07-30-2018, 03:52 PM
Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
(07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
(07-30-2018 04:19 PM)GameTime_21 Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
In a vacuum, sure. The difference is kids study the roster of the schools recruiting them, and see first hand when they watch practice on a visit that there are two veterans at their spot already in the system. Some are confident enough in their ability that they don’t care. Many others are looking for the path of least resistance to playing time. You can sell them on playing over the veterans until you are blue in the face, but they just saw first hand they are walking in to a crowded situation...
(07-30-2018 05:54 PM)marcuscan Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 04:19 PM)GameTime_21 Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
In a vacuum, sure. The difference is kids study the roster of the schools recruiting them, and see first hand when they watch practice on a visit that there are two veterans at their spot already in the system. Some are confident enough in their ability that they don’t care. Many others are looking for the path of least resistance to playing time. You can sell them on playing over the veterans until you are blue in the face, but they just saw first hand they are walking in to a crowded situation...
Nevertheless, somehow it's done at other schools.
At this point we have a statistically significant data set that shows us that our staff just isn't going to recruit on a level that's on par with our supposed station in the CBB landscape.
Considering all the accolades many on here heap upon the current administration you'd think it'd resonate more, but nah. It doesn't. We're held back by a conference that doesn't hold back our peers in the upper echelon of the AAC. At this point, it just is what it is.
Strap in boys, we're looking at more of the same for the foreseeable future. What a ride.....
mc
(07-30-2018 06:55 PM)GameTime_21 Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 05:54 PM)marcuscan Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 04:19 PM)GameTime_21 Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
In a vacuum, sure. The difference is kids study the roster of the schools recruiting them, and see first hand when they watch practice on a visit that there are two veterans at their spot already in the system. Some are confident enough in their ability that they don’t care. Many others are looking for the path of least resistance to playing time. You can sell them on playing over the veterans until you are blue in the face, but they just saw first hand they are walking in to a crowded situation...
Nevertheless, somehow it's done at other schools.
At this point we have a statistically significant data set that shows us that our staff just isn't going to recruit on a level that's on par with our supposed station in the CBB landscape.
Considering all the accolades many on here heap upon the current administration you'd think it'd resonate more, but nah. It doesn't. We're held back by a conference that doesn't hold back our peers in the upper echelon of the AAC. At this point, it just is what it is.
Strap in boys, we're looking at more of the same for the foreseeable future. What a ride.....
mc
More of the same as in 30 win seasons and finishing at or very near the top of the conference? Sure do have it rough around here...
(07-30-2018 07:06 PM)GameTime_21 Wrote: [ -> ]SMU: Caught cheating, coach forced out and on probation
UConn: Caught cheating, fires coach and sanctions looming
Memphis: Said screw it and went back to doing whatever necessary to keep local talent at home.
Houston: Hasn’t finished ahead of UC. Coach with long history of rule breaking
If you are expecting UC to cheat to get things done, I’d suggest you save yourself the trouble, and find a different team. Life will be easier for you...
(07-31-2018 10:11 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'll keep going back to my point that the 2017-2018 roster was Mick's best. Followed closely by his third best roster in 2016-2017 (I put the sweet sixteen team as second best). I guess we're recruiting poorly or something but I'm pretty sure that isn't the problem.
Quote:Wearing fluorescent orange shoelaces and piping on their jerseys, Cincinnati (26-11) fell behind by 12 at the half before going on a 19-4 run early in the second. The Bearcats led 52-48 with 11:34 to play when Matta called a timeout and ripped into his team.http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...=320820194
(07-31-2018 10:11 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'll keep going back to my point that the 2017-2018 roster was Mick's best. Followed closely by his third best roster in 2016-2017 (I put the sweet sixteen team as second best). I guess we're recruiting poorly or something but I'm pretty sure that isn't the problem.
(07-31-2018 11:56 AM)TubaCat Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 10:11 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'll keep going back to my point that the 2017-2018 roster was Mick's best. Followed closely by his third best roster in 2016-2017 (I put the sweet sixteen team as second best). I guess we're recruiting poorly or something but I'm pretty sure that isn't the problem.
I think I agree... Mick's brand of basketball might struggle to get even a UK or Duke roster past the first weekend. We said for years that Mick just needs an injection of talent into the program to break through this glass ceiling, but look how far we got this past season with a loaded roster...
(07-31-2018 12:04 PM)marcuscan Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 11:56 AM)TubaCat Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 10:11 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'll keep going back to my point that the 2017-2018 roster was Mick's best. Followed closely by his third best roster in 2016-2017 (I put the sweet sixteen team as second best). I guess we're recruiting poorly or something but I'm pretty sure that isn't the problem.
I think I agree... Mick's brand of basketball might struggle to get even a UK or Duke roster past the first weekend. We said for years that Mick just needs an injection of talent into the program to break through this glass ceiling, but look how far we got this past season with a loaded roster...
This past roster included a 1st rounder, and 2 iffy/ FA level NBAers. That's pretty dang good. I could be wrong, but I suspect it's just not going to get too much better than that...assuming we can even achieve that level of talent again in the first place.
This realization is one of the more depressing aspects of the collapse.
(07-31-2018 01:17 PM)BearcatMan Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 12:04 PM)marcuscan Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 11:56 AM)TubaCat Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 10:11 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I'll keep going back to my point that the 2017-2018 roster was Mick's best. Followed closely by his third best roster in 2016-2017 (I put the sweet sixteen team as second best). I guess we're recruiting poorly or something but I'm pretty sure that isn't the problem.
I think I agree... Mick's brand of basketball might struggle to get even a UK or Duke roster past the first weekend. We said for years that Mick just needs an injection of talent into the program to break through this glass ceiling, but look how far we got this past season with a loaded roster...
This past roster included a 1st rounder, and 2 iffy/ FA level NBAers. That's pretty dang good. I could be wrong, but I suspect it's just not going to get too much better than that...assuming we can even achieve that level of talent again in the first place.
This realization is one of the more depressing aspects of the collapse.
Add in there Jarron Cumberland who could be a 1st rounder/fringe lottery guy if he continues on his current progression curve...it was a pretty talented team, just weighed down by a lack of adjustments in the time they needed them most.
(07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
(07-31-2018 02:09 PM)Marcus Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
Totally agree. The excuses have gotten absolutely ridiculous and downright pathetic. Like others have said, we don't have anyone on this roster outside of Cumberland who has the type of talent we had on our rosters throughout the 90's and early 2000's.
(07-31-2018 02:28 PM)GoCats1994 Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 02:09 PM)Marcus Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
Totally agree. The excuses have gotten absolutely ridiculous and downright pathetic. Like others have said, we don't have anyone on this roster outside of Cumberland who has the type of talent we had on our rosters throughout the 90's and early 2000's.
Curious - which players through the 90's and early 2000's are you referring to? I would like to think today's roster stacks up rather favorably to former players like Shawn Myrick, Michael Horton, Jackson Julson, BJ Grove.
I am not trying to be funny here...but be very careful of revisionist history. UC has had its stars through the years, and a lot of role players otherwise.
Cincy just had 3 of its top 4 players move on. Everyone else on the roster was asked to be a role player. Let's be a little patient to see how the next crop of guys respond. No one (NO ONE) would have predicted Justin Jackson's senior season, as an example.
(07-31-2018 02:43 PM)CliftonAve Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 02:28 PM)GoCats1994 Wrote: [ -> ](07-31-2018 02:09 PM)Marcus Wrote: [ -> ](07-30-2018 03:52 PM)robertfoshizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, there's not a guy on this roster outside of Cumberland who has unequivocally earned a starting spot. The current roster is not an excuse for mediocre recruiting.
Totally agree. The excuses have gotten absolutely ridiculous and downright pathetic. Like others have said, we don't have anyone on this roster outside of Cumberland who has the type of talent we had on our rosters throughout the 90's and early 2000's.
Curious - which players through the 90's and early 2000's are you referring to? I would like to think today's roster stacks up rather favorably to former players like Shawn Myrick, Michael Horton, Jackson Julson, BJ Grove.
I am not trying to be funny here...but be very careful of revisionist history. UC has had its stars through the years, and a lot of role players otherwise.
Cincy just had 3 of its top 4 players move on. Everyone else on the roster was asked to be a role player. Let's be a little patient to see how the next crop of guys respond. No one (NO ONE) would have predicted Justin Jackson's senior season, as an example.
Shawn Myrick and Michael Horton were role players on rosters that included Danny Fortson, Reuben Patterson, Kenyon Martin, Pete Mickeal, Mel Levett, etc. If today's roster stacks up to the group you mentioned we are in trouble.