I guess it shouldn’t be too surprising that the media has glommed onto this story now. To me, it illustrates the difference between the coaches and the fans/media. Some thoughts:
1. 1/3 of all portal entrants are grads, and there has been a clear preference to take developed players to plug gaps on rosters.
2. coaches would always prefer to be as old as possible without sacrificing production—no college team needs to get younger if they’re trying to compete. IU’s roster build isn’t some novel approach.
3. I’d wager that the teams that recruit the most portal guys will naturally skew older.
4. I’d wager that the national champion has typically been among the oldest teams each year.
5. IU’s story confuses people, and the relative age of the roster has been put forward as a novel and simple explanation as a media product.
6. it is easier to get older during transition periods and most likely to happen at places where the program has been moribund.
7. Cignetti and staff deserve a ton of credit for player evaluation and culture building.