Recruiting Top Transfers

[D-West & PO-Z]

Or he works for the NCAA?

Ha, would make sense.

[AviatorX]

No we just choose to disagree on it being an issue. Kids get a choice to go to whatever school they want. They get a free education, room and board etc, They are not oppressed. They are not treated unfairly. The NCAA grants waivers (another poster just referenced this) and have been way more lenient the last few years. They don't get it right 100% of the time.

I think we can all (including the NCAA, I'm sure) agree that the fewer judgment calls the NCAA has to make, the better.

[D-West & PO-Z]

No we just choose to disagree on it being an issue. Kids get a choice to go to whatever school they want. They get a free education, room and board etc, They are not oppressed. They are not treated unfairly. The NCAA grants waivers (another poster just referenced this) and have been way more lenient the last few years. They don't get it right 100% of the time.

You just acted like you have never heard player rights being an issue.

It's literally one of the biggest topics in college sports whether you believe it is an issue or not.

And clearly the NCAA is starting to get for most it is an issue and they are and have been making a lot of new rules to address.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I think we can all (including the NCAA, I'm sure) agree that the fewer judgment calls the NCAA has to make, the better.

Very true.

[MHettel]

Note to self: trying to have a logical argument with an idealist is not so ideal.

I don't know what fucking universe some of you guys are in, but your ability to only see what you want has actually made you blind to seeing what is there.

[Juice]

Jeff Borzello
@jeffborzello
Northern Kentucky grad transfer Jalen Tate just committed to Arkansas, sources told ESPN.

Tate averaged 13.9 points, 5.4 rebounds and 3.6 assists last season. Top-20 grad transfer. He's the second pickup for the Razorbacks this month, following New Mexico's Vance Jackson.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Note to self: trying to have a logical argument with an idealist is not so ideal.

I don't know what fucking universe some of you guys are in, but your ability to only see what you want has actually made you blind to seeing what is there.

It's funny I was thinking the exact same thing reading your posts.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Jeff Borzello
@jeffborzello
Northern Kentucky grad transfer Jalen Tate just committed to Arkansas, sources told ESPN.

Tate averaged 13.9 points, 5.4 rebounds and 3.6 assists last season. Top-20 grad transfer. He's the second pickup for the Razorbacks this month, following New Mexico's Vance Jackson.

Did UC offer him? If so surprising he didnt pick them.

[AviatorX]

Note to self: trying to have a logical argument with an idealist is not so ideal.

I don't know what fucking universe some of you guys are in, but your ability to only see what you want has actually made you blind to seeing what is there.

You're reacting as if we're proposing lawlessness. There are certain reforms that would obliterate the college basketball landscape as it exists today - the best example is allowing (requiring?) schools to make direct payments to players. There's obviously a ton of people who staunchly support that, and at the same time there's legitimacy to the thought that a policy like that would be the death knell of competitive college hoops. We aren't talking about anything even close to that. We're talking about a one-time free transfer rule. It's really not that crazy, especially when it appears this is becoming somewhat of an informal NCAA policy anyway! No one is saying you can play for Xavier on December 15th and UK on the 20th. Of course there would have to be some regulation as to when you can transfer, and it would have to work within a school's academic framework anyway.

Is it really idealist to think college athletes should be able to transfer universities and play their sport at their new institution as soon as possible, instead of sitting out a year? Or that the NCAA, who hides behind the non-profit "we're just looking out for the kids" moniker ALL THE TIME, should make some rule adjustments that are in the interest of its "student-athletes" as opposed to "protecting its product"?

The bar for idealism is low, I suppose.

[D-West & PO-Z]

You're reacting as if we're proposing lawlessness. There are certain reforms that would obliterate the college basketball landscape as it exists today - the best example is allowing (requiring?) schools to make direct payments to players. There's obviously a ton of people who staunchly support that, and at the same time there's legitimacy to the thought that a policy like that would be the death knell of competitive college hoops. We aren't talking about anything even close to that. We're talking about a one-time free transfer rule. It's really not that crazy, especially when it appears this is becoming somewhat of an informal NCAA policy anyway! No one is saying you can play for Xavier on December 15th and UK on the 20th. Of course there would have to be some regulation as to when you can transfer, and it would have to work within a school's academic framework anyway.

Is it really idealist to think college athletes should be able to transfer universities and play their sport at their new institution as soon as possible, instead of sitting out a year? Or that the NCAA, who hides behind the non-profit "we're just looking out for the kids" moniker ALL THE TIME, should make some rule adjustments that are in the interest of its "student-athletes" as opposed to "protecting its product"?

The bar for idealism is low, I suppose.

+1

(this is what you put when someone says what your thinking but writes in a way you couldnt think of and you have nothing to add right?)

[xavierj]

Did UC offer him? If so surprising he didnt pick them.

Yes and some of their fans can’t believe it. Some friends of mine thought he was a slam dunk, no need to recruit lock to UC.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Yes and some of their fans can’t believe it. Some friends of mine thought he was a slam dunk, no need to recruit lock to UC.

Interesting, wonder what the deal was there?

[XUGRAD80]

My feeling is that if a kid is happy at a school, he’s probably going to stay. And if he is unhappy, he’s probably going to look to go somewhere else. The problem now is that if he transfers and sits, he loses a year of playing.

But here is the scenario that happens all to often....kid is recruited to a school and for whatever reason...doesn’t pick up the system well, isn’t talented enough to play at that level, to many good players in front of him, gets in the coaches doghouse, whatever....barely sees any playing time. The year is basically a waste. So he transfers, and has to sit out for year. Another wasted year. Now 2-3 years after his HS career ends, and after sitting the pine for 2 full years, he’s eligible. But as we’ve all seen, it usually take awhile for a player that has been out of games for long period a while before they are back in playing shape and for them to catch up to game speed. Gonna be another 1/2 year, at the very least wasted.

Look at James....barely played his first 2 years at X and now he’s going to have to sit out a full year before he’s eligible to play. 3 wasted years for him....and only 2 years left to play.

The idea that a few major programs might benefit from allowing players to transfer and play immediately the next season....is that a reason to penalize the other 99% of the kids that are just transferring to find playing time, or a coach that they can get along with?

It’s such a short career, and for 99% of the kids it’s their last chance to play competitive basketball......why take any of that time away from them? If it’s really supposed to be all about the players.....why make it more difficult for them than it already is?

These type of rules effect many more players like James, than they do a player like Naji. The rules should be written to benefit the majority of the players, and not the exceptions.

[D-West & PO-Z]

My feeling is that if a kid is happy at a school, he’s probably going to stay. And if he is unhappy, he’s probably going to look to go somewhere else. The problem now is that if he transfers and sits, he loses a year of playing.

But here is the scenario that happens all to often....kid is recruited to a school and for whatever reason...doesn’t pick up the system well, isn’t talented enough to play at that level, to many good players in front of him, gets in the coaches doghouse, whatever....barely sees any playing time. The year is basically a waste. So he transfers, and has to sit out for year. Another wasted year. Now 2-3 years after his HS career ends, and after sitting the pine for 2 full years, he’s eligible. But as we’ve all seen, it usually take awhile for a player that has been out of games for long period a while before they are back in playing shape and for them to catch up to game speed. Gonna be another 1/2 year, at the very least wasted.

Look at James....barely played his first 2 years at X and now he’s going to have to sit out a full year before he’s eligible to play. 3 wasted years for him....and only 2 years left to play.

The idea that a few major programs might benefit from allowing players to transfer and play immediately the next season....is that a reason to penalize the other 99% of the kids that are just transferring to find playing time, or a coach that they can get along with?

It’s such a short career, and for 99% of the kids it’s their last chance to play competitive basketball......why take any of that time away from them? If it’s really supposed to be all about the players.....why make it more difficult for them than it already is?

These type of rules effect many more players like James, than they do a player like Naji. The rules should be written to benefit the majority of the players, and not the exceptions.

Well put.

[MHettel]

You're reacting as if we're proposing lawlessness. There are certain reforms that would obliterate the college basketball landscape as it exists today - the best example is allowing (requiring?) schools to make direct payments to players. There's obviously a ton of people who staunchly support that, and at the same time there's legitimacy to the thought that a policy like that would be the death knell of competitive college hoops. We aren't talking about anything even close to that. We're talking about a one-time free transfer rule. It's really not that crazy, especially when it appears this is becoming somewhat of an informal NCAA policy anyway! No one is saying you can play for Xavier on December 15th and UK on the 20th. Of course there would have to be some regulation as to when you can transfer, and it would have to work within a school's academic framework anyway.

Is it really idealist to think college athletes should be able to transfer universities and play their sport at their new institution as soon as possible, instead of sitting out a year? Or that the NCAA, who hides behind the non-profit "we're just looking out for the kids" moniker ALL THE TIME, should make some rule adjustments that are in the interest of its "student-athletes" as opposed to "protecting its product"?

The bar for idealism is low, I suppose.

There are 345 teams in D1. If you want 345 teams, then you have to make an attempt at showing that there is some degree of competitiveness. We already have evidence of various types of cheating by coaches to gain one advantage or another. And, they way that the coaches try to distance themselves from the actual act of cheating (Book was doing this WITHOUT Miller knowing?), shows that they need to keep the appearance of playing with in the rules.

So the proposal / idea here is that bigger programs can just cannibalize the smaller ones. LaSalle signs a Freshman who lights it up? Transfer to Nova. Seattle U finds a mobile big man that is a rim protector as a frosh. UW bound.

This rule will so further expand the gap between the have's and have nots that it will ultimately and eventually reshape what D1 basketball is. If you think that's an acceptable outcome because you are in favor of "anything that's good for the player" then great! But D1 basketball as you know it will change. And it will start to resemble a professional league more so than any type of amateur level.

And by the way. If these guys are students first, why does it matter if they sit out? They aren't being deprived of their education. Exactly what "harm" can they claim? They choose to transfer for some reasons. There are pros and cons to any decision. They understand that a consequence of transferring is that they will need to sit out, and yet they do it anyway.

Wait till there are no consequences.

D1 will become the Big 6. And every other D1 team outside of the big six will become the D1 Development League.

Nothing like taking something that is about as perfect as it gets (NCAA Tourney) and undermining the EXACT reason it works in the name of "fairness" to those poor student athletes that want their cake and eat it too.

[XU 87]

T

So the proposal / idea here is that bigger programs can just cannibalize the smaller ones. LaSalle signs a Freshman who lights it up? Transfer to Nova. Seattle U finds a mobile big man that is a rim protector as a frosh. UW bound.



So what's wrong with that? Who should we be helping and/or protecting? The college basketball programs or the actual players?

[MHettel]

So what's wrong with that? Who should we be helping and/or protecting? The college basketball programs or the actual players?

Who the hell said that anyone needed to be protected? You want a scholarship? here are the rules. Don't like it? Next....

D1 NCAA basketball is in fantastic shape. This is the old adage of "cut off your nose to spite your face." Make a change to address a small problem (debatable that its a problem), only to create a critical injury. Smart.

[AviatorX]

There are 345 teams in D1. If you want 345 teams, then you have to make an attempt at showing that there is some degree of competitiveness. We already have evidence of various types of cheating by coaches to gain one advantage or another. And, they way that the coaches try to distance themselves from the actual act of cheating (Book was doing this WITHOUT Miller knowing?), shows that they need to keep the appearance of playing with in the rules.

So the proposal / idea here is that bigger programs can just cannibalize the smaller ones. LaSalle signs a Freshman who lights it up? Transfer to Nova. Seattle U finds a mobile big man that is a rim protector as a frosh. UW bound.

This rule will so further expand the gap between the have's and have nots that it will ultimately and eventually reshape what D1 basketball is. If you think that's an acceptable outcome because you are in favor of "anything that's good for the player" then great! But D1 basketball as you know it will change. And it will start to resemble a professional league more so than any type of amateur level.

And by the way. If these guys are students first, why does it matter if they sit out? They aren't being deprived of their education. Exactly what "harm" can they claim? They choose to transfer for some reasons. There are pros and cons to any decision. They understand that a consequence of transferring is that they will need to sit out, and yet they do it anyway.

Wait till there are no consequences.

D1 will become the Big 6. And every other D1 team outside of the big six will become the D1 Development League.

Nothing like taking something that is about as perfect as it gets (NCAA Tourney) and undermining the EXACT reason it works in the name of "fairness" to those poor student athletes that want their cake and eat it too.

To be clear, I don't think the competitive balance angle is a convincing argument against this rule change by any stretch of the imagine. But if we're going to entertain it, it's worth stating that the gulf between the haves and have nots in D1 college hoops is already so, so, so vast that it's pretty ridiculous to act as if this will change EVERYTHING. Look at the recruiting rankings every year. Look at the facilities at a place like Xavier compared to a school in the SWAC, MEAC or even Conference USA. There already is no competitive balance at all beyond the "Big 6".

I don't care at all if an under recruited guy commits to LaSalle or Seattle, succeeds there, and decides it's best for him and his future to exhaust his eligibility elsewhere. Who are we supposed to feel bad for in that situation? Why do you want to punish that guy for trying to get to a better situation?

Not even sure where to start with the student athletes want to have their cake and eat it to. Do you even know what that expression means? That's literally the opposite of student athletes current situation with respect to the NCAA.

[D-West & PO-Z]

There are 345 teams in D1. If you want 345 teams, then you have to make an attempt at showing that there is some degree of competitiveness. We already have evidence of various types of cheating by coaches to gain one advantage or another. And, they way that the coaches try to distance themselves from the actual act of cheating (Book was doing this WITHOUT Miller knowing?), shows that they need to keep the appearance of playing with in the rules.

So the proposal / idea here is that bigger programs can just cannibalize the smaller ones. LaSalle signs a Freshman who lights it up? Transfer to Nova. Seattle U finds a mobile big man that is a rim protector as a frosh. UW bound.

This rule will so further expand the gap between the have's and have nots that it will ultimately and eventually reshape what D1 basketball is. If you think that's an acceptable outcome because you are in favor of "anything that's good for the player" then great! But D1 basketball as you know it will change. And it will start to resemble a professional league more so than any type of amateur level.

And by the way. If these guys are students first, why does it matter if they sit out? They aren't being deprived of their education. Exactly what "harm" can they claim? They choose to transfer for some reasons. There are pros and cons to any decision. They understand that a consequence of transferring is that they will need to sit out, and yet they do it anyway.

Wait till there are no consequences.

D1 will become the Big 6. And every other D1 team outside of the big six will become the D1 Development League.

Nothing like taking something that is about as perfect as it gets (NCAA Tourney) and undermining the EXACT reason it works in the name of "fairness" to those poor student athletes that want their cake and eat it too.

Wait a second.....let me get this straight....you are trying to argue there is actually some sort of semblance of competitiveness amongst all 345 teams? Competitiveness between Villanova and Lasalle and Seattle and UW right now? Is this real life?

And we are the ones living is Disneyland????

:laugh:

[bleedXblue]

Note to self: trying to have a logical argument with an idealist is not so ideal.

I don't know what fucking universe some of you guys are in, but your ability to only see what you want has actually made you blind to seeing what is there.

bingo

[AviatorX]

Who the hell said that anyone needed to be protected? You want a scholarship? here are the rules. Don't like it? Next....

D1 NCAA basketball is in fantastic shape. This is the old adage of "cut off your nose to spite your face." Make a change to address a small problem (debatable that its a problem), only to create a critical injury. Smart.

Are you OK with guys leaving early for the NBA?

Also, DWest has made this point like 10 times and you've ignored it, but it kinda makes sense for a 16-17-18 year old kid (many of whom, with respect to CBB, are coming from lower income and lesser educated backgrounds) to get some protection from the rules, when the flip side of the coin are coaches making millions of dollars a year.

[xavierj]

Interesting, wonder what the deal was there?

Playing in the SEC against KY, Florida and Auburn was probably more appealing then playing in the AAC against Tulane, East Carolina and South Florida maybe?

[GoMuskies]

We can debate whether the rule change would be good or bad. However, I don't think there's any chance Xavier's program would have ever developed the way it has if that rule was in place. Guys like Tyrone Hill, Derek Strong, Brian Grant and Aaron Williams would have been very hard to keep if they could have transferred to Louisville or Indiana or Kentucky or wherever without having to sit a year back in the day. If they change the rule, thank God it happened AFTER we became a have instead of back when we were a have not.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Who the hell said that anyone needed to be protected? You want a scholarship? here are the rules. Don't like it? Next....

D1 NCAA basketball is in fantastic shape. This is the old adage of "cut off your nose to spite your face." Make a change to address a small problem (debatable that its a problem), only to create a critical injury. Smart.

People who dont think there is at least some problem with regards to player's rights, or whatever you want to call it, in college athletics right now have their head in the sand. Heck Mark Emmert was just grilled on Capitol Hill in Feb on this and many more topics surrounding college layers.

[AviatorX]

If the rule had always been that you can freely transfer, would anyone be calling to add restrictions like a sit-out year? What is even the logic behind that restriction? I'm all ears.

[sirthought]

Before all the critics jump in about the value of a basketball degree, I ask what exactly is the value of a music degree?

You're joking, right? You know how many people use music skills in their life/profession compared to basketball skills. Thousands!

[AviatorX]

We can debate whether the rule change would be good or bad. However, I don't think there's any chance Xavier's program would have ever developed the way it has if that rule was in place. Guys like Tyrone Hill, Derek Strong, Brian Grant and Aaron Williams would have been very hard to keep if they could have transferred to Louisville or Indiana or Kentucky or wherever without having to sit a year back in the day. If they change the rule, thank God it happened AFTER we became a have instead of back when we were a have not.

I mean maybe, but I think it's easy to forgot these are college kids. They have relationships with their teammates and coaches and are a part of campus life (probably much more so at a place like Xavier (before the program was on the level it is now) than IU, UK, Kansas, etc. where they have separate dorms, etc.). It's not as simple as signing a contract with a better NBA team to be able to chase a championship.

I hate comparisons like this because we all know being a high major D1 basketball player is not remotely similar to being an average college student, but if you had a 2.5 in high school (good enough for a full ride at UC, right?) and pulled a 4.0 your freshman year, is it an automatic no brainer to transfer to Harvard? It's not just flipping a switch to uproot your life like that twice in such a short period when you're 18.

Also, if this rule had existed in 2009, Xavier may well have been to the Final Four with Jordan Crawford adding some offensive punch to that roster.

[MADXSTER]

If the rule had always been that you can freely transfer, would anyone be calling to add restrictions like a sit-out year? What is even the logic behind that restriction? I'm all ears.

So that teams such as X(MCC and A10 days) wouldn't have their best players being poached by bigger programs.

I have no problems with protecting the players rights, I do however think that this will be the ' Rich getting Richer' scenario. Think about it, who really wants this....The P5. It basically benefits them the most. This, IMO, is disguised as supporting players but is really about helping the bigger programs.

How about making an NCAA rule that says if a college coach switches schools(D1 - D1) he has to sit out just like the players in the same sports that require the athletes to do the same?

[GoMuskies]

I mean maybe

I mean, if "maybe" means with 99% certainty, sure.

[D-West & PO-Z]

So that teams such as X(MCC and A10 days) wouldn't have their best players being poached by bigger programs.

I have no problems with protecting the players rights, I do however think that this will be the ' Rich getting Richer' scenario. Think about it, who really wants this....The P5. It basically benefits them the most. This, IMO, is disguised as supporting players but is really about helping the bigger programs.

How about making an NCAA rule that says if a college coach switches schools(D1 - D1) he has to sit out just like the players in the same sports that require the athletes to do the same?

Honestly some of the biggest vocal critics of this change are P5 coaches.

[GoMuskies]

Honestly some of the biggest vocal critics of this change are P5 coaches.

It's tough on them, but at least those guys have a fighting chance. I guess those guys are worried about losing their 12th and 13th guys to Missouri State.

[XUGRAD80]

It’s real simple...you allow kids to transfer ONE TIME during their career, only at the end of the spring semester, to another D1 or D2 school without having to sit out for a full year. You allow this only after the end of their 1st or 2nd years of eligibility. If they want to do it after their 3rd year it’s allowed only if they have graduated...just like the current grad transfer system. If a kid has already transferred one time during his undergraduate career, and now wants to transfer as a grad, make him sit out a year. This gives the younger players a chance to make up for a mistake made as a young person and also keeps the blue bloods from cherry picking upperclassmen...which is the real problem that would upset any competitive balance. You could even write rules limiting the number of transfers of those types a school can bring in. Make it no more than 2 underclassmen and 2 grad transfers per roster.

[XUGRAD80]

You're joking, right? You know how many people use music skills in their life/profession compared to basketball skills. Thousands!

Must be a lot of singing bartenders where you’re at. :drinks2:

[D-West & PO-Z]

Honestly there’s no need for hypothetical transfer rules or certain restrictions etc. just plain old one transfer year allowed per player without sitting out is what is proposed and is what’s going to happen. No need for all these other restrictions or caveats to the rule. That’s what it will be. The best schools will remain the best schools the lower schools will remain the lower schools and the middle guys will remain the middle guys. Everyone will figure it out some will benefit from it more than others but no real competitive balance will be different because the gap is already so massive. The ncaa tourney will continue to be great. Coaches will bitch but the will continue to be paid handsomely to figure it out.

[AviatorX]

I mean, if "maybe" means with 99% certainty, sure.

I really don’t think the amount of guys transferring up is going to skyrocket, but no way to know until we see how it happens once the rule change goes through. Talent is already pretty concentrated in college basketball. Definitely more so than the MCC days.

Can anyone even think of guys from this past season that would have been good candidates to transfer and ruin the sport?

[XUGRAD80]

I think that the only thing to fear would be the temptation by a coach to recruit an all-star team of soon to be senior players with the goal of winning a national championship and then everyone (including the coach) moving on to the pros. That’s why I would support putting a limit on the number of transfers any one roster could have at any one time. I would compare that to the pro’s trying to build super teams. They have a salary cap and luxury tax system that is set up to prevent and discourage that from happening. I do believe that there would need to be something to prevent that from happening at the college level too. But that is something that is certainly manageable and not a reason to eliminate the change in transfer rules IMO.

[xufan2020]

The number of transfers will not skyrocket like some here are predicting after this rule gets passed (which it will).
No freshmen that averages 16ppg in some junk league is going to transfer to a nova level school and get playing time right away as a sophomore.
Do you all realize that most other ncaa sports allow you to transfer once without having to sit out a year? The NCAA Tournament isn’t going to be ruined

[xuphan]

Xavier going after D2 forward Trevor Lakes. I guess he played against Xavier in an exhibition game. Any idea how he did and if he would be a good fit for X?

[xavierj]

Xavier going after D2 forward Trevor Lakes. I guess he played against Xavier in an exhibition game. Any idea how he did and if he would be a good fit for X?

Have no idea. Looks like according to his Twitter Nebraska and Arkansas have also contacted him. I guess he is a big shooter. According to his stats he shoots a ton of three's, 8 per game and is 40% from three for his career. Only took 3 shots per game inside the three point line. Shot 45% his freshman year. 6'7" 230.

[GoMuskies]

Sounds a bit like Ryan Welage.

[Lloyd Braun]

Sounds a bit like Ryan Welage.

If you watch the highlights Welage is a very fair comp. I know we need shooters... but I’m not sure I can get super excited about him. Had a difficult time finding defensive highlights.

[xavierj]

Sounds a bit like Ryan Welage.

Agree except about 50 lbs heavier. I am sure its take a chance see if he can translate. Worst thing that can happen is that he is not good enough to get off the bench. It's not like they are wasting a scholarship they need for someone else. If he comes to X then maybe a walk on gets upset because it uses a scholarship that they sometimes give to a walk on.

[IM4X]

Look at James....barely played his first 2 years at X and now heÂ’s going to have to sit out a full year before heÂ’s eligible to play. 3 wasted years for him....and only 2 years left to play.

Situation 1:
It does not seems to make sense to make players like James- players in his circumstance have to sit out a year. He gave his best to his coach and team for two years, but he is still not getting significant playing time. So why not allow all players who commit to a school where the coach chooses not to give them significant playing time by the end of their second full year to move on without having to sit out a year.

Situation 2:
If a player chooses to leave during or after their first year (like Bishop), then it makes more sense for that player to have to sit out a year (unless the coach has determined that the player will not ever likely get significant playing time.

Situation 3:
It also seems to make sense that a starter (or someone who plays more than say 25 minutes) who wants to transfer also should have to sit out a year. This is where it could get really messy if these recruits donÂ’t have to sit out. It is what keeps schools from constantly trying to steal away talent and causing chaos for basketball teams and their program. If you are a starter (or at least getting significant minutes), you are already getting what you signed up for. If you want to go somewhere else -fine- but know you will have to sit out a year.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Situation 1:
It does not seems to make sense to make players like James- players in his circumstance have to sit out a year. He gave his best to his coach and team for two years, but he is still not getting significant playing time. So why not allow all players who commit to a school where the coach chooses not to give them significant playing time by the end of their second full year to move on without having to sit out a year.

Situation 2:
If a player chooses to leave during or after their first year (like Bishop), then it makes more sense for that player to have to sit out a year (unless the coach has determined that the player will not ever likely get significant playing time.

Situation 3:
It also seems to make sense that a starter (or someone who plays more than say 25 minutes) who wants to transfer also should have to sit out a year. This is where it could get really messy if these recruits donÂ’t have to sit out. It is what keeps schools from constantly trying to steal away talent and causing chaos for basketball teams and their program. If you are a starter (or at least getting significant minutes), you are already getting what you signed up for. If you want to go somewhere else -fine- but know you will have to sit out a year.

So the biggest worry or concern from this remains "chaos" or roster management issues for the coaches? I just dont know why everyone is so concerned about the coaches job getting tougher.

Again situation 2 and 3 don't solve the issues that this rule is trying to solve.

[JTG]

Sounds a bit like Ryan Welage.

Wasn't Welage more like 6'7" 180 ?
As far as the transfer rule, what will happen when weazels like Bruce Pearl and Kelvin Sampson see a guy is averaging 15 and 10 in Dec, and blow the kid's phone up for the next 3 months promising him God knows what ? But I guess that goes on now. I think maybe the limit should be 2 no sit transfers period.

[JTG]

Sounds a bit like Ryan Welage.

Wasn't Welage more like 6'7" 180 ?
As far as the transfer rule, what will happen when weazels like Bruce Pearl and Kelvin Sampson see a guy is averaging 15 and 10 in Dec, and blow the kid's phone up for the next 3 months promising him God knows what ? But I guess that goes on now. I think maybe the limit should be 2 no sit transfers period.

[XUGRAD80]

So the biggest worry or concern from this remains "chaos" or roster management issues for the coaches? I just dont know why everyone is so concerned about the coaches job getting tougher.
.

I do think that is a legitimate concern, but not because it could make the coaches job tougher.

IMO it could even make a coaches job easier, especially for assistant coaches. No more need to travel to little HS gyms, or summer tourneys. No more need to suck up to 13 year olds and their parents. Sit back, watch the college game, and cherry pick the cream of the crop from the college ranks. Build your team by recruiting college all-stars. Meanwhile, all the coaches that beat the bushes, found these under the radar players, and worked to develop them, are screwed. Just when it was starting to pay off, someone takes them away because they have better facilities, and prettier co-eds. (Or just a stack of cash?)

That’s why I would propose a limit on the number of these players that can be on a roster. It would make it impossible to build a complete roster that way, but would also give the players the opportunity to transfer, without having to sit out, that they want (and should have IMO).

[D-West & PO-Z]

I do think that is a legitimate concern, but not because it could make the coaches job tougher.

IMO it could even make a coaches job easier, especially for assistant coaches. No more need to travel to little HS gyms, or summer tourneys. No more need to suck up to 13 year olds and their parents. Sit back, watch the college game, and cherry pick the cream of the crop from the college ranks. Build your team by recruiting college all-stars. Meanwhile, all the coaches that beat the bushes, found these under the radar players, and worked to develop them, are screwed. Just when it was starting to pay off, someone takes them away because they have better facilities, and prettier co-eds. (Or just a stack of cash?)

That’s why I would propose a limit on the number of these players that can be on a roster. It would make it impossible to build a complete roster that way, but would also give the players the opportunity to transfer, without having to sit out, that they want (and should have IMO).

Well it can’t be both ways. If the bigger schools are poaching “college all stars” (which I don’t think it going to happen near the level that some are concerned on this board) and not “sucking up to 13 year olds” and recruiting high school kids then there are that many more talented high school kids who won’t have spots on bigger schools and that will be available for those hard working coaches who aren’t going after transfers.

And the players aren’t the schools possession. I honestly don’t care if the found a diamond in the rough who turned out to be a star and not wants a shot at a higher school. Why are so many people against that? It’s truly confusing to me. It’s almost completely unamerican when you look at all of our lives and that we all strive to better our skills, better our jobs, better our positions and opportunities in life. But when it comes to the under recruited kid who worked hard and became a better player we get all in a tizzy when he wants a chance to compete at a higher level. It’s so strange.

And to me the rich getting richer argument just doesn’t hold water. This isn’t going to change anything in the landscape of whos is the best and who will consistently be final 4 and national championship contenders. That gap is too wide already for it to get wider in any significant way.

[XUGRAD80]

Do you think that there should be ANY restrictions upon a student-athletes freedom to transfer and compete right away?

Do you think that there should be ANY restrictions upon the number of scholarships that a school can hand out?

[D-West & PO-Z]

Do you think that there should be ANY restrictions upon a student-athletes freedom to transfer and compete right away?

Do you think that there should be ANY restrictions upon the number of scholarships that a school can hand out?

1. I like the proposed rule of one free transfer where no sitting out is required. That’s it. There’s no need for any other restriction or tier levels or anything else imo. Transfer twice then you have to sit a year.

2. Other than the normal scholarship limits (what is it 13 that a school gets?), no.

[XUGRAD80]

1. I like the proposed rule of one free transfer where no sitting out is required. That’s it. There’s no need for any other restriction or tier levels or anything else imo. Transfer twice then you have to sit a year.

2. Other than the normal scholarship limits (what is it 13 that a school gets?), no.

So you do agree that there should be restrictions and limits, you just disagree on where they should be. Got it.

Please understand that others feel that those restrictions and limits should be different than what you think they should be. Please understand that it may have nothing to do with being “un-American”, wanting to limit player freedom, or being concerned with making a coaches job to hard. Others have legitimate concerns about how this would all play out and how it may stack an already unlevel playing field even more against smaller schools and leagues.

[D-West & PO-Z]

So you do agree that there should be restrictions and limits, you just disagree on where they should be. Got it.

Please understand that others feel that those restrictions and limits should be different than what you think they should be. Please understand that it may have nothing to do with being “un-American”, wanting to limit player freedom, or being concerned with making a coaches job to hard. Others have legitimate concerns about how this would all play out and how it may stack an already unlevel playing field even more against smaller schools and leagues.

The difference is I’m just agreeing with what the proposed rule changes are. You guys are just making things up that aren’t proposed for the sake or trying to limit the proposed change.

If there was a proposed change that players could transfer 4 times without sitting out I would be perfectly fine with that too. I just like the proposed one time because it is better than the current no times.

And of course I think there should be scholarship limits that are already in place. Schools can’t have 50 players on the team. But no I don’t think there should be a new made up rule that they can only offer two of those scholarships to transfers.

The rules should always err on the side of protecting the players not the millionaire coaches or the schools imo.

[XUGRAD80]

The rules should always err on the side of protecting the players not the millionaire coaches or the schools imo.

Out of the hundreds of coaches at NCAA member schools, there are only a handful (50? 60?) that make anywhere near that amount of money. How about trying to protect the interests of those coaches that are working their butts off at those lower level institutions? Or protecting the interests of those lower level institutions that don't want to just be feeder programs for the elite? The NCAA is a voluntary organization and these lower level schools, and the people that toil at them, have some interests that need protecting too. It's not just about the elite here. That's why a change in the rules like this will be VOTED upon by the member schools. It won't be something that a handful of schools can force on the rest of the association.

What I've tried to do is present a plan that protects those school's interests, while still providing the student-athlete with more freedom of movement.

[AviatorX]

Out of the hundreds of coaches at NCAA member schools, there are only a handful (50? 60?) that make anywhere near that amount of money. How about trying to protect the interests of those coaches that are working their butts off at those lower level institutions? Or protecting the interests of those lower level institutions that don't want to just be feeder programs for the elite? The NCAA is a voluntary organization and these lower level schools, and the people that toil at them, have some interests that need protecting too. It's not just about the elite here. That's why a change in the rules like this will be VOTED upon by the member schools. It won't be something that a handful of schools can force on the rest of the association.

What I've tried to do is present a plan that protects those school's interests, while still providing the student-athlete with more freedom of movement.

A lot going on here, but one thing I can promise you, the vote is going to be a resounding "yes." The rule change is a 100% lock, the only thing up in the air is timing of the vote in light of the pandemic. Sounds like the vote will be in May.

The idea that there is no one looking out for the interests of the NCAA and its member institutions as compared to the players is certainly a thought. The coach in your example can (and will) break his contract and trade up as soon as possible.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Out of the hundreds of coaches at NCAA member schools, there are only a handful (50? 60?) that make anywhere near that amount of money. How about trying to protect the interests of those coaches that are working their butts off at those lower level institutions? Or protecting the interests of those lower level institutions that don't want to just be feeder programs for the elite? The NCAA is a voluntary organization and these lower level schools, and the people that toil at them, have some interests that need protecting too. It's not just about the elite here. That's why a change in the rules like this will be VOTED upon by the member schools. It won't be something that a handful of schools can force on the rest of the association.

What I've tried to do is present a plan that protects those school's interests, while still providing the student-athlete with more freedom of movement.

If they make any amount of money at all (all coaches get a salary right?) then I’m more interested in protecting the players than the coaches or schools. No one is poaching those bottoms schools players. This rule isn’t going to happen and then all of a sudden UK, Kansas, and Duke are grabbing all the best players from the MEAC, ASun, SWAC, and Big Sky.

This isn’t going to be nearly the doom and gloom that those who don’t want the rule or who want to limit would have you believe. It will be beneficial for all players while potentially helping some schools and hurting some and not overtly helping or hurting others.

Someone earlier (I think hettle) said if the players don’t like the current rule well “next”. Well as you said it’s voluntary. If a coach doesn’t like it and feels he’s getting screwed well, “next”.

[JTG]

Getting back to what this thread started out as, what's the story on Burton from WSU ? And any other targets ?

[xuphan]

Getting back to what this thread started out as, what's the story on Burton from WSU ? And any other targets ?

Burton will announce Monday. All signs point to him coming to Xavier.

[JTG]

Burton will announce Monday. All signs point to him coming to Xavier.

Does he have to sit a year ? Any news on the big who can be either 2020 or 2021 ?

[xavierj]

Does he have to sit a year ? Any news on the big who can be either 2020 or 2021 ?

Unless something changes, he will have to sit. I don’t think the rule change will take effect until 2021-2022 season. They may vote to pass it next month but can’t imagine they make it effective immediately. As for Burton I don’t think all signs point to Xavier. I hope I am wrong on that. I think he is a player.

[XUGRAD80]

Any news on the big who can be either 2020 or 2021 ?

Rivals says that he is in no hurry to make a decision and plans to do some more visits first.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Unless something changes, he will have to sit. I don’t think the rule change will take effect until 2021-2022 season. They may vote to pass it next month but can’t imagine they make it effective immediately. As for Burton I don’t think all signs point to Xavier. I hope I am wrong on that. I think he is a player.

The original plan was to vote in April and make it effective immediately for 2020-2021. But again not sure how if at all coronavirus has changed those plans.

[MHettel]

It will be beneficial for all players while potentially helping some schools and hurting some and not overtly helping or hurting others.



What exactly is the harm being done to a kid if he has to sit out a year? Lets get back to the "problem" we are trying to solve. How can anyone say that not being able to play a game is causing some damages that must be addressed?

Someone mentioned a roster limit. that addresses my concern at least a little. I'd limit it to ONE immediate transfer at a time on any roster. Also, maybe we should give the coach from the current program the ability to grant the waiver. So in the case of Dontarious James, OF COURSE Steele would grant the waiver.

Question: After the season ended 2 years ago, Marquette was projected to be a top 10 team and a legit NC contender. The Hauser brothers decided to transfer (AND sit out a year), and suddenly the outlook was much different for MU. So, what if this new rule had been in place? Who thinks Marcus Howard sticks around, and who thinks he just looks for the best situation to step right into so he can be on a contender again? I content he would have left, and Marquette would have gone from NC contender to Big East bottom dweller in a matter of days. The current rule is the only thing that allowed them to avert a disaster.

[D-West & PO-Z]

What exactly is the harm being done to a kid if he has to sit out a year? Lets get back to the "problem" we are trying to solve. How can anyone say that not being able to play a game is causing some damages that must be addressed?

Someone mentioned a roster limit. that addresses my concern at least a little. I'd limit it to ONE immediate transfer at a time on any roster. Also, maybe we should give the coach from the current program the ability to grant the waiver. So in the case of Dontarious James, OF COURSE Steele would grant the waiver.

Question: After the season ended 2 years ago, Marquette was projected to be a top 10 team and a legit NC contender. The Hauser brothers decided to transfer (AND sit out a year), and suddenly the outlook was much different for MU. So, what if this new rule had been in place? Who thinks Marcus Howard sticks around, and who thinks he just looks for the best situation to step right into so he can be on a contender again? I content he would have left, and Marquette would have gone from NC contender to Big East bottom dweller in a matter of days. The current rule is the only thing that allowed them to avert a disaster.

1. What is the reason for requiring the players to sit?

2. You are completely guessing with no basis for doing so that Howard would have left.

3. Who cares (besides Wojo and Marquette fans) if he did leave. Why would anyone else possibly care? I get being a fan and being butt hurt about it but if Howard found a better situation where he could contend for a national championship good for him.

You’ll never convince me that giving players more options to decide their own lives and futures is a bad thing. You want to control them and be punitive if they want to leave for a better situation. It’s only to benefit the coach and the school.

[AviatorX]

What exactly is the harm being done to a kid if he has to sit out a year? Lets get back to the "problem" we are trying to solve. How can anyone say that not being able to play a game is causing some damages that must be addressed?

Someone mentioned a roster limit. that addresses my concern at least a little. I'd limit it to ONE immediate transfer at a time on any roster. Also, maybe we should give the coach from the current program the ability to grant the waiver. So in the case of Dontarious James, OF COURSE Steele would grant the waiver.

Question: After the season ended 2 years ago, Marquette was projected to be a top 10 team and a legit NC contender. The Hauser brothers decided to transfer (AND sit out a year), and suddenly the outlook was much different for MU. So, what if this new rule had been in place? Who thinks Marcus Howard sticks around, and who thinks he just looks for the best situation to step right into so he can be on a contender again? I content he would have left, and Marquette would have gone from NC contender to Big East bottom dweller in a matter of days. The current rule is the only thing that allowed them to avert a disaster.

If you think Howard wasn't sticking around, you must not be too familiar with the reasons the Hausers left.

[XU 87]

Who the hell said that anyone needed to be protected? You want a scholarship? here are the rules. Don't like it? Next....



If that's your position, why not make players sit out for two years if they transfer? That will really protect the smaller programs. Who cares about the players? Rules are rules.

[IM4X]

Burton will announce Monday. All signs point to him coming to Xavier.

You mean like the subliminal sign in this Twitter teaser announcement: While Burton has all 4 school logos (he is down to) surrounding him- upon further inspection, one might notice that he is actually staring directly at the X.

Uh-huh. I like it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Moneymaker441?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweet embed%7Ctwterm%5E1248624239344676865&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zagsblog.com%2F2020%2F04 %2F12%2Fwichita-state-transfer-jamarius-burton-to-announce-monday%2F

[AviatorX]

Burton is definitely not an "all signs point to X" situation, although I guess that isn't surprising considering the source on that claim.

[xavierj]

Burton is definitely not an "all signs point to X" situation, although I guess that isn't surprising considering the source on that claim.

Agreed. Just looking at rosters, it looks more like he would get more time, where he wants, at Texas Tech.

[GIMMFD]

Agreed. Just looking at rosters, it looks more like he would get more time, where he wants, at Texas Tech.

If he doesn't come here, I'd much rather him go to Texas Tech than Marquette or Seton Hall, personally.

[D-West & PO-Z]

If he doesn't come here, I'd much rather him go to Texas Tech than Marquette or Seton Hall, personally.

Samesies

[Lloyd Braun]

Agreed. Just looking at rosters, it looks more like he would get more time, where he wants, at Texas Tech.

This would make sense. Not sure he would play that much here.

Edit: per Twitter he chose Texas Tech.

[xavierj]

Burton committed to Texas Tech.

[xuphan]

Burton committed to Texas Tech.

Dang it. I guess it makes sense that we offered the D2 kid a few days ago. Experts aren’t always right I guess.

[xavierj]

Dang it. I guess it makes sense that we offered the D2 kid a few days ago. Experts aren’t always right I guess.

Lol. What experts? I am pretty sure the D2 kid has nothing to do with a guy who plays a completely different position. I am sure Burton will do well at Texas Tech. Looks like a good player and a fit for what they need.

[Lloyd Braun]

Dang it. I guess it makes sense that we offered the D2 kid a few days ago. Experts aren’t always right I guess.

Just out of curiosity which experts had him coming to X? I didn’t see that anywhere...

[paulxu]

People with red dots.

[xuphan]

People with red dots.

Let’s be nice.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Let’s be nice.

People with nicely colored red dots.

[xu82]

Burton committed to Texas Tech.

I light of recent events, we didn’t want him anyway!



(Unless he wants to reconsider, of course.)

[Masterofreality]

Lol. What experts? I am pretty sure the D2 kid has nothing to do with a guy who plays a completely different position. I am sure Burton will do well at Texas Tech. Looks like a good player and a fit for what they need.

Did the low D1 kid that is coming play a different position? Just asking.

[AviatorX]

Did the low D1 kid that is coming play a different position? Just asking.

Yes. Burton is a wing that can slide to the 1 (which, by all accounts, is something he is very interested in doing right away). He is a good player that would been a very solid addition but the fit just wasn't really there.

[Masterofreality]

Yes. Burton is a wing that can slide to the 1 (which, by all accounts, is something he is very interested in doing right away). He is a good player that would been a very solid addition but the fit just wasn't really there.

Uh Burton was a PG that “slid” to the 2, per Wichita State’s own biography. So...No. same positions. We get Gardner Webb. They get Wichita State. Ooookkkk


“2019-20 (Sophomore):
WSU’s starting point guard down the stretch in 2018-19 will look to build on a strong rookie season… Versatile performer who can play the point or on the wing, as needed, and also defend multiple positions”

[xavierj]

Did the low D1 kid that is coming play a different position? Just asking.

Yes, Burton will play point at Texas Tech and he wouldn't much at Xavier. Johnson is strictly a wing shooter who can play defense from what I can see. I would imagine Johnson will be a guy to give some minutes off the bench and shoot three's.

[xavierj]

Uh Burton was a PG that “slid” to the 2, per Wichita State’s own biography. So...No. same positions. We get Gardner Webb. They get Wichita State. Ooookkkk


“2019-20 (Sophomore):
WSU’s starting point guard down the stretch in 2018-19 will look to build on a strong rookie season… Versatile performer who can play the point or on the wing, as needed, and also defend multiple positions”

How are they the same position? One is a point guard (Burton), that may get some minutes on the wing and one is nothing but a wing. On top of that, Johnson is a grad transfer and Burton isn't.

[AviatorX]

Uh Burton was a PG that “slid” to the 2, per Wichita State’s own biography. So...No. same positions. We get Gardner Webb. They get Wichita State. Ooookkkk


“2019-20 (Sophomore):
WSU’s starting point guard down the stretch in 2018-19 will look to build on a strong rookie season… Versatile performer who can play the point or on the wing, as needed, and also defend multiple positions”

Nate Johnson will be nowhere near the PG spot for X. Burton wants to play some PG. I'm not sure what point you think you're making based on an outdated bio at the school Burton transferred from, but that's the reality.

You also are loving this new line about where transfers come from, which is stupid. Chris Beard really won this one, getting a guy from Wichita State as opposed to Gardner Webb. Guess he forgot that rule when his second highest usage guy (behind a top 5 pick) on a national runner up team transferred in from South Dakota.

Transfers are all about fit, and fit goes both ways, even more so than with high school recruits where there's a lot of telling guys what they want to hear with respect to role.

[xavierj]

Uh Burton was a PG that “slid” to the 2, per Wichita State’s own biography. So...No. same positions. We get Gardner Webb. They get Wichita State. Ooookkkk


“2019-20 (Sophomore):
WSU’s starting point guard down the stretch in 2018-19 will look to build on a strong rookie season… Versatile performer who can play the point or on the wing, as needed, and also defend multiple positions”

Have you ever thought that maybe Travis is more interested long term to roll with his guys that he recruited out of high school? Maybe he sees Odom, Tandy, Wilcher and Jones as his guards for the next few years and maybe he is in good with some really good wings for the 2021 class that he just didn't really go all out for Burton, who will have to sit and could disrupt the guys he already has lined up. Not saying that Burton isn't a good player that could have helped, or that Travis didn't really recruit him hard, but I think there is a reason Travis seems to have really been looking for role players to come in and not guys that were looking for a ton of playing time and the ball in their hands. You seem to look for every negative in what Travis is doing without really knowing what is really going on.

[AviatorX]

Justin Turner, the consensus top GT on the market, is staying at Bowling Green.

Not a ringing endorsement for MHettel's death of college basketball by immediate transfer stance.

[xavierj]

Justin Turner who was being recruited by everyone, is now just staying at Bowling Green. I am sure he will declare for the draft, well at least he should, as I am not sure why he didn't in the first place.

https://twitter.com/GoodmanHoops/status/1249776395070382083

[Masterofreality]

Nate Johnson will be nowhere near the PG spot for X. Burton wants to play some PG. I'm not sure what point you think you're making based on an outdated bio at the school Burton transferred from, but that's the reality.

You also are loving this new line about where transfers come from, which is stupid. Chris Beard really won this one, getting a guy from Wichita State as opposed to Gardner Webb. Guess he forgot that rule when his second highest usage guy (behind a top 5 pick) on a national runner up team transferred in from South Dakota.

Transfers are all about fit, and fit goes both ways, even more so than with high school recruits where there's a lot of telling guys what they want to hear with respect to role.

You said they played different positions. Per their bios they don't. Both are basically combo guards. The "outdated bio" was from this year.

But yeah. Let's just keep settling for D2 and low D1 guys to take schollys away. Steele's roster. His handpicking. He'd better be right and not panicking.

[Masterofreality]

Have you ever thought that maybe Travis is more interested long term to roll with his guys that he recruited out of high school? Maybe he sees Odom, Tandy, Wilcher and Jones as his guards for the next few years and maybe he is in good with some really good wings for the 2021 class that he just didn't really go all out for Burton, who will have to sit and could disrupt the guys he already has lined up. Not saying that Burton isn't a good player that could have helped, or that Travis didn't really recruit him hard, but I think there is a reason Travis seems to have really been looking for role players to come in and not guys that were looking for a ton of playing time and the ball in their hands. You seem to look for every negative in what Travis is doing without really knowing what is really going on.

Then why was Steele interested in any transfers at all, rather than "showing interest" in 26 million of them...in every position? You yourself said that Xavier would be looking for "impact players" in the transfer portal. And "didn't recruit him hard?" Quote Xavier J- Post 164 of this thread: "I think Jamarius Burton is the guy Xavier want's. I think Xavier has a good chance to get him."
Uh, X was in his final 4, but, oh yeah. A guy from a Low D1 program that played the same position was already there at X. No one will be sitting out this year and I'm sure that zero guys are making decisions based upon a "sit out" year. They want PT. NOW
So glad you really know what's going on.

[AviatorX]

You said they played different positions. Per their bios they don't. Both are basically combo guards. The "outdated bio" was from this year.

But yeah. Let's just keep settling for D2 and low D1 guys to take schollys away. Steele's roster. His handpicking. He'd better be right and not panicking.

Want to bet Burton sees more minutes at Texas Tech at point than Johnson does at Xavier? I'm not really sure why the comparison is even relevant, honestly. Steele clearly wanted both. Both would play totally different roles. Both would be helpful. I was just explaining why Burton may have found the depth chart at X less appealing than elsewhere.

I'm not sure how anyone can bitch about Steele adding a big guard who knocked down almost 42% of his 3's last year on 177 attempts. Did you watch the last two seasons? Who is he taking the scholarship from? He's off the books after one season and Xavier has two open scholarships at this point, correct?

[XUMIOH12]

I feel like some people are thinking that Burton is eligible to play immediately at this point lol

[Masterofreality]

I feel like some people are thinking that Burton is eligible to play immediately at this point lol

They all will be. LOL.

That rule is for sure gonna be changed.

[AviatorX]

Please feel free to continue whining about Steele all you want, but if you think Burton didn't come to X because of Nate Johnson, you're living in your own world.

[Smails]

I feel like some people are thinking that Burton is eligible to play immediately at this point lol

..

[Masterofreality]

I'm not sure how anyone can bitch about Steele adding a big guard who knocked down almost 42% of his 3's last year on 177 attempts. Did you watch the last two seasons? Who is he taking the scholarship from? He's off the books after one season and Xavier has two open scholarships at this point, correct?

I can bitch because last year Steele was celebrated for bringing in guys who could supposedly shoot- from Low D1. Carter and Moore. The step was too big for them and both were disappointing. Now he jumps at a D2 and a low D1 again. Meanwhile, on the big school guys like O'Connell and Burton, Steele has empty hands...
But this is his "handpicked roster"...

[Masterofreality]

Please feel free to continue whining about Steele all you want, but if you think Burton didn't come to X because of Nate Johnson, you're living in your own world.

And you're living in your own world being happy with 38-29 and no NCAA for the last two years. (Hint: X wasn't making the field).

[AviatorX]

I can bitch because last year Steele was celebrated for bringing in guys who could supposedly shoot- from Low D1. Carter and Moore. The step was too big for them and both were disappointing. Now he jumps at a D2 and a low D1 again. Meanwhile, on the big school guys like O'Connell and Burton, Steele has empty hands...
But this is his "handpicked roster"...

Can you explain how Alex O'Connell would be a better addition than Nate Johnson?

Agreed on Burton, which is why Steele went after him hard. Unfortunately, the fit was better elsewhere (at a damn good program), which would likely have been the case whether or not Johnson and Griffin were added to Xavier's roster (see Paul Scruggs, KyKy Tandy and Dwon Odom).

[Muskie]

There's a lot of crying over spilled milk in this thread.

[Masterofreality]

Can you explain how Alex O'Connell would be a better addition than Nate Johnson?

Agreed on Burton, which is why Steele went after him hard. Unfortunately, the fit was better elsewhere (at a damn good program), which would likely have been the case whether or not Johnson and Griffin were added to Xavier's roster (see Paul Scruggs, KyKy Tandy and Dwon Odom).

Oh, I don't know. Duke vs Gardner Webb competition? A true 6:6 2/3 wing vs a somewhat redundant 6:3 guard, when we already have PG's not counting Scruggy?

[AviatorX]

Oh, I don't know. Duke vs Gardner Webb competition? A true 6:6 2/3 wing vs a somewhat redundant 6:3 guard, when we already have PG's not counting Scruggy?

Alex O'Connell is a minus defender who went 21-77 from 3 last season (lower percentage than Naji) and only got to the line 18 times. Oh yeah, and he's a sit one play one (which, although I agree the rule is going away, there's no guarantee it will be effective immediately).

Just to drive this home (because it's hilarious), O'Connell was actually worse from three last year than Naji, Q, Carter and Moore. I know that's hard to believe, but it's true.

There's definitely a case to be made he'll have a bounce back year, but much much easier to take that chance when you're laced with shooters like Creighton rather than bringing him in as a much needed shooter. What would you be posting on here next February if O'Connell landed at X and was laying bricks?

[xavierj]

Oh, I don't know. Duke vs Gardner Webb competition? A true 6:6 2/3 wing vs a somewhat redundant 6:3 guard, when we already have PG's not counting Scruggy?

Again, Johnson is a grad transfer that is nothing but a shooter and a defensive fill in. Xavier's starting 5 will be Scruggs, Tandy, Carter, Fremantle and probably Colby Jones. Then you have Odom, Johnson, Miles, Wilcher and maybe Griffin off the bench. No one really plays more than 7 or 8 guys any way. Xavier wants to bring in another three to four guys in the 2021 glass and they are involved with some really talented guys, which is fine by me. You don't have to want to get transfers every year to be competitive in my opinion.

Also, O'Connell is sitting out as he also isn't grad transfer. He even said he will sit out regardless of the ruling because that is what is best for him and Creighton. I also hear that the ruling will get approved but still mostly likely will be instituted for the 2021-2022 year due to all the other current issues going on.

[XU 87]

I can bitch because last year Steele was celebrated for bringing in guys who could supposedly shoot- from Low D1. Carter and Moore. The step was too big for them and both were disappointing. Now he jumps at a D2 and a low D1 again. Meanwhile, on the big school guys like O'Connell and Burton, Steele has empty hands...
But this is his "handpicked roster"...

Trust me, we get it that you bitch about Steele, and you bitch about him all the time on virtually every post. As for Burton, if you still belonged to the 247 site, you would know why Burton chose T. Tech and not X, and you wouldn't be posting your current "thoughts". T. Tech had things to offer him that Steele couldn't. But Steele didn't "choose" Johnson over Burton.

Finally, could you stop bitching about our transfers until after you actually see them play?

[xuphan]

Trust me, we get it that you bitch about Steele, and you bitch about him all the time on virtually every post. As for Burton, if you still belonged to the 247 site, you would know why Burton chose T. Tech and not X, and you wouldn't be posting your current "thoughts". T. Tech had things to offer him that Steele couldn't. But Steele didn't "choose" Johnson over Burton.

Finally, could you stop bitching about our transfers until after you actually see them play?

I agree. It will be interesting to look at the numbers at the end of next year to see if we got the best grad transfers over the other transfers we were in on.

[XUBison]

...Xavier's starting 5 will be Scruggs, Tandy, Carter, Fremantle and probably Colby Jones. Then you have Odom, Johnson, Miles, Wilcher and maybe Griffin off the bench...

Wow, this starting lineup /rotation really doesn’t get the juices flowing. Thank God Scruggs is on this list, or yikes.

[XU 87]

Wow, this starting lineup /rotation really doesn’t get the juices flowing. Thank God Scruggs is on this list, or yikes.

I think Tandy will be very much improved next year. He seems to have the talent. I think it really hurt him when he was out the first 6 weeks or so.

I like an Odom, Tandy, and Scruggs lineup.

[xavierj]

Wow, this starting lineup /rotation really doesn’t get the juices flowing. Thank God Scruggs is on this list, or yikes.

You are not a fan of Tandy and Fremantle? Both should be double figure scorers next year. They lost two guys. Who were you expecting to start? Were you expecting one of the three returning starters to get benched? To be honest, next years team on paper, is one of the most talented, highly rated groups Xavier has ever had. I think Odom will be really good, but not sure you want to put him at the one to start the year. Maybe let him ease into it like Tu. If you remember Dante Jackson started over Tu when he was a freshman. I also think Jones will be really good as well, good enough to start. Next year will a lot more fun to watch in my opinion.

[xudash]

You are not a fan of Tandy and Fremantle? Both should be double figure scorers next year. They lost two guys. Who were you expecting to start? Were you expecting one of the three returning starters to get benched? To be honest, next years team on paper, is one of the most talented, highly rated groups Xavier has ever had. I think Odom will be really good, but not sure you want to put him at the one to start the year. Maybe let him ease into it like Tu. If you remember Dante Jackson started over Tu when he was a freshman. I also think Jones will be really good as well, good enough to start. Next year will a lot more fun to watch in my opinion.

+1

[xu82]

You are not a fan of Tandy and Fremantle? Both should be double figure scorers next year. They lost two guys. Who were you expecting to start? Were you expecting one of the three returning starters to get benched? To be honest, next years team on paper, is one of the most talented, highly rated groups Xavier has ever had. I think Odom will be really good, but not sure you want to put him at the one to start the year. Maybe let him ease into it like Tu. If you remember Dante Jackson started over Tu when he was a freshman. I also think Jones will be really good as well, good enough to start. Next year will a lot more fun to watch in my opinion.

I love both Tandy and Freemantle, but I’m THRILLED to have Scruggs coming for the leadership (not to mention what he offers on the floor). As much as I love them, sophomores as your only leaders isn’t an ideal situation.

And YES, next year has to be more enjoyable!!!

[XUGRAD80]

I think that there are some here who don’t get it.....

They seem to think that the coaches sit back and hand pick who will be on the team based only on who they like.
They don’t seem to get that the other schools have scholarships to offer too.
They don’t seem to get that other schools have things to offer that make them unique too.
They seem to think that every young man in the country has Xavier as their dream school.
They don’t seem to grasp the concept that the players get to choose the school, and the better the player the more choices they get.

Fortunately, MOST of the people here seem to understand this and realize that, based on decades of history, isn’t likely to change anytime soon.

It’s not just a matter of what we, as fans, are willing to accept as the ceiling. Or what WE want. It’s just reality.

[bjf123]

And YES, next year has to be more enjoyable!!!

God, I hope so!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoMuskies]

And YES, next year has to be more enjoyable!!!

Pretty decent chance there's no season. That would be about a wash with last year in terms of enjoyment.

[xu82]

Pretty decent chance there's no season. That would be about a wash with last year in terms of enjoyment.

Glass half full..........it could not be LESS enjoyable either way. Play or not. That one hurt me. I’m excited to move forward.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Pretty decent chance there's no season. That would be about a wash with last year in terms of enjoyment.

I'd rather have it and have my hopes dashed then not have it and get no chance.

As much as I hate Xavier not being good and having down years I still go to every game I can and watch every game and get enjoyment out of most of them.

I fear you are correct though and there is a chance no season.

[xavierj]

I think that there are some here who don’t get it.....

They seem to think that the coaches sit back and hand pick who will be on the team based only on who they like.
They don’t seem to get that the other schools have scholarships to offer too.
They don’t seem to get that other schools have things to offer that make them unique too.
They seem to think that every young man in the country has Xavier as their dream school.
They don’t seem to grasp the concept that the players get to choose the school, and the better the player the more choices they get.

Fortunately, MOST of the people here seem to understand this and realize that, based on decades of history, isn’t likely to change anytime soon.

It’s not just a matter of what we, as fans, are willing to accept as the ceiling. Or what WE want. It’s just reality.

This is true and I would imagine most players look to see where they will get the best opportunity to play and also play the position they want. If a kid wants to play point guard for two years and he may have to sit next year, I am sure the coaches would say, we would love to have you but you probably will not be playing point guard at Xavier with who we have coming in.

[drudy23]

Pretty decent chance there's no season. That would be about a wash with last year in terms of enjoyment.

Decent chance? I don't know about that. Is there a chance, probably.

Perhaps with limited attendance. I can't see the whole season down the tubes. If it gets to that point, there's going to be too many athletic departments under water with little chance to recover. If you're not in top echelon of the power 5, you're screwed. If you don't have power 5 football, you literally have no chance.

[xudash]

Noticed a scroll on the news this evening that mentioned that the powers that be for college football fully intend to have a season this year.

I think the basketball season is fairly safe at this point. It may look a little different, crowd wise, but it should be safe.

[JTG]

Man the gloom and doom on this site is getting out of control. No football, no basketball. No this, no that. There should be a graduated back to work, and back to school starting May 1. Least affected places first, until most everyone is back working by Jun 15. If this goes into the Fall you're talking Great Depression II. We will have effectively used a nuclear bomb on our economy that will take years to recove from.

[whopper]

i am up ever day at 4am to watch business news and it is incredible the number of therapeutics and vaccines that are being developed all over the world. We need the economy up and running by Memorial Day at latest. I wear a mask, have hand sanitizer in car and have changed my ways and i think that we all can. Once season starts there will have been an election which may be the most contentious of our lives (and I remember Nixon/Humphrey in 8th grade) and we will have direction one way or other. Let's be optimistic and see if we can rebuild this economy fully by 2021 as I know so many hurting that are highly skilled hard working people (pilots, dentists, etc)

[sirthought]

Uh, ask Japan about getting life back to normal. They've had a new wave of cases and deaths in large enough numbers that they're shutting things down again. I had seen some man-on-the-street interview videos from Japan on YouTube a couple weeks ago. All the young adults thought they had nothing to worry about and weren't taking it seriously.

The issues in the U.S. are huge compared to Japan. This is going to go well into the fall, especially if they can't get testing up for the majority of people.

If we can get testing fulfilled like S. Korea, I think we'll manage things better.

Right now, I wouldn't count on football at all. Hoops I'm not so sure about either.

[XU 87]

There is another thread to discuss Corona virus. Can we continue to use that one?

[xuphan]

There is another thread to discuss Corona virus. Can we continue to use that one?

To get back on topic, Xavier is showing interest in Colin Castleton. PF/C who is transferring from Michigan. I believe he will sit one year and has two more years of eligibility left. Not sure how much interest Xavier has in him but he is a name to keep an eye on over the next several days.

[joe titan]

To get back on topic, Xavier is showing interest in Colin Castleton. PF/C who is transferring from Michigan. I believe he will sit one year and has two more years of eligibility left. Not sure how much interest Xavier has in him but he is a name to keep an eye on over the next several days.

You will hear "upside" & "potential" a lot with him. Martelli liked him so may be a tiny plus if Castlton looks @ XU.

[Lamont Sanford]

Looks like UC picked up a nice commit from Colgate's (the college not the toothpaste) best player. 6'10" F that scored 21 against them last year.

[xuphan]

Another name to keep an eye on is Jonah Antonio. Recently completed a virtual campus visit of Xavier. 40% three point shooter for UNLV last year.

[AviatorX]

Another name to keep an eye on is Jonah Antonio. Recently completed a virtual campus visit of Xavier. 40% three point shooter for UNLV last year.

Not with Nate Johnson in the fold.

[xavierj]

I think people are putting too much stock in transfers that transfer up, especially grad transfers. I saw something on twitter that says these guys who transfer up rarely make a big impact. Something like only two guys who transferred up last year cracked more than 12 PPG and the vast majority of the guys who transferred up saw their production cut in half from their previous school. So I wouldn't get giddy over expectations of grad transfers or most transfers for that matter.

[xavierj]

Not with Nate Johnson in the fold.

Yeah I can't see Xavier adding another shooting guard. The only thing they may add if someone fits the bill is a stretch 4. Xavier has plenty of guards and centers.

[xuphan]

Not with Nate Johnson in the fold.

This article was posted today saying Xavier is interested. Maybe it is not an update article then with its information.

https://stockrisers.com/2020/04/15/unlv-graduate-transfer-jonah-antonio-with-several-programs-in-the-mix-virtually-visits-xavier/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[D-West & PO-Z]

I think people are putting too much stock in transfers that transfer up, especially grad transfers. I saw something on twitter that says these guys who transfer up rarely make a big impact. Something like only two guys who transferred up last year cracked more than 12 PPG and the vast majority of the guys who transferred up saw their production cut in half from their previous school. So I wouldn't get giddy over expectations of grad transfers or most transfers for that matter.

I'm not disagreeing with your overall point but using 12 PPG as a marker for if they made a big impact or not doesnt make sense. That is a pretty good number of points. I think we all would agree Hankins had a pretty big impact for XU and he scored 10.6 PPG.

I think to see an impact from a guy like Johnson it wont be as much how many points he scored it will be does he knock down outside shots at a decent clip. Does he hit the shots he makes when given the opportunity, can he hit a big three when we really need it. Along with playing defense well enough to not be a liability.

[Muskie in dayton]

Yeah I can't see Xavier adding another shooting guard. The only thing they may add if someone fits the bill is a stretch 4. Xavier has plenty of guards and centers.
Doesn’t it seem X would benefit by adding a PG? Scruggs and Tandy are best off the ball, and the only other option is an incoming Freshman.

[GoMuskies]

Dick Vitale has come out against allowing all players to transfer without having to sit out. This has caused me to completely rethink my opposition to this rule....

[D-West & PO-Z]

Dick Vitale has come out against allowing all players to transfer without having to sit out. This has caused me to completely rethink my opposition to this rule....

Yeah, never want to catch yourself on the same side of a college basketball opinion as Dick Vitale.

[SM#24]

Doesn’t it seem X would benefit by adding a PG? Scruggs and Tandy are best off the ball, and the only other option is an incoming Freshman.

We are adding a PG, Odom.

[D-West & PO-Z]

We are adding a PG, Odom.

Yeah he mentioned Odom, that is the incoming freshman.

I do have some concerns about the PG spot. Putting Scruggs there takes what should be our best player next year out of the things he does best so I hope that isnt any real solution. KyKy could and should improve but I think he is and will continue to be better off the ball.

That is why I think Odom will end up starting at the 1 next year, if not for the entire year, for the majority of it. We know though it can take freshman some time tho to adjust. I think it would be beneficial to have another player who could fill in effectively at the PG spot but I get the overall guard spots are getting a little crowded. I just wish I had more faith in Scruggs or KyKy to play the PG effectively.

[BandAid]

Will the sit-out rule change affect in-season transfers? Can you transfer and play immediately in say, December?

[GoMuskies]

Will the sit-out rule change affect in-season transfers? Can you transfer and play immediately in say, December?

Ha, now that could get crazy.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I don't know the exact answer but my guess would be they would limit it to end of season. I think it would be a little crazy if they were able to transfer at end of 1st semester and play for another teams in the spring semester. I have to think that is not how it will be approved.

[xavierj]

Doesn’t it seem X would benefit by adding a PG? Scruggs and Tandy are best off the ball, and the only other option is an incoming Freshman.

KyKy also wants to play point and you only have some many minutes. He is maybe 6’0” and has pro aspirations and PG is his best chance. Also, Paul wants to get it the NBA and he knows he needs some time playing the point. So to add another PG, someone won’t be happy. No teams really have more than one or maybe two true point guards. I mean how many Does Nova or Duke have every year? One with other guys who can help. Michigan had two last year and they are bringing in another this year so the guy that was a sophomore is transferring even though the other PG last year is graduating. I can’t recall another Xavier team that had more than one true point guard. I mean we had two with Sumner and Goodin, but they knew Ed wasn’t staying 4 years. You always have guys that can help but next year they don’t need a 4th guy who can play point. Xavier needs stretch 4’s in my opinion.

[D-West & PO-Z]

KyKy also wants to play point and you only have some many minutes. He is maybe 6’0” and has pro aspirations and PG is his best chance. Also, Paul wants to get it the NBA and he knows he needs some time playing the point. So to add another PG, someone won’t be happy. No teams really have more than one or maybe two true point guards. I mean how many Does Nova or Duke have every year? One with other guys who can help. Michigan had two last year and they are bringing in another this year so the guy that was a sophomore is transferring even though the other PG last year is graduating. I can’t recall another Xavier team that had more than one true point guard. I mean we had two with Sumner and Goodin, but they knew Ed wasn’t staying 4 years. You always have guys that can help but next year they don’t need a 4th guy who can play point. Xavier needs stretch 4’s in my opinion.

Yeah I totally get the guard spots getting a little crowded and KyKy and Scruggs wanting to probably play some PG. We have to really hope the following though if we want to have a successful season:

1. Odom is the real deal and gets into a groove at PG relatively quickly.
2. Odom doesnt have any injuries.
3. KyKy really improves his passing/turnovers/command of the offense.

I really hope Scruggs doesnt have to play too much PG because I really think he can be an all league type player for us off the ball.

[xavierj]

Yeah I totally get the guard spots getting a little crowded and KyKy and Scruggs wanting to probably play some PG. We have to really hope the following though if we want to have a successful season:

1. Odom is the real deal and gets into a groove at PG relatively quickly.
2. Odom doesnt have any injuries.
3. KyKy really improves his passing/turnovers/command of the offense.

I really hope Scruggs doesnt have to play too much PG because I really think he can be an all league type player for us off the ball.

Paul, if he can stay out of foul trouble will be playing 35 minutes a game. 10 minutes of point guard play for him won't be a bad thing if needed. Hopefully Odom is really good and plays PG for 25 to 30 minutes a game. Maybe its best early on to just throw him to the wolves.

[Muskie]

Yeah I totally get the guard spots getting a little crowded and KyKy and Scruggs wanting to probably play some PG. We have to really hope the following though if we want to have a successful season:

1. Odom is the real deal and gets into a groove at PG relatively quickly.
2. Odom doesnt have any injuries.
3. KyKy really improves his passing/turnovers/command of the offense.

I really hope Scruggs doesnt have to play too much PG because I really think he can be an all league type player for us off the ball.

Odom has now officially passed the Churchill Odia level of klout and optimism before ever dribbling a basketball for X.

[BandAid]

Odom has now officially passed the Churchill Odia level of klout and optimism before ever dribbling a basketball for X.

More than Kenny Frease?

Odia was just before my time at X. Would y’all say he’s been the most-hyped recruit from the fansbase’s perspective?

[xavierj]

Odom has now officially passed the Churchill Odia level of klout and optimism before ever dribbling a basketball for X.

Yes but its a different age. Coaches have so many more resources at their finger tips than they did when Odia was coming to X. I mean anyone that watches his clips can see he has a ton of potential. Built like a rock and super athletic. If he develops into a shooter, he probably won't be at X long. Reminds me of Kyle Lowry although Odom has a stronger build, both rated similar. Not saying he will be that, but the potential is there. Lowry only shot 22% from three as a freshman, but 44% as a sophomore, which is a crazy jump. Nova can make average shooters very good somehow.

[xavierj]

More than Kenny Frease?

Odia was just before my time at X. Would y’all say he’s been the most-hyped recruit from the fansbase’s perspective?

Probably. I think up to that point, Xavier wasn't getting many top 100 guys and this guy was a 6'6" guy who could play point and rated like 80th in the country. Anyone would be excited about that. Not sure why that guy couldn't make it work. He had a lot of tools.

[IM4X]

You always have guys that can help but next year they don’t need a 4th guy who can play point. Xavier needs stretch 4’s in my opinion.

We certainly could use another big. I like the idea of picking up a stretch 4 for in the class of ‘21. If we are talking about an immediately eligible transfer though, I think the bigger need is a more traditional power forward who is a very good rebounder and rim protector. We already have Freemantle and Carter who will be taking their share of outside shots next year. We don’t want to have a bunch of stretch bigs on the floor who struggle to defend in the paint and average 4 or 5 rebounds a game. We need to make up for the rebound production lost due to the graduation of Jones- and neither Freemantle nor Carter are going to rebound or defend inside at that level.

Now that it appears we will have better 3 point shooting guards, we will need another ”close to the basket” type of player (like Jones), preferably with a little more height. maybe Miles and Ramsey will develop into those players, but it would help the team to add one proven beast in the paint for next season. A big in the same vein as Hankins. Farr. Reynolds. Stainbrook, O’Mara... another PF or C who excels inside and will stay home, allowing players like Freemantle and Carter to more freely wonder out to take their 3s and midrange shots - knowing someone will be in position to rebound if they miss.

[IM4X]

Would y’all say he’s been the most-hyped recruit from the fansbase’s perspective?

Possibly.

Wells, Semaj and Trevon were all very hyped too- deservingly so.

[SM#24]

Paul, if he can stay out of foul trouble will be playing 35 minutes a game. 10 minutes of point guard play for him won't be a bad thing if needed. Hopefully Odom is really good and plays PG for 25 to 30 minutes a game. Maybe its best early on to just throw him to the wolves.

That's what buy games are for. I've seen enough video of Odom (and it's not a lot) to think he should be the Day 1 starting PG. If we can get 85 minutes a game out of Scruggs, Tandy & Odom at the 1 & 2 and times with all three on the court, I think we'll be just fine.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Odom has now officially passed the Churchill Odia level of klout and optimism before ever dribbling a basketball for X.

I dont say this about Odom because I know he is going to be amazing, I say it more in hopes that he is because I dont have faith in X being real effective offensively with Scruggs or KyKy running the point. I could be wrong but they would both have to have significant improvements in that spot.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Possibly.

Wells, Semaj and Trevon were all very hyped too- deservingly so.

Lloyd Price remains to this day one of our highest rated recruits ever right?

[MHettel]

Dick Vitale has come out against allowing all players to transfer without having to sit out. This has caused me to completely rethink my opposition to this rule....

what was his reasoning?

[XU 87]

Lloyd Price remains to this day one of our highest rated recruits ever right?

I think one service had him rated at 35. I think one service had Churchill Odia in the top 20.

[D-West & PO-Z]

what was his reasoning?

Probably something to do with it not being fair to Rick Pitino.

Seems like 90% if his tweets are how Pitino got a raw deal. So I am sure he is doing Pitinos bidding again. Probably bc Pitino is now at a small school Vitale is all against it.

[xavierj]

I dont say this about Odom because I know he is going to be amazing, I say it more in hopes that he is because I dont have faith in X being real effective offensively with Scruggs or KyKy running the point. I could be wrong but they would both have to have significant improvements in that spot.

I think by having capable shooters around him, Paul would become a better point guard. Other than KyKy there was really no one to kick it out to for a three for most of last year. Free started to hit a few late but Paul also was hurt the last three games. In my opinion with Naji on the court and Ty clogging the middle, it made it tough for anyone to play PG. I mean Q struggled but he looked much better when the middle wasn't clogged because you had to respect Tre, JP and Kaiser when they were on the floor with him. I don't think its a coincidence that Q no longer was a serviceable PG after Tre, JP and Kaiser were gone.

[sirthought]

UC got that point guard from Michigan. Pretty big get. Really surprised he left Michigan. UC will have some true speed in their backcourt with him and the Saunders kid.

[xavierj]

UC got that point guard from Michigan. Pretty big get. Really surprised he left Michigan. UC will have some true speed in their backcourt with him and the Saunders kid.

I don't know, time will tell I guess. It didn't seem like a ton of schools really pushed on him and that might mean there are some red flags. I know Marquette was involved but it doesn't seem that they really pushed as they recruit his AAU team hard and had like three of his AAU teammates already on the roster and then Marquette got DJ Carton from Ohio State to commit. So essentially it was UC, Iowa State and Missouri that really wanted him but teams like Seton Hall, who was going after everyone and needs a PG, didn't try to get involved. People around Cincinnati though feel they are now final 4 contenders...

[IM4X]

Lloyd Price remains to this day one of our highest rated recruits ever right?

Lloyd was a good one too. I can’t remember or find what he was rated.

Semaj was 31st in the nation and Trevon was rated 34th (by Rivals).

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2012/semaj-christon-38073

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2014/trevon-bluiett-1728

Dez was rated as 48th best in his class (by ESPN).

[xavierj]

Lloyd was a good one too. I can’t remember or find what he was rated.

Semaj was 31st in the nation and Trevon was rated 34th (by Rivals).

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2012/semaj-christon-38073

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/2014/trevon-bluiett-1728

Dez was rated as 48th best in his class (by ESPN).

Next year Xavier will have 4 guys rated in the top 100 according to Scout. Paul 34th, Odom 49th, KyKy 89th and Wilcher 94th. Some think Colby who is rated 118 might have the biggest impact next year of all the new guys.

[GoMuskies]

what was his reasoning?

I didn't read the article. Just the headline. I'm an American after all! :)

[sirthought]

I don't know, time will tell I guess. It didn't seem like a ton of schools really pushed on him and that might mean there are some red flags. I know Marquette was involved but it doesn't seem that they really pushed as they recruit his AAU team hard and had like three of his AAU teammates already on the roster and then Marquette got DJ Carton from Ohio State to commit. So essentially it was UC, Iowa State and Missouri that really wanted him but teams like Seton Hall, who was going after everyone and needs a PG, didn't try to get involved. People around Cincinnati though feel they are now final 4 contenders...

Good job trying to diminish him. LOL

Carton was considered the #2 transfer prospect for PG. DeJulius, number 21, didn't even announce he was leaving until late, so only so many programs are going to have a fit. But Michigan expected him to be their starter next season. This was a surprise. He was a four star prospect. No one knows what he'll mean for them yet, but signs point to him being a scorer and someone who will help Brannen's run style in a way they couldn't do last season with injured Cumberland doing most of the ball handling. If anything they got two transfers this week with a lot of experience to help a young team. Returning PG is a soph who played more off the ball, and then two incoming freshmen who won't be ready to start for a couple years. All things considered for the time of year, it's a pretty big get.

[Muskie in dayton]

More than Kenny Frease?

Odia was just before my time at X. Would y’all say he’s been the most-hyped recruit from the fansbase’s perspective?
The most overhyped for sure. Followed closely by Erik Edwards.

[xavierj]

Good job trying to diminish him. LOL

Carton was considered the #2 transfer prospect for PG. DeJulius, number 21, didn't even announce he was leaving until late, so only so many programs are going to have a fit. But Michigan expected him to be their starter next season. This was a surprise. He was a four star prospect. No one knows what he'll mean for them yet, but signs point to him being a scorer and someone who will help Brannen's run style in a way they couldn't do last season with injured Cumberland doing most of the ball handling. If anything they got two transfers this week with a lot of experience to help a young team. Returning PG is a soph who played more off the ball, and then two incoming freshmen who won't be ready to start for a couple years. All things considered for the time of year, it's a pretty big get.

It is a pretty good pickup for a program like UC, no doubt. If Xavier picked up a guy who averaged 7 pts a game from any big school we probably wouldn't be doing back flips like the program was just saved and we are now contenders to win it all. I have friends that are UC fans and they think that way. Well they think that way with every recruit they get and the guys that go somewhere else its because the coaches didn't want them.

[Muskie in dayton]

Yeah I totally get the guard spots getting a little crowded and KyKy and Scruggs wanting to probably play some PG. We have to really hope the following though if we want to have a successful season:

1. Odom is the real deal and gets into a groove at PG relatively quickly.
2. Odom doesnt have any injuries.
3. KyKy really improves his passing/turnovers/command of the offense.

I really hope Scruggs doesnt have to play too much PG because I really think he can be an all league type player for us off the ball.

If any one of those “ifs” come to fruition, we are hurting at the most critical position. I don’t think we need the caliber of transfer who would expect significant minutes, but just good insurance policy to keep the wheels from falling off if something doesn’t go as hoped. We are a much better team with Scruggs and Tandy playing off the ball.

[D-West & PO-Z]

If any one of those “ifs” come to fruition, we are hurting at the most critical position. I don’t think we need the caliber of transfer who would expect significant minutes, but just good insurance policy to keep the wheels from falling off if something doesn’t go as hoped. We are a much better team with Scruggs and Tandy playing off the ball.

Yeah I generally agree.

[Murph85]

Yeah I generally agree.

One of the other items that could result in a better season than we expect is the fact that C Jones can shoot. He took very few 3's during his senior season but that was due to circumstances. They simply din not have a need for him to. He still shot 45 %

His shot is said to be very legit. Legit to the point where if his stats included a significant sample he may have been rated about 40 positions higher. Said to have made 65 of 100 in a controlled drill. By Steele.

[MADXSTER]

The most overhyped for sure. Followed closely by Erik Edwards.

Well he was Delaware's POY so there's that.

[Mrs. Garrett]

Well he was Delaware's POY so there's that.

We used to have quite the pipeline to the state of Delaware in the early to mid 90's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK_FiRm6ZK8

[MHettel]

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/29118140/ncaa-board-does-not-recommend-changes-transfer-waiver-process

hmm.

[XUGRAD80]

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/29118140/ncaa-board-does-not-recommend-changes-transfer-waiver-process

hmm.

“At this time” is maybe the key part of this statement. My prediction is that it’s still going to happen, but it’s going to be a year away. I expect it will go into effect during the 2021-22 academic year.

[xukeith]

If any one of those “ifs” come to fruition, we are hurting at the most critical position. I don’t think we need the caliber of transfer who would expect significant minutes, but just good insurance policy to keep the wheels from falling off if something doesn’t go as hoped. We are a much better team with Scruggs and Tandy playing off the ball.

Which guard will play most minutes at pg? Frosh Odom is our only hope? Rolling the dice?

[xuphan]

Xavier makes final five for Nike

http://https://247sports.com/college/basketball/recruiting/Article/Nike-Sibande-transfer-portal-Arkansas-Alabama-Georgia-Georgetown-Xavier-146817734/

[Masterofreality]

Well he was Delaware's POY so there's that.

True History here. Odia was John Groce's (Travis Steele's Brother) selection and he pushed Odia to Matta. Sean Miller had Kyle Lowry locked up to deliver and he was pushing Lowry to Matta. Matta took Groce's guy. Sheesh!


Who's been the more successful Head Coach, Groce or Miller? I'll hang up and listen.....

By the way. Erik Edwards played in the McDonalds All America game.

[xavierj]

True History here. Odia was John Groce's (Travis Steele's Brother) selection and he pushed Odia to Matta. Sean Miller had Kyle Lowry locked up to deliver and he was pushing Lowry to Matta. Matta took Groce's guy. Sheesh!


Who's been the more successful Head Coach, Groce or Miller? I'll hang up and listen.....

By the way. Erik Edwards played in the McDonalds All America game.

Miller by far. Great evaluator of talent. Wish he would have stayed and that next year we would have had both D Brown and Jordan Crawford. That would have been nice. Travis Steele pushed Trevon Bluiett to Xavier. Chris Mack should donate part of his salary for that one, to Travis, since landing him basically got him the Louisville job. Had Trevon stayed with UCLA, Chris might still be at X.

[Xavier]

I’m not sure where the narrative came from that Brown would’ve stayed. I remember watching summer league where Katz interviewed brown, then after the interview Katz said Brown told him he was leaving for the NBA regardless of Miller. Did Brown mention somewhere else he would’ve stayed? I’ve seen that a couple times here the past few weeks so he must have and I didn’t see that. I remember that Katz interview though.

[xudash]

Right or wrong, some of the recent posts here have made me think about the hit and miss nature of bringing talent into a program.

Simple question: is Mark Fee simply a genius? I perceive he hits and hits well at a very high-level. Thoughts?

[paulxu]

Whose Mark Fee?

(this shelter in place is getting to me)

[Xville]

Right or wrong, some of the recent posts here have made me think about the hit and miss nature of bringing talent into a program.

Simple question: is Mark Fee simply a genius? I perceive he hits and hits well at a very high-level. Thoughts?

I think it's a combination of things:

1.) Have done a tremendous job recruiting internationally
2.) Way less competition than in the middle of the country
3.) Stability

[D-West & PO-Z]

I’m not sure where the narrative came from that Brown would’ve stayed. I remember watching summer league where Katz interviewed brown, then after the interview Katz said Brown told him he was leaving for the NBA regardless of Miller. Did Brown mention somewhere else he would’ve stayed? I’ve seen that a couple times here the past few weeks so he must have and I didn’t see that. I remember that Katz interview though.

Not saying I know one way or the other but I find it hard to imagine he would have said anything other than that in the interview with Katz. It does nothing for Brown to be honest and say "yeah if Coach Miller came back, I would have been back".

Though maybe he would not have, who knows, but I get if you are borderline, having your coach leave would push you over the top to leave.

[MHettel]

I think it's a combination of things:

1.) Have done a tremendous job recruiting internationally
2.) Way less competition than in the middle of the country
3.) Stability

He takes low risk, high reward guys. He never compromises when it comes to program "fit." Every guy on Gonzaga fits their system. Look at many of the guys that have come through XU. Jordan Crawford....top notch talent....knucklehead. Trevon....Top level scorer....low level defender. Mark Lyons...dynamic scorer....hothead. Jalen Reynolds....paint beast...knucklehead.

We HAVE to accept the shortcomings of these guys in order to get our hands on the talent. Gonzaga just simply doesn't do that.

[JTG]

I agree with MH. The Zags take a certain type player, much like Butler. Gonzaga has kind of a choirboy reputation like Butler. But Gonzaga's choirboys are much more talented.

[GoMuskies]

So WF big man Olivier Sarr is transferring to Kentucky. The most important lesson learned in this, of course, is that Xavier lost to a shitty, 13-18 Wake Forest team playing without their best player?!? WTF? I guess Sarr was hurt when we played them?

[AviatorX]

I mean it's as simple as Gonzaga is a more prestigious program that recruits better players than Xavier. Not really controversial. Mark Few is a super unique guy in a super unique situation, and Gonzaga is lucky to have him.

I don't think they really recruit a "type", other than good players.

[Xavier]

Agreed. The program is in much better shape. They do seem to have a unique recruiting trail for overseas players. I think Xaviers best case scenario is turning into Gonzaga.

[xudash]

I think it's a combination of things:

1.) Have done a tremendous job recruiting internationally
2.) Way less competition than in the middle of the country
3.) Stability

IMHO, you hit the nail on the head, but especially with response #3.

And I don't believe Gonzaga is a more prestigious program than Xavier. If you believe that because they broke through (against us) to the F4, then I get that, but that's one element, albeit a big one, of a program's overall resume.

Is Gonzaga in a more prestigious conference than Xavier's conference? Uhm, not even close. Does Gonzaga have nicer facilities than Xavier? Not even close. They have ample media exposure, but it still doesn't compare to that of Xavier, and we make a hell of a lot more money from our media deal than Gonzaga makes from theirs.

What I'm driving to here is Xville's response #3. STABILITY. Gonzaga has been blessed with a guy that is holistic about his life: money, location, lifestyle wants and needs. Gonzaga, Spokane, and that region of Washington has given and continues to give this guy what he wants, and he isn't simply chasing money or the biggest job.

Point #2 kicks in here, because for years he has primarily been up against Arizona, UCLA and a couple others, but spread all over hell and back, when it comes to recruiting.

From there, #1 becomes an interesting dynamic.

Mark Few is 57 years old and makes $1.8 million per year. The PERCEPTION with this guy now is that he isn't going anywhere else and that he is still young (enough) and that he does win most of the time. If you prefer a WCC schedule on your way to the NCAAT virtually every year, at this point, and you don't mind a modern high school gym with a thyroid condition, then Gonzaga is a damn fine choice to make for your college years. STABILITY is like building a pipeline that strengthens overtime, that doesn't break, and that increasingly fills with quality recruits each passing year.

Xavier has been incredible when it comes to replacing coaches, but that has always come with a price. Perceptions of being a stepping stone - - "will this guy be here past my freshman, soph, etc. year"? We know Travis can recruit. We know his wife is from Cincinnati and comes from, let's say a well entrenched family. He is young. I'll put it this way, if his coaching next year and beyond is such that MOR has a big, fat smile on his face, then we are in for some good years the likes of which even we've never seen.

[GoMuskies]

Gonzaga is definitely more prestigious than Xavier now. The last few years have guaranteed that (and the way they have absolutely manhandled us three of the four times we've played certainly hasn't helped things). But there's no reason that has to last forever.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I mean it's as simple as Gonzaga is a more prestigious program that recruits better players than Xavier. Not really controversial. Mark Few is a super unique guy in a super unique situation, and Gonzaga is lucky to have him.

I don't think they really recruit a "type", other than good players.

Agreed.

The idea that Gonzaga doesn't have any "knuckleheads" is a pure guess unless you follow the program as closely as you do X to know their players. No one who doesnt follow X would think some people consider Jalen a "knucklehead" or Lyons was a "pain".

They just recruit at a higher level. They also do recruit really well internationally.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Gonzaga is definitely more prestigious than Xavier now. The last few years have guaranteed that (and the way they have absolutely manhandled us three of the four times we've played certainly hasn't helped things). But there's no reason that has to last forever.

Yeah 5 years ago I wouldn't have agreed but a Final 4 is giant for their argument against us and they have continued to be a top 10-15 team in that time annually.

[GoMuskies]

Adam Morrison was a huge knucklehead. Granted, that was a completely different era of Gonzaga basketball.

[MHettel]

Adam Morrison was a huge knucklehead. Granted, that was a completely different era of Gonzaga basketball.

I mean knucklehead that sometimes hurts the team on the court. Guys losing their cool, or hogging shots, or taking plays off.

Morrison was a strange dude. But he didn't take it to the court.

[AviatorX]

I mean knucklehead that sometimes hurts the team on the court. Guys losing their cool, or hogging shots, or taking plays off.

Morrison was a strange dude. But he didn't take it to the court.

He famously held it together in the Sweet 16 against UCLA.

[D-West & PO-Z]

He famously held it together in the Sweet 16 against UCLA.

Yeah that’s the most famous one. I remember several times Morrison lost his cool on the court.

[Xavier]

Yeah 5 years ago I wouldn't have agreed but a Final 4 is giant for their argument against us and they have continued to be a top 10-15 team in that time annually.

Yep. But it is more than the final 4- they are expected to be a top 3 seed every year. Multiple 1 seeds, they have gone into the season as one of the top favorites to win the NC. And as you said they are almost always in the top 10-15. They are seen as the best program in the West right now.

Recency bias obviously but I don't really think we are close to Gonzaga.

[paulxu]

Just for the heck of it, I looked at last year's Gonzaga roster.
6 International
4 Wash/Oregon
3 Texas
1 St Louis
That's a fairly focused recruiting effort inside the US.
3 of their top 6 scorers were international players.

[XUMIOH12]

Just for the heck of it, I looked at last year's Gonzaga roster.
6 International
4 Wash/Oregon
3 Texas
1 St Louis
That's a fairly focused recruiting effort inside the US.
3 of their top 6 scorers were international players.

For a college team i'd say that is a pretty focused recruiting effort outside the US.

Few has always been able to get good international players and that is a huge part of their team just about every year.

[AviatorX]

It also doesn't hurt that for basically every top transfer looking to go "closer to home" west of the Mississippi, you can pencil in Gonzaga and Arizona in the final 5.

[paulxu]

Creighton deciding to getting into the Gonzaga program:


Top international basketball prospect Rati Andronikashvili has committed to Creighton, he told ESPN on Thursday.

I remember Mack almost got that guy from Greece (?) to come.

[xu82]

Creighton deciding to getting into the Gonzaga program:



I remember Mack almost got that guy from Greece (?) to come.

Since he went elsewhere, I wouldn’t have wanted to have to spell that name, anyway!

[D-West & PO-Z]

Creighton deciding to getting into the Gonzaga program:



I remember Mack almost got that guy from Greece (?) to come.

Rick Majerus had success with this when he was at SLU. He had two very good big men who could shoot from New Zealand and Australia when he got SLU to a top 10 team.

[Final4]

We know Travis can recruit. We know his wife is from Cincinnati and comes from, let's say a well entrenched family. He is young. I'll put it this way, if his coaching next year and beyond is such that MOR has a big, fat smile on his face, then we are in for some good years the likes of which even we've never seen.

This is where I'm at as well regarding Travis. Could we be Zaga or Nova with their coaching stability? I thought we were there with Mack........alum and Cincinnati native. However I think his wife's desire to move back home was a major factor is his decision to take the Lville job. I'm hoping Travis was the right hire because I could see him retiring from this job.

[IM4X]

This is where I'm at as well regarding Travis. Could we be Zaga or Nova with their coaching stability? I thought we were there with Mack........alum and Cincinnati native. However I think his wife's desire to move back home was a major factor is his decision to take the Lville job. I'm hoping Travis was the right hire because I could see him retiring from this job.

Almost as big of a factor as getting a $4 million a year contract for seven years and getting to prove to your father and siblings that you are able to coach for a team that your family has always held in such high esteem since his childhood.

It’s just a bit disheartening to see him show a lack of integrity and respect. While coaching at X, he stated that the BE was the best conference in the country and his dream job. He conveniently changed his tune as soon as he landed the Louisville gig. Louisville was now the dream job and the ACC was”by far“ the best conference in the country. He also disrespected X and even his former players by saying he couldn’t get the recruits he really wanted and need to get to a final four because he was at X. Not only was that a lie, it was a selfish way to try to put himself on a pedestal, while making everyone else from
his past seem inferior. Not classy at all. Take the job - but don’t show how insecure you really are by blaming everyone else for your miserable failure when you were unable to make a final 4 with an absolute dream team roster you just had at X.

Yep, Mack knew he failed X in his final year. He knew that if he had stayed, there was a good chance his next team the following season would not even have made the dance (just as Steele didn’t). He could see how fans might get a little restless and continue to bring up what a disappointment the previous year’s 1 seed team was in the tournament. His head coaching stock would have plummeted. No longer would he be seen as someone on the rise. Someone helped him see this unfavorable situation.

Someone also likely pointed out to him that this new opportunity at this specific university at this exact time probably happened for a reason. It was fate. The head coaching job opens up at a school you loved as a kid, in a town where your wife grew up, where they’re willing to pay you much more money than you are currently making and it will likely be easier for you to win more games with the players you will inherit during your first year their than the players who will be coming back to play at your current job. It all adds up to the kind of opportunity that makes too much sense for a guy like him to pass up.

The only reason to stay at X is because you know you will be happier at X than any other place- You feel Cincinnati is your home and you know you want to stay home... and X is your family and you want to stay with your family for life (like Few at Gonzaga or Wright at Nova).

It’s good he moved on (for him and for us). It’s just too bad he was incapable of showing a little more class in some of his public remarks after he departed.

[JTG]

I've said before on other posts, that I was always a little uneasy with Mack as coach. He just struck me as a dbag. A guy that if he was coaching against your team, you'd think , "this guy's seems like a prick. But he was our prick, and we were winning. I was not mad that he left, but I was furious that he f*cked us over in the process. What if we had gone to the F4, and/or won it all. Then he would have really looked like an ass leaving. I think he sabotaged that last team, and I hope he never wins shit the rest of his career.

[Backyard Champ]

How did he F us over in the process?

Don’t feel that way at all. I want him to succeed, but as always, I want Xavier to reach further rounds in the tournament before he does.

[JTG]

How did he F us over in the process?

.
By having a foot out the door, from before the BE tournament on. Actually most of that year. It's why we couldn't sign any recruits. And the team knew he had sealed the deal with UL at the BE tournament. Had he just left, Steele may have taken that team to the F4.

[xufan2020]

By having a foot out the door, from before the BE tournament on. Actually most of that year. It's why we couldn't sign any recruits. And the team knew he had sealed the deal with UL at the BE tournament. Had he just left, Steele may have taken that team to the F4.
Yeah I’m sure when X went up 12 on fsu with 8 minutes to go, Mack just purposely sabatoged everything.. get real

[Xavier]

Mack had one foot out the door most of the season and it resulted in the best regular season in Xavier history....duh

[JTG]

I think he's an asshole. Does that work for ya ?

[xavierj]

Mack had one foot out the door most of the season and it resulted in the best regular season in Xavier history....duh

Why was that season so great? Who did they beat? I know they won the Big East, but lost to Nova twice. I don’t think they beat one team that made it out of the first weekend of the NCAA tourney. Wisconsin had a losing record and Baylor was an NIT team. To have a number 1 seed, with that roster, and blow the 2nd game of the tourney was extremely disappointing. That season was really overrated as far as how it played out. Way too much talent not to, one beat Nova at least once and two get to at least the elite 8. When your best win is UC, how can that be the best Xavier season ever? And to top it off, your home grown coach says see you later and leaves you with zero recruits. We love ya Chris.

[Backyard Champ]

How was it the best regular season ever?

Followed up with:
We won the Big East, and it was our only 1 seed we’ve ever had. Answered his own question. Maybe you missed the regular season part? It didn’t end up how we wanted, but getting a 1 seed and winning the Big East has to make the regular season one of the tops we’ve ever had.

[Xavier]

I’d say getting the only 1 seed in Xavier history makes it the best regular season. Pretty simple. If that’s not enough (....?) then winning the league title
in the best conference Xavier has been apart of should also help.

[xavierj]

How was it the best regular season ever?

Followed up with:
We won the Big East, and it was our only 1 seed we’ve ever had. Answered his own question. Maybe you missed the regular season part? It didn’t end up how we wanted, but getting a 1 seed and winning the Big East has to make the regular season one of the tops we’ve ever had.

Well they showed they shouldn’t have been a 1 seed. Again the season was not that great. Look back at it and tell me where the huge wins came from. UC. But yay they got a 1 seed....

[xufan2020]

Well they showed they shouldn’t have been a 1 seed. Again the season was not that great. Look back at it and tell me where the huge wins came from. UC. But yay they got a 1 seed....
They got the seed they deserved, beat Butler x2, Creighton x2, Seton Hall x2, and as you mentioned a great UC team. Wow yeah how disappointing we didn’t have the talent to measure up to Nova’s 5 legit NBA players.
Everyone was disappointed in with the outcome of the tournament, but that’s how March is sometimes.

[whopper]

on my rowing machine I put on 1 hour summaries of 2018 from Foxsports on youtube and work out to them. I remember our margin of victory was by far the lowest of the 1 seeds and someone pointed out that the ball always bounced our way that year during the season and probably true. Still a great college team and one to be proud of.

[AviatorX]

They got the seed they deserved, beat Butler x2, Creighton x2, Seton Hall x2, and as you mentioned a great UC team. Wow yeah how disappointing we didn’t have the talent to measure up to Nova’s 5 legit NBA players.
Everyone was disappointed in with the outcome of the tournament, but that’s how March is sometimes.

I know Nova swept X but the teams also both played a double round robin in the Big East and Xavier had a better record. Unless you want to measure conference titles on something other than record (which is especially dumb when everyone plays the same schedule), that’s what we call an outright conference title no matter how you slice it.

Oh yeah, and as xufan2020 rightly flags here, that Nova team was one of the best college teams of the past decade, maybe the best offensive team ever. The season they had (and they were quite obviously a much better team than X, and everyone else in the country) has nothing to do with Xavier’s success.

It’s pretty insane to minimize a 1 seed. That is literally the pinnacle of regular season success, isn’t it? Xavier could play another 100 seasons of basketball before getting another 1 seed. That was a big deal.

[xavierj]

I know Nova swept X but the teams also both played a double round robin in the Big East and Xavier had a better record. Unless you want to measure conference titles on something other than record (which is especially dumb when everyone plays the same schedule), that’s what we call an outright conference title no matter how you slice it.

Oh yeah, and as xufan2020 rightly flags here, that Nova team was one of the best college teams of the past decade, maybe the best offensive team ever. The season they had (and they were quite obviously a much better team than X, and everyone else in the country) has nothing to do with Xavier’s success.

It’s pretty insane to minimize a 1 seed. That is literally the pinnacle of regular season success, isn’t it? Xavier could play another 100 seasons of basketball before getting another 1 seed. That was a big deal.

Not minimizing a number 1 seed, but in the history of the tourney, only 19 teams with a number 1 seed failed to make the sweet 16. And I hope it’s not 100 more years. Usually if you win the Big East, you will be a number 1 seed. When Xavier was a number 1 seed, so was Villanova.

[paulxu]

When Xavier was a number 1 seed, so was Villanova.

Are you saying the Requiem for the Big East was premature?

[D-West & PO-Z]

Why was that season so great? .

Uhhhhh.....we got our first 1 seed ever. Is this a real question? I get the ending sucked but the regular season was amazing and we got a freaking 1 seed. I get we didnt beat Nova but we got a freaking 1 seed!

:facepalm:

[D-West & PO-Z]

Not minimizing a number 1 seed

Yes, you absolutely are minimizing a 1 seed. What else is "what was so great about that season? we lost to nova twice. who did we beat?" doing other than minimizing the 1 seed?

[Lamont Sanford]

Purdue's Nojel Eastern entered the transfer portal this week. That be a helluva get. I know X was one of his five choices before (incorrectly) choosing the Boilermakers.

[xavierj]

Purdue's Nojel Eastern entered the transfer portal this week. That be a helluva get. I know X was one of his five choices before (incorrectly) choosing the Boilermakers.

I’m not sure he would be a good get. In three years at Purdue he has averaged 5 points a game, while shooting 18% from 3 and 55% from the line. A lot of Xavier fans would say he needs to practice more free throws when he is tired.

[AviatorX]

Purdue's Nojel Eastern entered the transfer portal this week. That be a helluva get. I know X was one of his five choices before (incorrectly) choosing the Boilermakers.

This would be an easy pass for me. Complete non-shooter with some family baggage/annoyance (mom is a prolific message board poster, so could be funny to see her go head to head with MOR on second thought). Doesn't strike me as a guy looking to be a role player.

[xavierj]

This guy might be an option if he doesn’t stay in the draft. Probably will transfer if not.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/elijah-olaniyi-1.html

[XUMIOH12]

This would be an easy pass for me. Complete non-shooter with some family baggage/annoyance (mom is a prolific message board poster, so could be funny to see her go head to head with MOR on second thought). Doesn't strike me as a guy looking to be a role player.

yeah he is an excellent defender but is a total liability on offense

[Mrs. Garrett]

Purdue's Nojel Eastern entered the transfer portal this week. That be a helluva get. I know X was one of his five choices before (incorrectly) choosing the Boilermakers.

He really fits the mold of a kid who transfers to DePaul. Over-hyped high school kid leaves the city for greener pastures. Green pastures don't pan out. Kid comes home to DePaul where he can score more on a shitty team (see Charlie Moore).

[MHettel]

yeah he is an excellent defender but is a total liability on offense

So kind of like a Quentin Goodin that can play defense?

[XU 87]

I’m not sure he would be a good get. In three years at Purdue he has averaged 5 points a game, while shooting 18% from 3 and 55% from the line. A lot of Xavier fans would say he needs to practice more free throws when he is tired.

I didn't realize that Purdue has such poor free throw shooting drills. Xeus, maybe you could send those same free throw shooting videos that you sent to Steele and also send them to Purdue.

[xeus]

I didn't realize that Purdue has such poor free throw shooting drills. Xeus, maybe you could send those same free throw shooting videos that you sent to Steele and also send them to Purdue.

No way. Screw Purdue. Besides, I promised Mario that any coaching tips I gave to Travis will not be shared with other programs.

[XU 87]

No way. Screw Purdue. Besides, I promised Mario that any coaching tips I gave to Travis will not be shared with other programs.

You make a good point. No need to share Steele's new free throw drills with another coach.

[xeus]

You make a good point. No need to share Steele's new free throw drills with another coach.

Never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking again.

[xavierj]

This guy might be an option if he doesn’t stay in the draft. Probably will transfer if not.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/elijah-olaniyi-1.html

Looks like Xavier is one of the schools who offered this kid. Looks like a player.

https://basketball.realgm.com/player/Elijah-Olaniyi/Summary/122181

https://clutchpoints.com/elijah-olaniyi-the-stony-brook-talents-origin-story-is-unheard-of/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xbZCVVjZJp4

[Lamont Sanford]

Considering Nojel Eastern already verballed to UofMichigan, we can stop talking about those chances.

I like this kid from Stony Brook.

[xavierj]

Considering Nojel Eastern already verballed to UofMichigan, we can stop talking about those chances.

I like this kid from Stony Brook.

I liked him too but apparently he committed to Miami, FL.

[Lamont Sanford]

I liked him too but apparently he committed to Miami, FL.

Well, shit!!!!

[AviatorX]

Starting to sound like Nojel Eastern’s “commitment” to Michigan may have been news to Juwan Howard. Apparently he may not even have had an offer and five days later no acknowledgement of his addition by the program. The guy has serious family over involvement baggage. Just a weird deal all around. Feel bad for him.

[Lloyd Braun]

Justin Smith is intriguing to gobble up Naji role... He’s looking for an MBA program so we’ve got that going for us, which is nice.

[Xuperman]

Justin Smith is intriguing to gobble up Naji role... He’s looking for an MBA program so we’ve got that going for us, which is nice.

Would seem to be a perfect fit. Just imagine how the influence of 3 Seniors, Scruggs, Carter, Smith, would benefit the development of our PACK of youngsters....WOW!!

[xuphan]

Would seem to be a perfect fit. Just imagine how the influence of 3 Seniors, Scruggs, Carter, Martin, would benefit the development of our PACK of youngsters....WOW!!

Looks like Snow has Nike Sibande going to Alabama

[AviatorX]

Justin Smith is the exact opposite of a fit for Xavier’s roster, especially considering he wants an expanded role. He is a very good college player, but if you want Xavier’s offense to look exactly like it did last year, that’s the kind of high usage piece you add. No thanks.

[xuphan]

Justin Smith is the exact opposite of a fit for Xavier’s roster, especially considering he wants an expanded role. He is a very good college player, but if you want Xavier’s offense to look exactly like it did last year, that’s the kind of high usage piece you add. No thanks.

I totally agree. Not sure what message this tell the D2 kid we just brought in.

[AviatorX]

I totally agree. Not sure what message this tell the D2 kid we just brought in.

The guy who is probably going to play 5-10 minutes a game? Pretty far cry from Smith who played 30 mins a game for IU, was a multi-year starter, and despite being limited offensively, has expressed an interest to have an increased offensive role.

Again, I think Justin Smith is a very good college player when he is crashing the glass, defending 1-5, and finishing put backs and dunks. If that’s the role he wants, any team in the country will take him as a grad transfer. He essentially wants to be a non-shooting forward that is an offensive focal point.

[Lloyd Braun]

I guess I have more defense in mind. I don’t expect the offense to magically be leaps and bounds ahead, but if the defense falls too much (which is quite possible looking at the current roster) it could be a rough go for several games. Add a big wing who is an excellent defender fixes a lot of issues on that end and outweighs someone who is not a shooter on offense. Whether he would accept glue guy role IDK but he would be wise to do so wherever he goes.

[AviatorX]

I guess I have more defense in mind. I don’t expect the offense to magically be leaps and bounds ahead, but if the defense falls too much (which is quite possible looking at the current roster) it could be a rough go for several games. Add a big wing who is an excellent defender fixes a lot of issues on that end and outweighs someone who is not a shooter on offense. Whether he would accept glue guy role IDK but he would be wise to do so wherever he goes.

Totally agree. But Smith had that role (and then some) on an IU team that is shaping up to be pretty good next year and he didn’t want any part of it. This screams DePaul or Notre Dame, in my opinion.

[xuphan]

Totally agree. But Smith had that role (and then some) on an IU team that is shaping up to be pretty good next year and he didn’t want any part of it. This screams DePaul or Notre Dame, in my opinion.

Nike Sibande expected to announce his college choice this week. Alabama lean but XU still in it.

[GoMuskies]

Maybe Jamarius Burton will change his mind now that Max McClung is also headed to Texas Tech.

[noteggs]

Maybe Jamarius Burton will change his mind now that Max McClung is also headed to Texas Tech.

Damn that’s a heck of a backcourt for Tech.

[Lamont Sanford]

Damn that’s a heck of a backcourt for Tech.

Best backcourt $$$ can buy. Tech is dirty.

[murray87]

Not sure if this has been posted somewhere already but Figueroa leaving St. Johns:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/former-st-johns-guard-lj-figueroa-commits-to-oregon-as-transfer-due-to-circumstances-out-of-my/