In light of the ncaa’s change of policy allowing transfers to play immediately I think even “true” Creaning is a lot less problematic than it used to be. It used to be that the player kind of got screwed because he’d have to burn a year sitting out after transferring. And if the player already redshirted, he’d lose a year of eligibility entirely.
Illini took Hamlin as a very late flyer when he had no high major offers and was heading to prep school. He got two years here being part of winning teams at the highest level of college ball, got some playing time, got tons of practice time against an elite center and coaching from an elite big man coach. At this point, I assume he would rather go somewhere he can get a lot of playing time immediately and for two years as an upperclassman. If his preference is riding pine, it does stink a little that he’s being encouraged to transfer (I would assume that’s all that’s happened and the coaching staff did not tell him “we’re not renewing your scholarship”). But with the way the transfer portal now works, that’s life in high major basketball. People transfer freely, there is major upside to many players in that they get to go play wherever they want immediately, and the downside to players who don’t want to leave is limited by the fact that they can also go play elsewhere immediately.
I have mixed feelings on the transfer portal. I think it’s fair to players, but I don’t love the impact it has on the sport. As a spectator, I enjoy roster continuity and watching players develop and teams come together. But with the changes to the portal and the proliferation of transfers, schools can’t be expected to just sit back and let other schools position themselves well while others don’t. There are tons of top notch transfers available, and we lost one in Miller. We’d be idiotic not to try to take advantage of the portal, which every other team is doing.