Evanson: Oregon State's player departures aren't the problem, they're a symptom of a bigger one

I had an Oregon State fan ask me this past weekend, “what’s going on?” in regard to the recent and significant departure of a number of its women’s basketball team’s biggest and/or upcoming stars.

That’s a good question, and one that’s difficult to answer without hearing from the departing players beyond a prepared statement thanking the team and school for time served.

Is NIL a part of it? To some extent, for there is likely a market for at least a few of the stars with eyes elsewhere.

What about the conference situation which has the OSU women’s and men’s basketball teams competing in the WCC over the next two seasons? Again, likely. After-all, I suspect the bulk of student athletes in Corvallis chose the school in large part due to an opportunity to play against Power 5 competition, and with the Beavers still looking for a chair since the conference alignment music quit playing late last summer, said competition has—at least for now—become a thing of the past.

Winning or lack thereof? It’s hard to make that argument, for the Oregon State women just advanced to the NCAA Tournament’s “Elite 8” and were set to return the vast majority of a roster which on paper appeared capable of making a run to next season’s “Final Four.”

But while all or most of the aforementioned factors likely played a part in what can only be called a max exodus, they’re really just symptoms of a much bigger problem facing the team, university, and college athletics in general — the Transfer Portal.

By now, you’re either familiar with the mechanism, new to the collegiate game, or breathing the sand your head is clearly buried in.

For players, the Transfer Portal is the land of opportunity. It was meant to provide them a chance to seek “employment” elsewhere if they were unhappy with their current situation, eying greener pastures, or simply righting what amounted to a wrong when they committed to a school that was ultimately not for them.

But while created as a conduit for players who prior had limited options, it’s become little more than an auction block for commodities seeking more of what college athletics previously provided little of — money.

That’s what it boils down to: who has the money and how does one get the most of it?

This was inevitable. For decades, collegiate sports were in desperate need of reform. The monetary pie was getting bigger, but the kids’ slice of it wasn’t — at least directly. So, begrudgingly the NCAA created NIL (Name, Image and Likeness) as a means of sharing the wealth, and the Transfer Portal as a gesture to people clamoring for more freedom for athletes hamstrung by the existing contractual obligations tied to athletic scholarships.

But without the time and foresight necessary to implement fair and efficient policy, the NCAA shoe-horned in a half-baked version of it and now you’re seeing the results.

I’m all for the players getting increased compensation. And while I’m still one of the dinosaurs that believes there’s significant value in a scholarship and the benefits that come with it, the product they provide is worthy of more than what they were previously getting.

I also believe there should be at least a little wiggle room when it comes to an athlete’s ability to transfer.

But I don’t agree with how NIL is presently being executed, and further believe there needs to be restrictions for when and how the Transfer Portal can be used.

What does all of that look like? I’d need more time, space, and likely brain cells to answer that, but it can’t continue to look like what it presently does, for it’s unsustainable for the universities, I believe unhealthy for the student-athletes, and nonsensical for people like you or I trying to make sense of it all.

That doesn’t make for a very bright future for the Beavers, nor ultimately anyone else in or beyond the college games.