2016 General Recruiting

[Bearcat513]

I appreciate your opinions and outlooks on alot of things and think you are pretty educated on the game and recruiting process. Alot more educated than many. I also have been in the AAU circuit coaching for awhile now. I just honestly think alot of this crap is excuses for not getting the job done. I'd like to hear him and the other assistants pitches to these kids compared to some of the great recruiters out there right now. Just being honest I think that is where we are falling short.

I know this is a huge difference, but I love what Calipari does with his interviews and statements and such. It seems like everything he tweets, says, does is aimed as a recruiting pitch. It's not directly implied but everyone knows it.

I know Mick doesn't have the national stage like Cal does, but I would love to see Mick tweet some stats about UC players in the NBA, or the arena renovation, or anything. The kids he is recruiting will definitely see it and it would just stay in their minds.

Just an idea but like I said, I know Coach Cal does it for a more national level but Mick could easily do something similar.

 

[UCalum08]

Kind of a loaded question with a lot of answers, but there are two that stand out as to why kids stay loyal to the brand they grow up with.

1. The shoe companies are spending millions to create their leagues, camps, international tournaments, all star games and so on. While playing in those high exposure situations, the player greatly benefits in their development and a sense of brand loyalty is formed. That loyalty is rewarded by staying under the same umbrella when picking a college, and this holds especially true for the guys that are on those circuits starting from the time they enter high school. It isn't as much of a factor for guys like Gary Clark and Jarron Cumberland that only played on the Nike circuit for their final season, but the influences from part #2 are still working hard to keep them in the "family".

2. More than ever the people running a kids recruitment are the same people that brought them in to whatever shoe brand team they play for. While this mostly gets blamed on AAU, it is also very true for most of the power prep and high school programs that are sponsored by the shoe companies as well. The more loyal your program is to the brand (as long as the talent matches), the higher up the food chain you move.

Nike changed everything with the creation of the EYBL, and they typically have between 60-70% of the top 100 players playing on their circuit. They obviously fill their camps, all star games and international events with those players and with all of that cash and time invested in each kid there is an expectation to keep dancing with who brought you in return...

Thanks for taking the time to explain. It makes sense but damn it does seem wrong to me. Everything is a business now so I'm not surprised. It basically seems like legal, blatant bribery.

Let me ask you this, what if a Nike kid from goes against them and goes to a UA school? What would be some repercussions for that player? Are companies like Nike giving monetary gifts to the kids recruiting handler? (Which ultimately could go to the kid, undetected)

I guess I'm just trying to understand the true benefits of staying with Nike just because they sponsored my high school or AAU team. If the players are staying this loyal, there has to be something in it for them.

 

[the_one_32]

I don't get the posts about Kenyon and Nick being huge hires as assistants when it comes to recruiting. Most of these kids have no clue who Van Exel is and have never seen him play. That's not because he wasn't an excellent ball player but these kids are too young to remember. Yeah I'm sure they've seen Kenyon play in the NBA but most likely it was the late years of his career when he was a role player.

Do I think they can help with player progression and development? Absolutely. However, to think an 18 year old highly touted recruit is going to be swayed by 2 assistants he's never seen play is a dream. Unless the recruits we are speaking of are local kids who have been taught the history of the program and know what these guys meant to UC, it's not going to make a difference on the recruiting trail.

Fact is, and I know this sucks for fans, but Chad is 1,000% right on this. Unfortunately for UC, NIKE runs pretty much every major all star game and big time camp. Those same kids are playing for NIKE sponsored AAU teams and for coaches who know the next big recruit could be their ticket into college basketball coaching. Coaches and players alike, will listen to handlers and schools sponsored by NIKE because it benefits both. I think soon UA will be much closer to NIKE but will always be #2. Hopefully UA begins to get more high profile AAU teams and runs more high profile camps and all star games. Add that with the possible expansion of the BIG 12 and the hope that UC is included in that, then you have a recipe for success.

I will go back to what I said previously and it's not necessarily an indictment of Mick. At some point he has to say to himself that some of these recruits he's spending so much time on are not obtainable. We know Mick can recruit successfully because we have seen it in past classes as a HC and assistant. But the landscape has changed and shoe companies are making it very difficult to pry a player away to a non affiliated school.

2017 is a crucial class for Mick and his staff. He is in on many top recruits and seems to be in good position. He's got to be able to deliver not only early in the process but late as well. We all know he will sign a guy or two early and we will be excited. Let's see if he can close the deal late to grab a guy who grabs our attention.

 

[waterhead]

Kind of a loaded question with a lot of answers, but there are two that stand out as to why kids stay loyal to the brand they grow up with.

1. The shoe companies are spending millions to create their leagues, camps, international tournaments, all star games and so on. While playing in those high exposure situations, the player greatly benefits in their development and a sense of brand loyalty is formed. That loyalty is rewarded by staying under the same umbrella when picking a college, and this holds especially true for the guys that are on those circuits starting from the time they enter high school. It isn't as much of a factor for guys like Gary Clark and Jarron Cumberland that only played on the Nike circuit for their final season, but the influences from part #2 are still working hard to keep them in the "family".

2. More than ever the people running a kids recruitment are the same people that brought them in to whatever shoe brand team they play for. While this mostly gets blamed on AAU, it is also very true for most of the power prep and high school programs that are sponsored by the shoe companies as well. The more loyal your program is to the brand (as long as the talent matches), the higher up the food chain you move.

Nike changed everything with the creation of the EYBL, and they typically have between 60-70% of the top 100 players playing on their circuit. They obviously fill their camps, all star games and international events with those players and with all of that cash and time invested in each kid there is an expectation to keep dancing with who brought you in return...

Would love to know the stats behind what % of players who are Nike or UA actually end up at one of those schools. 75%? More...less?

 

[Ryno99]

Let's face it folks, the majority of us have no idea what goes into the recruiting process, we may think we do, but the reality of it is we don't. We have no idea what Mick and the coaching staff are or aren't up against. Having Chad's insight is very helpful, as he is the only one that close to it that has true insight into it. Chad has done a nice job at giving us an outline of some of what goes into the process without crossing any professional lines that may hurt him and his business. Let's face it, I think we all believe it happens and I can't blame Chad for not saying it, benefits change hands here between handlers, families, shoe companies, it's part of the gig now, and just something you have to deal with. Nike does everything it can to keep it's top players. UA does as well. I think UC has a great deal with UA and UA seems to be the up and comer in the market, but you're never going to compete with Nike on a grand scale at this point in time. Let's worry less about the process since we really don't know what it entails and worry more about players and talking about who we'd like to see or not like to see and why. I don't think it's fair to criticize coaches and staff for something we truly have no clue what the ins and outs of it are.

Waterhead, my guess is closer to 85 or 90% but I have no empirical evidence. It would be an interesting study.

I also agree with whoever said I don't think Van Exel or Martin would do much for recruiting, neither are well known nationally, and only Van Exel has coaching experience. You need people with local and shoe company ties if you really want to influence the process would be my guess.

All of this is just my opinion.

 

[GarradJ21]

I don't get the posts about Kenyon and Nick being huge hires as assistants when it comes to recruiting. Most of these kids have no clue who Van Exel is and have never seen him play. That's not because he wasn't an excellent ball player but these kids are too young to remember. Yeah I'm sure they've seen Kenyon play in the NBA but most likely it was the late years of his career when he was a role player.

Do I think they can help with player progression and development? Absolutely. However, to think an 18 year old highly touted recruit is going to be swayed by 2 assistants he's never seen play is a dream. Unless the recruits we are speaking of are local kids who have been taught the history of the program and know what these guys meant to UC, it's not going to make a difference on the recruiting trail.

Fact is, and I know this sucks for fans, but Chad is 1,000% right on this. Unfortunately for UC, NIKE runs pretty much every major all star game and big time camp. Those same kids are playing for NIKE sponsored AAU teams and for coaches who know the next big recruit could be their ticket into college basketball coaching. Coaches and players alike, will listen to handlers and schools sponsored by NIKE because it benefits both. I think soon UA will be much closer to NIKE but will always be #2. Hopefully UA begins to get more high profile AAU teams and runs more high profile camps and all star games. Add that with the possible expansion of the BIG 12 and the hope that UC is included in that, then you have a recipe for success.

I will go back to what I said previously and it's not necessarily an indictment of Mick. At some point he has to say to himself that some of these recruits he's spending so much time on are not obtainable. We know Mick can recruit successfully because we have seen it in past classes as a HC and assistant. But the landscape has changed and shoe companies are making it very difficult to pry a player away to a non affiliated school.

2017 is a crucial class for Mick and his staff. He is in on many top recruits and seems to be in good position. He's got to be able to deliver not only early in the process but late as well. We all know he will sign a guy or two early and we will be excited. Let's see if he can close the deal late to grab a guy who grabs our attention.

One of the most accurate things I have ever read on this blog. It is when it is. UC, unfortunately is not as sexy as it once was (Jordan days). We play in the AAC, have UA uniforms, and no kids will be twitter or Instagram famous coming here like they will at UK and Duke.

That being said, I did just compare us to the two top dogs. We need to still beat out teams like Xavier in recruiting. No reason we can't still compete and make a nice run one of these years. Tough this year to pick up a late recruit with the playing time available. I know people have commented where PT is still available and all that but I really don't see it. We will be alright this year and def should make the tourney. Would love to see our best recruiting class under MICK for 2017. A lot of potential.

 

[BearcatSpaniard513]

One of the most accurate things I have ever read on this blog. It is when it is. UC, unfortunately is not as sexy as it once was (Jordan days). We play in the AAC, have UA uniforms, and no kids will be twitter or Instagram famous coming here like they will at UK and Duke.

That being said, I did just compare us to the two top dogs. We need to still beat out teams like Xavier in recruiting. No reason we can't still compete and make a nice run one of these years. Tough this year to pick up a late recruit with the playing time available. I know people have commented where PT is still available and all that but I really don't see it. We will be alright this year and def should make the tourney. Would love to see our best recruiting class under MICK for 2017. A lot of potential.

I just wish we had DeBerry for one more year... When Clark, Washington or Evans get in foul trouble, there's playing time that could easily be earned by a talented enough recruit.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Van Exel or Martin would give our coaching staff more credibility. These recruits had to have watched them play for them to get any respect? Please. Kenyon was unanimous player of the year, and the #1 pick. He's about as young as you can find for a former NBA guy wanting to coach. You don't think high level recruits would take his word for something over an asst who has been part of sending 1 undrafted guy to the league? Yeah right. Van Exel has also worked specifically in the NBA in player development and in the D-League. Even if he wasn't a former player, that kind of thing on the resume gives you credibility with recruits. You guys are nuts if you think either one of these guys would carry zero weight with recruits. Not even sure how anyone could think their impact would be meaningless. Stunning really.

And now we're going all in on saying we can't recruit bc we're not Nike? Tons of non-Nike schools seem to find a way to do it. I guess UCLA just committed program suicide yesterday by becoming yet another UA school. Can't wait to track their recruiting, I'm sure it'll take a HUGE hit (Not!).

Excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses. For absolutely everything. Always the "reasons" why we can't succeed. And it never has anything to do with the coach, the brand he's built, or the type of basketball he plays.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Why did 2 guys we were recruiting this spring go to Adidas schools? How can that even be possible? And didn't Bowman go to a UA school? What's the excuse for that one?

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Partner went to GTech, who I believe is Russell Athletic. I'll be interested to see how his recruiting goes.

 

[GarradJ21]

Why did 2 guys we were recruiting this spring go to Adidas schools? How can that even be possible? And didn't Bowman go to a UA school? What's the excuse for that one?

Playing time. I believe playing time is above anything.

 

[Ryno99]

Van Exel or Martin would give our coaching staff more credibility. These recruits had to have watched them play for them to get any respect? Please. Kenyon was unanimous player of the year, and the #1 pick. He's about as young as you can find for a former NBA guy wanting to coach. You don't think high level recruits would take his word for something over an asst who has been part of sending 1 undrafted guy to the league? Yeah right. Van Exel has also worked specifically in the NBA in player development and in the D-League. Even if he wasn't a former player, that kind of thing on the resume gives you credibility with recruits. You guys are nuts if you think either one of these guys would carry zero weight with recruits. Not even sure how anyone could think their impact would be meaningless. Stunning really.

And now we're going all in on saying we can't recruit bc we're not Nike? Tons of non-Nike schools seem to find a way to do it. I guess UCLA just committed program suicide yesterday by becoming yet another UA school. Can't wait to track their recruiting, I'm sure it'll take a HUGE hit (Not!).

Excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses. For absolutely everything. Always the "reasons" why we can't succeed. And it never has anything to do with the coach, the brand he's built, or the type of basketball he plays.

Jacob, not once did I say they could or couldn't recruit based on that, I said I don't think most of us know what really goes into it and that the shoe companies are a bigger issue than we give them credit for, there are plenty of situations where we have or haven't gotten a player that isn't Nike or even is Nike. I choose to focus on other aspects than the negativity which many focus on here on this board. I choose to live my life happy and positively, if some choose to be negative and unhappy, hey that is their prerogative.

Your opinion is what it is but please don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Ryno99]

I am curious about one thing, what are peoples expectations? That the staff get every recruit they go after? What should the hit rate be? What do you think Coach K, or Cal's hit ratio is? Yes they get higher players, but my guess would be that their hit rates aren't as high as you may think. Competition is fierce, and young men are fickle and impressionable. If this were easy, everyone would win a championship every year.

 

[#BearcatNation]

Excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses, excuses. For absolutely everything. Always the "reasons" why we can't succeed. And it never has anything to do with the coach, the brand he's built, or the type of basketball he plays.

Relax. You interpret it as excuses, I interpret it as trying to find reasons for mediocre/poor recruiting. I do think the slow-paced hoops wouldn't be ideal for many recruits, but at the same time, it sure doesn't hurt schools like Virginia, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, Syracuse, etc etc. Other schools make it work. Why can't we?

There are a lot of factors towards poor recruiting. Sure, the coaching staff does get some blame. But a poor arena and sub-par conference that gets few eyes doesn't help either. Trying to find "that one thing", which to you seems to be the coaches, and others seems to be amenities, etc. is silly.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Jacob, not once did I say they could or couldn't recruit based on that, I said I don't think most of us know what really goes into it and that the shoe companies are a bigger issue than we give them credit for, there are plenty of situations where we have or haven't gotten a player that isn't Nike or even is Nike. I choose to focus on other aspects than the negativity which many focus on here on this board. I choose to live my life happy and positively, if some choose to be negative and unhappy, hey that is their prerogative.

Your opinion is what it is but please don't put words in my mouth.

Nothing I said was directed specifically at you.

And positivity is a matter of perspective. L-T is viewed as being negative by many, but he has been the top person on the board when it comes to talking up everything The University of Cincinnati has to offer. It's pretty simple on this board...there is the narrative that Cronin is a perfect person, who is doing a perfect job, and is working miracles. And there is the narrative that some people hate Cronin and want to tear down anything and everything he's done at any cost. Neither are really true. But being on the other side of a "positive" and "happy" person's issue, doesn't automatically make you "negative" and "unhappy". Surely you understand that.

 

[waterhead]

I am curious about one thing, what are peoples expectations? That the staff get every recruit they go after? What should the hit rate be? What do you think Coach K, or Cal's hit ratio is? Yes they get higher players, but my guess would be that their hit rates aren't as high as you may think. Competition is fierce, and young men are fickle and impressionable. If this were easy, everyone would win a championship every year.

For me it's not the hit ratio as much as we have open scholarships and we are very thin. If you miss the guys you were after...you still need to make sure we aren't an ankle sprain away from being in complete scramble mode.

 

[Ryno99]

I agree waterhead, now it comes down to is anyone worth the scholly at this point, I don't think you add a body just to add one, but hopefully you have planned that if option A and B fall through there is an option C, if not shame on them. But sometimes I guess option C could be gone by the time you know A&B are as well, who knows.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I am curious about one thing, what are peoples expectations? That the staff get every recruit they go after? What should the hit rate be? What do you think Coach K, or Cal's hit ratio is? Yes they get higher players, but my guess would be that their hit rates aren't as high as you may think. Competition is fierce, and young men are fickle and impressionable. If this were easy, everyone would win a championship every year.

I don't think we make ourselves as desirable as possible with the way we operate and it hurts our reputation. Everyone tries to make it so big about Coach Cal, shoe companies, one and dones, etc. Not saying those things are completely irrelevant, but I think we weigh all the off the court stuff way too heavily and forget to focus on the basketball itself. I've said it several times, but here's what I expect: To win the AAC regular season or tournament damn near every year. You (and I don't mean you specifically) can throw up any "reason" you want for not being Top 15, getting NBA Talent, etc, but I still haven't seen a good reason why we can't compete at the highest level in our conference. So where that puts us nationally, I don't know. But the idea of "make the tournament at all costs" equalling Mission Accomplished is growing old. Last year our coach said he didn't care where we were in the conference standings, and that he doesn't coach for wins and losses. I've never known those things to be so unimportant at UC. But I feel like at the end of the day though, results do the talking. Everything else is just fodder. And the product of UC basketball needs to improve.

 

[Bearcat513]

First off I want to say when I said I wanted Van Exel as an assistant I thought he had AAU coaching experience too. I did a quick search but didn't find anything. Not that he isn't qualified now, like Jacob said he was an instructor for player development for the Hawks, but having those AAU connections as a coach would be an even bigger help for his case as an assistant.

Nothing I said was directed specifically at you.

And positivity is a matter of perspective. L-T is viewed as being negative by many, but he has been the top person on the board when it comes to talking up everything The University of Cincinnati has to offer. It's pretty simple on this board...there is the narrative that Cronin is a perfect person, who is doing a perfect job, and is working miracles. And there is the narrative that some people hate Cronin and want to tear down anything and everything he's done at any cost. Neither are really true. But being on the other side of a "positive" and "happy" person's issue, doesn't automatically make you "negative" and "unhappy". Surely you understand that.

As for the quoted section, I really believe I am in the middle of those two extremes and many might agree. Do I think Cronin is perfect? No, because the results are not there. Not even close. Do I want him fired and hate his guts? No, not at all. I respect him for what he has given this program, a stable coach who wins and runs a good program. He took in a program that was dying, or dead, and has resurrected it. But now, he needs to get out of the first weekend of the tourney. No more first round exits.

I think the number one factor of why we don't get big time recruits is our snail like pace of basketball. If I was not a diehard fan of UC, I would HATE watching our games. They are boring. We can't score on the road and have droughts of 8+ minutes every game. It hurts my eyes watching it. We are not in the Big East anymore as a team who can't compete. We are in a lesser conference and are a top-two program in said conference. We should be taking our athletes and pitting them against the other teams to see who can run and score the most. Do I want to give up 75 points a game? No. But, we can win games 75-67 and still play tremendous defense. Someone mentioned ND, Cuse, Virginia, Wisconsin as teams who play slow. Well, yes. But they are also the most efficient offenses in the country. Strides need to be made towards more efficient offense players who can still play solid defense. Not lock down defenders who struggle to reach 50 while on the road.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Relax. You interpret it as excuses, I interpret it as trying to find reasons for mediocre/poor recruiting. I do think the slow-paced hoops wouldn't be ideal for many recruits, but at the same time, it sure doesn't hurt schools like Virginia, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, Syracuse, etc etc. Other schools make it work. Why can't we?

There are a lot of factors towards poor recruiting. Sure, the coaching staff does get some blame. But a poor arena and sub-par conference that gets few eyes doesn't help either. Trying to find "that one thing", which to you seems to be the coaches, and others seems to be amenities, etc. is silly.

I think part of the problem too is having to turn over every rock to find the "right" fit. We eliminate lots of players right off the bat if they don't fit a profile that is based largely on defensive potential. We have such a rare (outdated) and specific style of play, it seems like we have a hard time even compiling a list of viable options from the get-go. I've been hearing for years that the shift in focus is changing, but I'm still not sure I really see it on this upcoming roster. Coach needs to be more adaptable when it comes to the guys he recruits. If the guy is good, it's on you to figure out how to make him successful, instead of trying to jam square pegs into round holes. Putting the style above all else, regardless of personnel is a huge impediment to success on the court imo.