Before everyone jumps on the thread to write about how we should grab this kid on the bounce-back, I'm wondering if there shouldn't be a set of established criteria for transfers to pursue. I think the hits and misses of recent years give us a good sense of how to separate the wheat from the chaff. Here goes from most likely to succeed to least likely...
-Accomplished starter at previous school, preferably at higher level, same level or only slightly below. If team was winning squad, even better.
-Starter but badly underutilized by scheme. Coaching change during or soon after arrival possibly a factor. -Backup, with some positive game experience, but behind all-conference/all-america talent.
Now bad signs...
-Starter and positive contributor but on a disastrously bad and poorly-disciplined team. Even if the player is talented, there may not be enough time to get him to quit bad habits, especially if he's a grad transfer.
-Starter at lower level program with middling stats.
-High level signee but little to no impact whatsoever at factory program. Whether due to talent or repeated disciplinary problems is not so important. Both are bad.