed.

Maybe so but apparently you missed the point of my original post.

[JMV JustMyView]

Maybe so but apparently you missed the point of my original post.

What is your point? I address everything in my previous posts.

[zephyr]

Maybe so but apparently you missed the point of my original post.

Not really

[Rainman66]

Glasco isn't trying to become trnasfer-u, if he has the chance to upgrade I see no problem with it if the kids is good on and off the field. We need kids to push other kids, if your good enough then you will play, that's the bottom line.

Whether he is or he isn't, he is transfer U right now. Check last year's roster and the majority of the players did not start their careers here.

Now there are multiple reasons why this is fine:

1. He is winning.
2. Players coming in are very talented and good citizens.
3. He is winning big.
4. In general, there are a lot of transfers in the sport.
5. He is winning really big.
6. He took over a program and still recruiting his players.


Now in a year or two, is Glasco bad at evaluation, if players he recruited here are transferring out and not developing into good players?

If he is still winning, the answer is, it doesn't matter.

[JMV JustMyView]

Whether he is or he isn't, he is transfer U right now. Check last year's roster and the majority of the players did not start their careers here.

Now there are multiple reasons why this is fine:

1. He is winning.
2. Players coming in are very talented and good citizens.
3. He is winning big.
4. In general, there are a lot of transfers in the sport.
5. He is winning really big.
6. He took over a program and still recruiting his players.


Now in a year or two, is Glasco bad at evaluation, if players he recruited here are transferring out and not developing into good players?

If he is still winning, the answer is, it doesn't matter.

His first few years he had no choice his roster was depleted. He brought in Milligan, Hudek and Alderink all former players of his. Every school has transfers coming in.

[JMV JustMyView]

Whether he is or he isn't, he is transfer U right now. Check last year's roster and the majority of the players did not start their careers here.

Now there are multiple reasons why this is fine:

1. He is winning.
2. Players coming in are very talented and good citizens.
3. He is winning big.
4. In general, there are a lot of transfers in the sport.
5. He is winning really big.
6. He took over a program and still recruiting his players.


Now in a year or two, is Glasco bad at evaluation, if players he recruited here are transferring out and not developing into good players?

If he is still winning, the answer is, it doesn't matter.

Some of those players were Mike kids. O'Neill and Dalton.

[CajunEXPRESS]

Some of those players were Mike kids. O'Neill and Dalton.

He clearly had to resell them on the Louisiana program. There was a concerted effort by Lotief & his cultists to crash the program. I consider those players Glasco players.

[60swerethebest]

In interview Glasco said he is using transfers to upgrade program but does not plan on doing to this extent long term. He points to the next two recruiting classes. No way I have any issue with his approach. He has grown the program from get go. Shame we will never know what this year would have been. Not many teams have two AA pitchers on staff that support each other. Rats.

[Rainman66]

His first few years he had no choice his roster was depleted. He brought in Milligan, Hudek and Alderink all former players of his. Every school has transfers coming in.

I am not arguing that, but to say this isn't transfer U, right now, is just not true. GG has brought in more transfers than HS signees. The latest announcement was one of each, and now hearing there may be a couple of more transfers coming in.

I think transfer U has had negative connotations in the past, but I don't see that it has to be a bad thing.