Full Version: Juco v. 4-year
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I would personally rather see four-year players. It seems that about half of our pickups in the past five years or so, are Juco players, and it kind of bugs me.

I understand that the Jucos have a level of play that most freshmen do not, but it seems to me that we are simply looking for someone to come in and fix this or that problem.

I'm not sure the Jays would be any better with mostly or all four-year players, in fact, I doubt it, but I somehow fell that I would rather watch a player develop over the long haul, like it is going to be fun to watch AY as a junior and senior.

No offense, Booker.

Any thoughts?
My feelings have always been that I'd rather have a FR than a JUCO. JUCOs should really only be used to fill in spots that are weak due to previous recruiting or weakness due to development or transfer. Unless you can find a JUCO that's going to come right in and be a force, there's no sense, in my mind, of not developing a younger player.

JUCO guys tend to take half a season to figure it out. So if you're lucky, you get 1.5 years out of them. Sometimes less. Rarely more. Even if a FR takes a full year to get comfortable and figure it out, you get 3 years of contributions. It's also easier to build and recruit for your needs when you have a stable of 4 year players and aren't having to turn around all the time and bring in another JUCO because there's nobody waiting to take over the spot of a graduating player.
Reference URL's