'15 NC State Transfer PF Kyle Washington (Commit)

[Bulldog01]

Maybe. Maybe not. But most Top 50 recruits never step foot in our arena, so idk.

to be fair mick, most of our top recruits in history of program he's help land.

 

[Doogle]

I find it pretty amusing that most of us (including myself) on this board were giddy at the prospects for this team next year right after the tournament.
2 months later, we're lining up to jump off a ledge because Mick didn't get a few transfers very few people had ever heard of prior to their decisions to transfer.

Jenifer, Scott and Evans were all very solid gets. This team will be extremely good next year IMO. Next year, after a deep tourney run, we could be in prime position to land impact spring recruits or a couple of those coveted transfers everyone's in a twist about. Let's focus on next season and let Mick and company worry about 2016-2017 and beyond. Our hand-wringing and belly aching has no impact on the process anyway - so why waste precious energy?

 

[TNBearcat3]

I find it pretty amusing that most of us (including myself) on this board were giddy at the prospects for this team next year right after the tournament.
2 months later, we're lining up to jump off a ledge because Mick didn't get a few transfers very few people had ever heard of prior to their decisions to transfer.

Jenifer, Scott and Evans were all very solid gets. This team will be extremely good next year IMO. Next year, after a deep tourney run, we could be in prime position to land impact spring recruits or a couple of those coveted transfers everyone's in a twist about. Let's focus on next season and let Mick and company worry about 2016-2017 and beyond. Our hand-wringing and belly aching has no impact on the process anyway - so why waste precious energy?

This x1000000

 

[Mcginnjw]

I find it pretty amusing that most of us (including myself) on this board were giddy at the prospects for this team next year right after the tournament.
2 months later, we're lining up to jump off a ledge because Mick didn't get a few transfers very few people had ever heard of prior to their decisions to transfer.

Jenifer, Scott and Evans were all very solid gets. This team will be extremely good next year IMO. Next year, after a deep tourney run, we could be in prime position to land impact spring recruits or a couple of those coveted transfers everyone's in a twist about. Let's focus on next season and let Mick and company worry about 2016-2017 and beyond. Our hand-wringing and belly aching has no impact on the process anyway - so why waste precious energy?

Thank you!

 

[Bcatfollower]

I find it pretty amusing that most of us (including myself) on this board were giddy at the prospects for this team next year right after the tournament.
2 months later, we're lining up to jump off a ledge because Mick didn't get a few transfers very few people had ever heard of prior to their decisions to transfer.

Jenifer, Scott and Evans were all very solid gets. This team will be extremely good next year IMO. Next year, after a deep tourney run, we could be in prime position to land impact spring recruits or a couple of those coveted transfers everyone's in a twist about. Let's focus on next season and let Mick and company worry about 2016-2017 and beyond. Our hand-wringing and belly aching has no impact on the process anyway - so why waste precious energy?

I think the reasoning is we hear Mick say they want to add 1 to 2 players 1 of which he wanted a good contributor. The staff obviously identifies they want certain players and does their best to get them. They fail and another school, near out current level, brings them in. It's disappointing and becoming repetitive. Mick set these expectations.

 

[bearcat jeff]

It will all work out. Most people said NIT prior to this past season and they made the NCAA. This is not the end of the world. They have plenty of scholarship players. They're the same team everyone was excited over. There will be another recruiting class next season and frankly I still think they'll look under every rock to sign one more this season. If the few good guys that are left don't come, just pocket the 'ship. Many teams operate under the scholarship limit it's no big deal.

 

[cincycpaw]

I still think the team will be terrific next year. I'm concerned about the year after but plenty of recruiting time left. Hopefully Mick used his year well.

 

[david aka the TYZ]

In the grand scheme of things, I'm not concerned about losing any one recruit. Rowsey chose a good Marquette program over us. Not a big deal. Izundu chose to play in the ACC and Miami over coming north. Not a big deal. It is frustrating to watch and want these guys and see them choose other schools, but I'm over it the second they announce somewhere else. I don't think the sky is falling but I do get the frustrations of fans that we haven't brought in anybody with these two scholarships.

With that said, I do feel when you have open scholarships you are missing the boat somewhere if they are not filled. Especially when you continually keep one open every year. If Mick comes out a says, "Look I only want 12 players every year," then I'll disagree but understand. I just don't completely buy the save it for next year song and dance every year. Come March we had 8 competent players and a very raw Quadri Moore. I know three players scholarship players were off the team for whatever the reason, but we did leave a scholly open this year. Running into Kentucky probably didn't matter if we had one or two more bodies, but that Purdue game when Ellis went out it sure could've helped and save a miraculous finish did nearly cost us. If the Purdue coach was smart enough to put in both his seven footers then I think there is no chance UC hangs around in that game. My point is while the roster might be fine as is for next year, if you aren't filling your rosters out somewhere it can come back and bite you. We had a couple lost years in recruiting and that hurt us this past year with no truly solid upperclassmen. Luckily this team scrapped and fought and turned a positive out of a rebuilding year and kudos to them for pulling out a good season. I get where you don't want to give a guy four years when someone better could come along in that time, but we never use our scholly's anyway and those things always have a way of working themselves out if a player doesn't fit in. In the past three years Gaines, Davis, Lawrence, Strickland, Guyn and Morman either left by their own choice or were shown the door. Most probably a combination of the two. So why save a scholarship? Give me a fundamentally solid big and a fundamentally solid shooter/scorer with these last two. They are out there. Will they turn into studs, probably not. Would they come here as opposed to a Wright State or a Bowling Green? Probably yes. Would they help us down the stretch and give some valuable minutes as opposed to having an empty spot on the bench? I think definitely yes.

 

[ccmbearcat]

In the grand scheme of things, I'm not concerned about losing any one recruit. Rowsey chose a good Marquette program over us. Not a big deal. Izundu chose to play in the ACC and Miami over coming north. Not a big deal. It is frustrating to watch and want these guys and see them choose other schools, but I'm over it the second they announce somewhere else. I don't think the sky is falling but I do get the frustrations of fans that we haven't brought in anybody with these two scholarships.

With that said, I do feel when you have open scholarships you are missing the boat somewhere if they are not filled. Especially when you continually keep one open every year. If Mick comes out a says, "Look I only want 12 players every year," then I'll disagree but understand. I just don't completely buy the save it for next year song and dance every year. Come March we had 8 competent players and a very raw Quadri Moore. I know three players scholarship players were off the team for whatever the reason, but we did leave a scholly open this year. Running into Kentucky probably didn't matter if we had one or two more bodies, but that Purdue game when Ellis went out it sure could've helped and save a miraculous finish did nearly cost us. If the Purdue coach was smart enough to put in both his seven footers then I think there is no chance UC hangs around in that game. My point is while the roster might be fine as is for next year, if you aren't filling your rosters out somewhere it can come back and bite you. We had a couple lost years in recruiting and that hurt us this past year with no truly solid upperclassmen. Luckily this team scrapped and fought and turned a positive out of a rebuilding year and kudos to them for pulling out a good season. I get where you don't want to give a guy four years when someone better could come along in that time, but we never use our scholly's anyway and those things always have a way of working themselves out if a player doesn't fit in. In the past three years Gaines, Davis, Lawrence, Strickland, Guyn and Morman either left by their own choice or were shown the door. Most probably a combination of the two. So why save a scholarship? Give me a fundamentally solid big and a fundamentally solid shooter/scorer with these last two. They are out there. Will they turn into studs, probably not. Would they come here as opposed to a Wright State or a Bowling Green? Probably yes. Would they help us down the stretch and give some valuable minutes as opposed to having an empty spot on the bench? I think definitely yes.

The problem with keeping 13 is that many times the guys at the bottom of the depth chart often become disgruntled with the available PT and decide to move on. That was the case with Guyn, Davis, Strickland and Gaines. Lots of teams end up carrying less than 13, but it would have been nice to grab an impact player but not the end of the world. Recruiting is often a dirty business, especially in the spring when the few top guys are shopped around looking for the highest bidder. So if Mick does not add anybody this spring I'm OK with that. It would be very nice to have 13 impact players but that will never happen, I'll take a roster with 10 guys who can play every time.

 

[ccmbearcat]

Updated list of top10 remaining transfers. Kyle Washington #7.

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/jef...9/top-10-transfers-and-complete-transfer-list

 

[Patrick Bateman]

The problem with keeping 13 is that many times the guys at the bottom of the depth chart often become disgruntled with the available PT and decide to move on. That was the case with Guyn, Davis, Strickland and Gaines. Lots of teams end up carrying less than 13, but it would have been nice to grab an impact player but not the end of the world. Recruiting is often a dirty business, especially in the spring when the few top guys are shopped around looking for the highest bidder. So if Mick does not add anybody this spring I'm OK with that. It would be very nice to have 13 impact players but that will never happen, I'll take a roster with 10 guys who can play every time.

First off, Guyn did not transfer due to PT, he got hurt, same with Davis and when he came back he was lost on D. Strickland left b/c he did not want to put in work and already sat out at least two years and had multiple surgeries on his knee.

Prove your point. Are their other coaches that hold scholarships? Who? How do other coaches keep their 11, 12 and 13th man happy? Seems like many schools over recruit and make room if need be.

The issue is not in the short term but the long term. In UC's case they absolutely need those spots filled so they can build for the future, they mostly get guys that are 4 year players and need 1-2 years to develop ie. Shaq, KJ. It also gives you the luxury of red-shirting players to develop for the future as well. Not filling those holes is a big void that will be magnified next year and the year after and puts pressure on the recruiting game.

If you have a roster of 10 scholarship players it makes the margin for error thin, you cannot afford an injury, suspension,transfer etc...

With the transfer rule changing there will be much less movement in the future.

 

[Bulldog01]

Benches with only 8-9 scholarship players look embarrassing for program. Fill last 2-3 spots with local guys.

 

[david aka the TYZ]

Benches with only 8-9 scholarship players look embarrassing for program. Fill last 2-3 spots with local guys.

That was kind of my point in my post.

I'm sure Mick would love 13 difference making impact players to use his scholarships on, we all would. We obviously can't land that many every year. If we do, great if not give the scholarship to a role player. The argument against is you can't keep the 12th and 13th guy happy and I get that but that is why you fill it with a fundamentally sound player that will come here over a MAC school that can help when called upon but doesn't have any grand illusions that he will be in the NBA someday. A guy like Sanders was happy coming off the bench and doing the small things. He was fundamentally sound. I'd take him all day as my 12th or 13th guy. There are guys that come out of Cincinnati that go to MAC-caliber schools that can help us and wouldn't be headcases at the end of the bench. To my recollection we've only used all 13 scholarships once in at least the last six years.

 

[jds513]

I'm having trouble understanding what all the outrage is about. First it was because we aren't landing the caliber of players that will set us up for tournament runs every year. Like 5 star top 50 players. And yes, there is definitely a reason that isn't happening.

Now, the narrative is that we aren't filling the last two scholarships with 2-3 star MAC players. It's all much ado about nothing.

Having a team that has a rotation of 11 players that all can contribute is pretty damn good. So what if there isn't 2 more scholarship players that see the court as much as the walk ons do? I really don't think it matters.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Three of the players have not played one game, can they contribute? That remains to be seen. Quadri can contribute?

Not filling schollies does not affect next year but puts pressure on the next recruiting class. Time will tell if it is much ado about nothing but won't be able to see ripple effect until after this season.

 

[Bulldog01]

Three of the players have not played one game, can they contribute? That remains to be seen. Quadri can contribute?

Not filling schollies does not affect next year but puts pressure on the next recruiting class. Time will tell if it is much ado about nothing but won't be able to see ripple effect until after this season.

Moore had higher ranking I believe and hype on high school scene than all of them also

 

[Robert]

Yeah, there's really no telling if these freshmen coming in can contribute right away. I tend to think at least one of them will, but you never know.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I'm having trouble understanding what all the outrage is about.

Since 2009, we've had only one Top 40 recruiting class. And that was the class with Lawrence, Strickland and Morman. This 2015 class is Mick's 10th, and it doesn't rank in the Top 50 nationally. Plus we have 2 scholarships left that our coaches said we were going to use, but we haven't. Now add in that we've missed on Ward for 2016 already, we don't appear to lead for a single player, and we're offering guys being recruited by Cal-State Bakersfield, Fairfield, Hofstra, High Point, Kennesaw State, Drexel, Rider, Robert Morris and Sam Houston State. Not good enough imo. We're paying our coach too much to be recruiting at this level. We were told we had to rebuild with 7 new players just this year, but now somehow 9 scholarships are open again after just 2 years. A bigger picture is forming. We're 1-3 in the tournament in the last 3 years, with an average 7.7 seed. All I'm saying, then I'm done, is that we're playing with fire. This 2015-2016 team better be amazing, bc based on our track record, it looks like we're on pace to jump right back into the rebuild after this season. Pressure is really on to land some MAJOR high school players this fall.

 

[JackBauer151]

Since 2009, we've had only one Top 40 recruiting class. And that was the class with Lawrence, Strickland and Morman. This 2015 class is Mick's 10th, and it doesn't rank in the Top 50 nationally. Plus we have 2 scholarships left that our coaches said we were going to use, but we haven't. Now add in that we've missed on Ward for 2016 already, we don't appear to lead for a single player, and we're offering guys being recruited by Cal-State Bakersfield, Fairfield, Hofstra, High Point, Kennesaw State, Drexel, Rider, Robert Morris and Sam Houston State. Not good enough imo. We're paying our coach too much to be recruiting at this level. We were told we had to rebuild with 7 new players just this year, but now somehow 9 scholarships are open again after just 2 years. A bigger picture is forming. We're 1-3 in the tournament in the last 3 years, with an average 7.7 seed. All I'm saying, then I'm done, is that we're playing with fire. This 2015-2016 team better be amazing, bc based on our track record, it looks like we're on pace to jump right back into the rebuild after this season. Pressure is really on to land some MAJOR high school players this fall.

I get that you are very tied to this point of view but it's starting to go off the rails a little bit. First of all Mick is not paid to recruit at any level. He is paid to WIN. I dont care about rankings. Would you rather be St. Johns or Memphis? Those programs get top 100 kids every year. They have no culture and their kids run a muck. Then they miss the tournament and have to think about changing coaches and rebuilding. You make it sound like our recruiting has been a complete black hole. That's just not true. If you care about rankings just look at the last three classes. We've brought in a 5 star, a 4 star, and another 4 star. Troy was a 3. Justin Jenifer was a 4 for a long time. The recruiting has been good given the state of the program. It's not been great. But just because we've missed on two players who were once committed to Charlotte and UNC Ashville lets not lose perspective. To borrow a term from you that you used toward Jason. "That's cute" that you listed all those lower tier schools when describing a recruit that we offered. To try to base the skill of a certain recruit based off his offer list this early in the process is dumb and lazy. It means absolutely nothing. You know who else had those type of offers? Pretty much every recruit before they blew up. It's what Brison Gresham had and we were on him very early. If you would have looked at his list you would have thought why are we recruiting this guy? Then you look up and bam he has offers from Texas, OSU, and LSU. Finally I've seen you and others say this on different threads. That if we dont land HUUUGGGEEEEE recruits in 2016 we will be rebuilding and that is our track record. What on earth are you talking about? The 2016-17 team will have Troy and Kev as seniors. Gary and Quadri as Juniors, Evans, Jenifer, and Scott as sophomores. (Not including any transfers. The transfer season or market is not over. We havent filled those two scholly's YET. Washington, Coleby, Chuckwu, and more are still out there.) Even before we add anybody there is a lot of talent on that team. We will not be rebuilding. As far as our track record this past year was the first rebuild since the program got back on track and STILL MADE THE DAMN TOURNAMENT. Look, I get your overall point. You want better recruits that will hopefully result in deeper runs. The staff has a problem with closing certain recruits down. Is that a result of facilities, budget, conference, style of play, perception, or just shortcomings as salesmen? Yes. No. Maybe. I dont know. Im sure all of those can be improved upon which would yield better results. Some of them we know for a fact are (new locker room, arena, lounge area ect.) So while I understand the frustration and at times can even agree with you, your criticism at this point verges from reality. Has the recruiting been great? No. But considering all the factors the program is up against it has been pretty damn good.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I get that you are very tied to this point of view but it's starting to go off the rails a little bit. First of all Mick is not paid to recruit at any level. He is paid to WIN. I dont care about rankings. Would you rather be St. Johns or Memphis? Those programs get top 100 kids every year. They have no culture and their kids run a muck. Then they miss the tournament and have to think about changing coaches and rebuilding. You make it sound like our recruiting has been a complete black hole. That's just not true. If you care about rankings just look at the last three classes. We've brought in a 5 star, a 4 star, and another 4 star. Troy was a 3. Justin Jenifer was a 4 for a long time. The recruiting has been good given the state of the program. It's not been great. But just because we've missed on two players who were once committed to Charlotte and UNC Ashville lets not lose perspective. To borrow a term from you that you used toward Jason. "That's cute" that you listed all those lower tier schools when describing a recruit that we offered. To try to base the skill of a certain recruit based off his offer list this early in the process is dumb and lazy. It means absolutely nothing. You know who else had those type of offers? Pretty much every recruit before they blew up. It's what Brison Gresham had and we were on him very early. If you would have looked at his list you would have thought why are we recruiting this guy? Then you look up and bam he has offers from Texas, OSU, and LSU. Finally I've seen you and others say this on different threads. That if we dont land HUUUGGGEEEEE recruits in 2016 we will be rebuilding and that is our track record. What on earth are you talking about? The 2016-17 team will have Troy and Kev as seniors. Gary and Quadri as Juniors, Evans, Jenifer, and Scott as sophomores. (Not including any transfers. The transfer season or market is not over. We havent filled those two scholly's YET. Washington, Coleby, Chuckwu, and more are still out there.) Even before we add anybody there is a lot of talent on that team. We will not be rebuilding. As far as our track record this past year was the first rebuild since the program got back on track and STILL MADE THE DAMN TOURNAMENT. Look, I get your overall point. You want better recruits that will hopefully result in deeper runs. The staff has a problem with closing certain recruits down. Is that a result of facilities, budget, conference, style of play, perception, or just shortcomings as salesmen? Yes. No. Maybe. I dont know. Im sure all of those can be improved upon which would yield better results. Some of them we know for a fact are (new locker room, arena, lounge area ect.) So while I understand the frustration and at times can even agree with you, your criticism at this point verges from reality. Has the recruiting been great? No. But considering all the factors the program is up against it has been pretty damn good.

Thank you for actually articulating your point of view, instead of just trying to shut down the conversation bc you see an opinion that you don't agree with.