"Zero" recruits was a reference to the spring signing period which has in fact come and gone with "zero" recruits. I am not bitching about the roster. Haven't said a word about it. I actually like the roster for this coming year but feel we needed to supplement it in this spring period to solidify our chances for that illusive "special" season. So, everything you said was pretty much irrelevant to any of my earlier points.
2016 General Recruiting
- Thread starter BearcatSpaniard513
- Start date
Help Support BearcatTalk:
"Zero" recruits was a reference to the spring signing period which has in fact come and gone with "zero" recruits. I am not bitching about the roster. Haven't said a word about it. I actually like the roster for this coming year but feel we needed to supplement it in this spring period to solidify our chances for that illusive "special" season. So, everything you said was pretty much irrelevant to any of my earlier points.
Below was your post from yesterday with "Bearcatnation" discussing pace of play. Don't see a single word in here about recruiting. You and Bearcatnation are both complaining about my posts being unrelated to recruiting and you both are off topic. Why don't you follow your own advice. This pace of play crap gets discussed in every thread. Is anyone enjoying this?
"I agree BearcatNation. Probably did not express that too well but I like seeing us run it against the lesser competition and then matching the pace to others. Efficiency is differently our biggest issue as a team. We can take time off the clock and then take a bad shot or miss an open one. The offense needs to have better spacing, more fluent movement and crisper passing."
JasonS
Football Moderator
Below was your post from yesterday with "Bearcatnation" discussing pace of play. Don't see a single word in here about recruiting. You and Bearcatnation are both complaining about my posts being unrelated to recruiting and you both are off topic. Why don't you follow your own advice. This pace of play crap gets discussed in every thread. Is anyone enjoying this?
"I agree BearcatNation. Probably did not express that too well but I like seeing us run it against the lesser competition and then matching the pace to others. Efficiency is differently our biggest issue as a team. We can take time off the clock and then take a bad shot or miss an open one. The offense needs to have better spacing, more fluent movement and crisper passing."
Two wrongs don't make a right. This thread needs to get back on topic.
#BearcatNation
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,120
I'm just hoping for a decent JuCo at this point, preferably a 4 or 5. I remember landing Ellis and Cobb with little to no public sign of it. Hadn't even heard we were going after them till I saw a "_____ has committed to UC" tweet. Maybe something like that will happen again. I'd love another DeBerry.
Bearcat513
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,395
That's probably the only chance we have of getting another player for this coming season. Otherwise, I feel like we will pocket the scholarships, unfortunately.
Bearcat513
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,395
Below was your post from yesterday with "Bearcatnation" discussing pace of play. Don't see a single word in here about recruiting. You and Bearcatnation are both complaining about my posts being unrelated to recruiting and you both are off topic. Why don't you follow your own advice. This pace of play crap gets discussed in every thread. Is anyone enjoying this?
"I agree BearcatNation. Probably did not express that too well but I like seeing us run it against the lesser competition and then matching the pace to others. Efficiency is differently our biggest issue as a team. We can take time off the clock and then take a bad shot or miss an open one. The offense needs to have better spacing, more fluent movement and crisper passing."
I hate myself for even responding to this childish post. Going through the thread to try and "catch" me talking off topic? C'mon. If you read the previous posts, we were discussing the need of PLAYERS who are more efficient. And what is the means of attaining those more efficient players? Recruiting.
Sorry for not explicitly stating, " RECRUITING OPINION AHEAD" on each of my posts. I'm moving on from this discussion so please don't respond. I will ignore any further posts regarding anything unrelated to recruiting in this thread.
Haven't really enjoyed this since the season ended
This is a "General" Recruiting thread. Every single post I made was on the topic of recruiting, which fits within the realm of "General". So, it's not two wrongs. It's only one, and mine wasn't wrong.
My statement:
"Zero" recruits was a reference to the spring signing period which has in fact come and gone with "zero" recruits. I am not bitching about the roster. Haven't said a word about it. I actually like the roster for this coming year but feel we needed to supplement it in this spring period to solidify our chances for that illusive "special" season. So, everything you said was pretty much irrelevant to any of my earlier points.
Cane Broome is not playing this year, so I don't view that as a 2016 recruit that will help us this coming season. Plus, one of the only decent teams he played against was UCONN, and he had 6 points, so we'll see in a couple years how good this signing was.
That is concerning for sure. But at the same time this makes me think of the first time Ellis played at Memphis(where he was from) and he had a pretty bad game too. So hopefully it was just attributed to a combination of that and him having to be "the guy" with noone else on the roster.
I will say this. Hopefully this year he adds some muscle mass(which with our trainer shouldnt be a problem) and becomes a much more consistent shooter from the outside. He did have some poor shooting nights. Comparing him, I could see him as someone similar to Cobb(could be streaky) except he excels at getting to the line and driving to the basket. Something Cobb never did. So unlike Cobb, on poor shooting nights hopefully to get out of a funk he looks to attack the rim and get to the line.
He will also have Cumberland, Evans, Clark and Washington to take a load of him so I dont believe he will shoot as much
BearcatSpaniard513
Well-known member
Should be our best offensive team if he does workout!
Videos I've seen of him show him driving to the basket a lot. His 6 points against UCONN make me wonder how effective he'll be doing that at a higher Div 1 level. He's supposedly not a "lights out" 3 point shooter, which I feel was a more important need for us. So, I'm cautiously optimistic. We get a good bit of hype whenever Mick signs somebody, but we're more often than not disappointed. Evans was the rare exception to that.
BearcatSpaniard513
Well-known member
#BearcatNation
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,120
While Broome's one game against UConn is a little disheartening, you have to treat it as it is...one game. His 31% from deep scares me a bit as well, but he was shooting from NBA-range with hands in his face consistently because he had zero supporting cast.
Schools that reached out to him include Creighton, Indiana, Michigan, N.C. State, Providence, Rutgers, and Seton Hall. That's a pretty good list. I like to believe that once he isn't as heavily relied upon, his %'s will improve. Someone said it earlier, but a starting lineup of Broome, Cumberland, Evans, Clark, and Washington in 2017 has a LOT of potential. I still worry about depth, but that could be a heck of a starting 5.
Schools that reached out to him include Creighton, Indiana, Michigan, N.C. State, Providence, Rutgers, and Seton Hall. That's a pretty good list. I like to believe that once he isn't as heavily relied upon, his %'s will improve. Someone said it earlier, but a starting lineup of Broome, Cumberland, Evans, Clark, and Washington in 2017 has a LOT of potential. I still worry about depth, but that could be a heck of a starting 5.
GarradJ21
Well-known member
June 13th.
Then why didnt we go with Nike?? Chad?? Less money upfront, but possibly more money Indirectly by way of better players, more ncaa tourney wins and money, more future ESPN games, etc.????? I know we wanted the UA $$, but if we can pay 150 million dollars or whatever for football plus basketball arena, can't we be patient? And go with Nike? Jacob had me feeling better saying that we didn't need Nike,that Under Armour was up and coming. Any thoughts?
Really enjoying the Nike and recruiting discussion. Appreciate Chad's insight. I also like that UCAlum08 ask for clarification.
I agree a little bit with several posters. Why pocket 2 scholarships. There has got to be reasonable players within a 200-mile radius that for a few games a year could be different makers. Way better than Zack tobler. I know Waite , most kids want playing time. But not all kids.
Or I agree give it to an underrated player from a big school. Build relationships with these local coaches. Then when they have a 4-star we will be right in line.
And you can't tell me there's not some less athletic shooters or pure rebounders that we couldn't get as transfers or straight out of high school. I know there are factors. But I agree some of it is just excuses. It's either put up or shut up. Instead of going for an athletic up-and-comer, get some players that you know would be solid in the Mid-American Conference, recruit them hard, give them love. Tell them their role and how they can be part of something special. A couple of those players would go a long way in spots during the year. We don't always have to get somebody with high upside. Meaning someone that's athletic that may develop. Get a real basketball player that maybe doesn't have the upside but certainly could help us
I agree a little bit with several posters. Why pocket 2 scholarships. There has got to be reasonable players within a 200-mile radius that for a few games a year could be different makers. Way better than Zack tobler. I know Waite , most kids want playing time. But not all kids.
Or I agree give it to an underrated player from a big school. Build relationships with these local coaches. Then when they have a 4-star we will be right in line.
And you can't tell me there's not some less athletic shooters or pure rebounders that we couldn't get as transfers or straight out of high school. I know there are factors. But I agree some of it is just excuses. It's either put up or shut up. Instead of going for an athletic up-and-comer, get some players that you know would be solid in the Mid-American Conference, recruit them hard, give them love. Tell them their role and how they can be part of something special. A couple of those players would go a long way in spots during the year. We don't always have to get somebody with high upside. Meaning someone that's athletic that may develop. Get a real basketball player that maybe doesn't have the upside but certainly could help us