Recruiting Question?

[waterhead]

From a coaching standpoint it is always a good thing to watch lots of tape and pick up on what other coaches are doing that works well on the court. If you want to learn about a zone you can watch Temple (historically), if you want to learn how to pass you can watch Princeton etc.

From a recruiting standpoint I am wondering how much coaches study how other coaches bring in 5 star recruiting classes year after year. Are they saying things to kids that we should be saying?

When Matta went to OSU he instantly started bringing in unbelievable recruiting classes. Before Matta, UC was doing just fine in recruiting compared to OSU. So it wasn't the university or the history of the program or the boosters that were giving them an edge. Calipari has also always been pretty good at recruiting. Steve Lavin etc. I understand some coaches may be doing underhanded stuff...but the point of this post is not to call any particular coach out.

But what are these guys doing so well (other than underhanded stuff) that we aren't doing? What does St Johns have to offer that UC does not? UC has done a fantastic job recently of making the campus look so much more inviting and our training facilities are top notch. The history is there. With Nippert renovations it's going to be that much better. I can only hope we renovate the Shoe but it's doubtfull. I hate the idea of playing downtown since it's not as convenient for students.

 

[UCalum08]

From a coaching standpoint it is always a good thing to watch lots of tape and pick up on what other coaches are doing that works well on the court. If you want to learn about a zone you can watch Temple (historically), if you want to learn how to pass you can watch Princeton etc.

From a recruiting standpoint I am wondering how much coaches study how other coaches bring in 5 star recruiting classes year after year. Are they saying things to kids that we should be saying?

When Matta went to OSU he instantly started bringing in unbelievable recruiting classes. Before Matta, UC was doing just fine in recruiting compared to OSU. So it wasn't the university or the history of the program or the boosters that were giving them an edge. Calipari has also always been pretty good at recruiting. Steve Lavin etc. I understand some coaches may be doing underhanded stuff...but the point of this post is not to call any particular coach out.

But what are these guys doing so well (other than underhanded stuff) that we aren't doing? What does St Johns have to offer that UC does not? UC has done a fantastic job recently of making the campus look so much more inviting and our training facilities are top notch. The history is there. With Nippert renovations it's going to be that much better. I can only hope we renovate the Shoe but it's doubtfull. I hate the idea of playing downtown since it's not as convenient for students.

Like my esteem colleague's named Wu-Tang Clan once said: "Cash rules everything around me C.R.E.A.M. Dolla Dolla Bill Ya'lllllll"

I really think its because the other schools and coaches have an endless (close to or more than double) supply to money and resources. Mick does the best he can with what he is given.

 

[waterhead]

Like my esteem colleague's named Wu-Tang Clan once said: "Cash rules everything around me C.R.E.A.M. Dolla Dolla Bill Ya'lllllll"

I really think its because the other schools and coaches have an endless (close to or more than double) supply to money and resources. Mick does the best he can with what he is given.

Nice Wu-Tang reference

But my question is...what are you referring to in regards to endless money resources? I mean they are all supposed to have the same rules. There are limits to all teams on what they can give or do (but I don't know what those are)...and I am guessing most teams max out on doing what they can for recruits that are legal or within the rules.

To me this seems to be more of situation of what they are telling kids rather than what the will give them under the table. Or maybe it could be like the "tax loophole" thing where smart people find a way to do things legally, even if clearly trying to expose the system.

Is Mick just too honest and straight forward to a fault?

Here is another example. Let's say Calipari says "Trust me...you will be starting from day one" and Mick says "You are going to have to work your ass off to start on my team". Calipari can make this happen on day one no matter how bad the kid sucks...start him on day one...promise granted...pull him after minute two and sit him on bench for rest of the year.

My question is...does Mick need to look at changing anything about his recruiting techniques. I am not saying we need to get dirty. And he has done a great job with the last two classes.

Hey, I work in sales, I sell metal. Sometimes I get a request for something we don't have in stock. Then I turn into a broker and find it and quote the metal to the customer. When the customer asks me why the lead time on delivery is so long. I tell them it's because it's coming from "another location" (we have 6 branches but I am not telling them it's coming from one of our other branches). I don't tell them I am buying it from another distributor where the customer could also buy it from. Is that dirty? No. My customer wants a quote on some metal and I give it to them. Some distributors will just say we don't stock that item. I choose NOT to say "we don't stock that item"...but "yes I will get you a quote on that item".

 

[waterhead]

We have an outside sales guy. When a customer asks him if we can provide a certain item that we don't even stock he says "Yes we stock that" because he knows we can at least call around and broker a deal. That is an un-necessary lie though.

Here is how I handle it. "Yes I can get you a quote on that material" or "We have that item available to us but not at our location".

There is a difference between sleezy (flat out lying) and crafty (tip toeing around a question without lying). Tip toeing doesn't even mean being misleading. There is nothing misleading in my responses above. In this scenario no laws are broken, no lies are told, and nobody is getting hurt...the customer gets his material and I make a few bucks. Everyone is happy.

I just wonder if "salesmanship" is how a lot of these recruiting battles are won. Is it a difference between tip toeing and brutal honesty? The reason I ask this is because I get the impression Mick is brutally honest...and I don't think that is a bad thing at all.

 

[UCalum08]

I get where you are coming from. I look at from a pretty simplistic view, which can totally be wrong.

I see it as Mick doesn't have the financial backing to take as many plane trips as needed for recruiting anywhere in the United States like a lot of coaches, i.e. Thad Matta. I think fifth third arena and attendance is a big factor. Yes our conference games draw close to 10k usually but til January its dismal. A lot of the best recruiting schools have a very strong fan support/showing. I think UC fans are passionate but there are a lot that stay on the fence and stay home and watch on TV rather than go to the games and support the team. Fifth third is a great arena when its full but lets face it...that is few and far between.

UC isn't the hot sell it once was. We have obviously put all our focus and monies in the football program. I think we are forced to do that because the state of the NCAA and college football. UC has lost its national presence ever since the Huggs fall out. Its hard to take in but like a lot of people say on this board, winning changes everything and while we have been winning we have not done much to gain national attention. We have been in a very tough league with premier schools. We've been finishing in the middle of the conference race the past few years.

If you really think about what its going to take for us to become a "hot bed" in college basketball we are still a good length away. Its going to take more than just making the NCAA tourney. I know its not as simple as having a new arena and then fans will show. But I truly believe if we had an arena like the Cintas Center it surely would help. They play crappy teams and still get 10k. It drives me crazy that we don't have the financial backings to 100% support the basketball program. It drives me crazy that all these fortune 500 companies in the city won't donate some serious money towards that. It's a lot of things but money and support I think are two big factors. This kind of turned into a rant but I thank everyone who read it. lol

 

[waterhead]

"Coach...I just want to know if I will get playing time from day one".

Here are two possible responses...

"Yes...I can guarantee you playing time on day one"

or something like this..

"That will depend on how hard you work"


The coach in example one can fulfill his gurantee quite easily. Just by putting him in a game on day one for however many minutes. The player would not be able to come back and say "you didn't make good on your promise".

In coach example #2 the player is thinking there are no gurantees for me playing from day one at this program and I do have a guarantee at another program. I think the coach 2 scenario may be the more "above board" way to deal with a recruit...but is coach 2 un-necessarily hurting his chances?

 

[waterhead]

I get where you are coming from. I look at from a pretty simplistic view, which can totally be wrong.

I see it as Mick doesn't have the financial backing to take as many plane trips as needed for recruiting anywhere in the United States like a lot of coaches, i.e. Thad Matta. I think fifth third arena and attendance is a big factor. Yes our conference games draw close to 10k usually but til January its dismal. A lot of the best recruiting schools have a very strong fan support/showing. I think UC fans are passionate but there are a lot that stay on the fence and stay home and watch on TV rather than go to the games and support the team. Fifth third is a great arena when its full but lets face it...that is few and far between.

UC isn't the hot sell it once was. We have obviously put all our focus and monies in the football program. I think we are forced to do that because the state of the NCAA and college football. UC has lost its national presence ever since the Huggs fall out. Its hard to take in but like a lot of people say on this board, winning changes everything and while we have been winning we have not done much to gain national attention. We have been in a very tough league with premier schools. We've been finishing in the middle of the conference race the past few years.

If you really think about what its going to take for us to become a "hot bed" in college basketball we are still a good length away. Its going to take more than just making the NCAA tourney. I know its not as simple as having a new arena and then fans will show. But I truly believe if we had an arena like the Cintas Center it surely would help. They play crappy teams and still get 10k. It drives me crazy that we don't have the financial backings to 100% support the basketball program. It drives me crazy that all these fortune 500 companies in the city won't donate some serious money towards that. It's a lot of things but money and support I think are two big factors. This kind of turned into a rant but I thank everyone who read it. lol

I agree with you about fan support. Trust me...I hate that we are kind of a "bandwagon" city. We need to be in top 10 consideration to get back to where we were as far as selling out the Shoe. I was in school from about 1988-1993...yes it took 5 years I remember waiting in line overnight for tickets with lots of my friends student ID cards in my pocket (as they were sleeping) so we could be assured tickets. Those were the days...and I think with our last two classes we can get back there.

 

[waterhead]

I also remember getting in the UC FB games for either free or $4 (I can't recall)...just by presenting a student ID. There was a time you had to camp out for BB tickets and FB tickets were basically being handed out to get people to come.

I met a fan recently at a USF football game (because I live in Florida) who was basically JUST a UC football fan and didn't give two shakes about BB really. That surprised me since it was baslically the reverse situation when I was there. BB was king. I was an OSU FB fan until maybe about 5 years ago. Now, I have grown to look at them as a nemesis.

I think this is also why our attendence is so bad in BB. Football has been all the rave over the last 10 years or so. BB has been rebuiliding.

 

[UCalum08]

I agree with you about fan support. Trust me...I hate that we are kind of a "bandwagon" city. We need to be in top 10 consideration to get back to where we were as far as selling out the Shoe. I was in school from about 1988-1993...yes it took 5 years I remember waiting in line overnight for tickets with lots of my friends student ID cards in my pocket (as they were sleeping) so we could be assured tickets. Those were the days...and I think with our last two classes we can get back there.

UC basketball was a large reason why I went to UC. I have follow UC basketball for as long as I can remember. I attended from 04-09. Kind of ironic timing because after my freshman year is when Huggs went down. But, I will say, my freshman year was the best in terms of basketball just because I got to be a student while Huggs was still the coach. ESPN was following the team around doing a series on them. I got to camp out and sleep in Fifth Third arena to get tickets for the UL game. There was a certain excitement/passion that fans had that is hard to describe. But then, Huggs was out and our team was destroyed. Then football picked up. As a student I got to storm the field during the Rutgers upset, go to 2 BCS bowl games, Miami and New Orleans.

I say its ironic because I mainly wanted to go to UC to be apart of the basketball atmosphere, but football kind of took over. Regardless I have got to be apart of lot of really fun times. I still live in Cincy and I am an active alum. I really want to see basketball get back to where it was and more. I know football needs to advance first, its the world we live in today. But it kills me that in a city with such large corporations can't financially back the university. Maybe its a side of business I know nothing about. I graduated with a bachelors in Criminal Justice lol.

I just hope more kids like me get to experience all the good things I got to (sports or academically) and want to give back to the school. That's what college is all about imo, I love my school and UC needs their graduates to give back...if they are in a position too. My fear is, most alums that once knew UC basketball during its glory years are starting to fade away, naturally as time goes on. The current graduates aren't going to share that same passion for the basketball program like alum's of old.

 

[kg5]

National perception is our worst enemy, and the fact that UC only recruits certain players, yeah I'm sure they want to go after the top 10 kids just like anyone else but at the same time some of those kids do not fit the UC style. Look at all of our kids on this current roster most of them are work in progress. The more polished kids go to Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas because the perception is you are going to get properly coached up and have a chance to go to the NBA. Unfortunately we do not have that perception even though I don't think it's fair but it is the truth.

I have a very good inside position with the type of kids that Cincinnati recruits. my opinion is we would much rather have a top-notch athlete that is fundamentally raw that we can have in the program for 3 to 4 years. Why this is I don't know I would much rather have better basketball players then athletes. I also think we are our worst enemy under this that process.

 

[david aka the TYZ]

Some people make recruiting out to to be some secret science. Three things are important the name of the school, the name of the coach and if you are winning. If you're a blue blood, like UK, Duke, Kansas, UNC your school sells itself. If your a coach that has won big time, Pitino, Boeheim, Calipari your name sells itself. Usually big name coaches and big name programs go hand-in-hand. Since we are talking about getting the 5-star players, they care about playing time, winning and their chance at getting to the NBA. Chane Behanon is the perfect example to me of why UC has lagged in recruiting. Behanon is the local kid, commits to local school early --UC. Reality sets in, UC hasn't been to the tournament in six years or so, hasn't put anyone in the NBA in the same amount of time and is a middle of the pack team in a great conference. Louisville comes calling. Hey I'm Rick Pitino, I've won a national title, I have this many guys in the NBA right now, I'm competing at the top of the best conference in the country. Some people blame Mick for not being able to pull in this recruit. Logic tells you otherwise. Kemba Walker is another classic example. UC lean, Calhoun comes calling. Hey, I've won two national titles, including this past years, you want to go to Cincinnati and do nothing or help me defend a national title? Mick has an eye for talent. He sold playing for Huggins and Pitino well and helped pull in big recruits. Different story when pulling in guys to play for him and to a team that hasn't done jack shit nationally in six years. Now that we have returned to the tourney three straight years and the program is getting face time on ESPN and making a name for itself our recruiting has gotten better. It would take a fool to think Mick is a better recruiter now than he was four years ago. He has the same eye for talent and tells the kid the same things and is recruting to the same facilities and arena he always had. The difference is we are winning. His voice carries more weight now. There are plenty of subtleties and other things that can matter in recruiting, but in the grand scheme of things recruiting isn't that hard to predict. There's a reason Kentucky gets it's pick of five-star guys every year and it's not because Calipari is a better recruiter than Mick or anybody else. A good recruiter targets guys he can get and works as hard as he can to sell his program. I think Mick has done a good job of this. Miami of Ohio is not going to land five star guys. They could hire the best salesman in the world and he couldn't sell that. UC two and three years ago couldn't outrecruit Louisville or Ohio State. Now we might can compete with those guys for recruits.

 

[waterhead]

National perception is our worst enemy, and the fact that UC only recruits certain players, yeah I'm sure they want to go after the top 10 kids just like anyone else but at the same time some of those kids do not fit the UC style. Look at all of our kids on this current roster most of them are work in progress. The more polished kids go to Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas because the perception is you are going to get properly coached up and have a chance to go to the NBA. Unfortunately we do not have that perception even though I don't think it's fair but it is the truth.

I have a very good inside position with the type of kids that Cincinnati recruits. my opinion is we would much rather have a top-notch athlete that is fundamentally raw that we can have in the program for 3 to 4 years. Why this is I don't know I would much rather have better basketball players then athletes. I also think we are our worst enemy under this that process.

But this is why i am so excited about these last two classes. We have 9 new players (frosh and incoming)...none of which are solely athletes or labled "offensive projects". Mormon and Johnson are absolute studs on D but they also have game. Gary Clark has a lot more game than JJ did when he came here as a frosh...but we aren't giving up much athletically...hell we might have more. We can talk about Thomas and Lawrence too but you get the picture.

I guess I should add Moore (reminds me a little of Yancy) and Strickland who was told by Cronin "I am bringing you in to score". When is the last time we heard that type of shyte coming out of Cronin's mouth?