The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Mason's tweet suggests that it was his decision to leave. I hope that's the case. I'm thinking he may have been told that his playing time would be diminished. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I like Mason - I think he is great team guy and at times really gave them a spark off the bench. Hope he lands in a good spot.

(03-16-2022 09:04 AM)Dont tase me bro Wrote:  Mason's tweet suggests that it was his decision to leave. I hope that's the case. I'm thinking he may have been told that his playing time would be diminished. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I like Mason - I think he is great team guy and at times really gave them a spark off the bench. Hope he lands in a good spot.

We're bringing in a guy who is more talented and dynamic in every facet of the game at his current position, so that would make sense.

I could see Mason going to the Summit/MVC/MAC/Horizon and making a nice career of it, but he just isn't at the level of player we need knowing what is coming in a year.

(03-16-2022 09:04 AM)Dont tase me bro Wrote:  Mason's tweet suggests that it was his decision to leave. I hope that's the case. I'm thinking he may have been told that his playing time would be diminished. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I like Mason - I think he is great team guy and at times really gave them a spark off the bench. Hope he lands in a good spot.

Wes isn't going to force any of these kids out but he owes it to them to give a frank, honest assessment of where they are development wise, what their future role looks like at that trajectory and whether other opportunities might be a better fit. Especially given the kids ability to transfer without sitting.

Coaches rarely run a guy off for level of play. If you honestly tell them what their role is going to be and if that is not what the kid wants, then it’s the players decision.

(03-16-2022 09:04 AM)Dont tase me bro Wrote:  Mason's tweet suggests that it was his decision to leave. I hope that's the case. I'm thinking he may have been told that his playing time would be diminished. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I like Mason - I think he is great team guy and at times really gave them a spark off the bench. Hope he lands in a good spot.

Yes, that is the new euphemism for running a kid off, the "frank conversation." I wonder what Wes told Madsen last year to get him to stay? Maybe he said, "Give me a year, and you can always transfer next season if it's not working out." Hope that's the case. I don't blame Wes, this is just how it's going to be, it seems. Maybe it's better for all parties in the end.

(03-16-2022 09:18 AM)levydl Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 09:04 AM)Dont tase me bro Wrote:  Mason's tweet suggests that it was his decision to leave. I hope that's the case. I'm thinking he may have been told that his playing time would be diminished. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I like Mason - I think he is great team guy and at times really gave them a spark off the bench. Hope he lands in a good spot.

Yes, that is the new euphemism for running a kid off, the "frank conversation." I wonder what Wes told Madsen last year to get him to stay? Maybe he said, "Give me a year, and you can always transfer next season if it's not working out." Hope that's the case. I don't blame Wes, this is just how it's going to be, it seems. Maybe it's better for all parties in the end.

I'm not sure if this has been posted here but I found Wes' post-season presser extremely informative. While he didn't name Mason or any player by name, he really digs into his philosophy of personnel management and the portal at about the 11:45 mark:

i was hoping he was going to be our poor man's eric devendorf

(03-16-2022 09:17 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Coaches rarely run a guy off for level of play. If you honestly tell them what their role is going to be and if that is not what the kid wants, then it’s the players decision.

Why is it so hard to admit that there is functionally no difference between this and running a kid off? With the new transfer rules in the background, when a coach tells a kid he's not going to play much or doesn't fit with what they are trying to do, it's the player's choice in only the most meager sense of the word. To act like coaches are having these "frank conversations" for the player's benefit is silly.

Not sure what the problem is…would you rather a coach lie to a kid? Or just not recruit over him?

That’s life in every company he will work in for 40 years after playing basketball.

I’ve found in life that most people would rather hear the truth to be able to make their own decision than not.

(03-16-2022 09:39 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Not sure what the problem is…would you rather a coach lie to a kid? Or just not recruit over him?

That’s life in every company he will work in for 40 years after playing basketball.

I’ve found in life that most people would rather hear the truth to be able to make their own decision than not.

Right, and like you say, we should be honest about what's happening instead of acting like Miller truly wants everyone to return and he's not running anyone off and it's really the player's decision.

(03-16-2022 09:46 AM)levydl Wrote:  Right, and like you say, we should be honest about what's happening instead of acting like Miller truly wants everyone to return and he's not running anyone off and it's really the player's decision.

Multiple things can be true. Wes strikes me as a genuine guy and I'm sure he truly enjoys the guys on this team. All are capable of contributing. He also knows that to make the team better he needs better players. So he'll find roles for guys that want to stay but I'm sure he recognizes that if 1-2 more guys leave that's an opportunity to upgrade the roster to be more competitive for a top 4 AAC finish and potential NCAA bid next year.

(03-16-2022 09:35 AM)levydl Wrote:  Why is it so hard to admit that there is functionally no difference between this and running a kid off?

Why is it so hard to admit the player has agency in his decision and deserves to know where he fits into the future of the program if he stays? A coach can like the kid, be committed to keeping him around if he wants to stay but be honest that unless he makes drastic improvements he'll probably have a limited role. That isn't running a kid off.

(03-16-2022 09:59 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Why is it so hard to admit the player has agency in his decision and deserves to know where he fits into the future of the program if he stays? A coach can like the kid, be committed to keeping him around if he wants to stay but be honest that unless he makes drastic improvements he'll probably have a limited role. That isn't running a kid off.

Exactly. Giving a kid a scholarship isn't a commitment to making sure that kid is playing starter minutes by the time he's an upper classmen. Wes owes these kids honesty and support and then allow the kids to determine if the role that they envision based on what they've seen from them fits.

One of their primary gripes with the last staff, specifically, was dishonesty in their expectations. I'm sure they appreciate honesty now more than ever.

(03-16-2022 10:03 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 09:59 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Why is it so hard to admit the player has agency in his decision and deserves to know where he fits into the future of the program if he stays? A coach can like the kid, be committed to keeping him around if he wants to stay but be honest that unless he makes drastic improvements he'll probably have a limited role. That isn't running a kid off.

Exactly. Giving a kid a scholarship isn't a commitment to making sure that kid is playing starter minutes by the time he's an upper classmen. Wes owes these kids honesty and support and then allow the kids to determine if the role that they envision based on what they've seen from them fits.

The sense of entitlement in these young players is astounding. I don't think a scholarship should ever be revoked for non-disciplinary reasons, but playing time has to be conditional on performance. Everybody knows deep down that, whatever "promises" were made on signing, if you are getting outplayed eventually the guy who is outplaying you is going to get your minutes and that is the way it should be

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:03 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 09:59 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Why is it so hard to admit the player has agency in his decision and deserves to know where he fits into the future of the program if he stays? A coach can like the kid, be committed to keeping him around if he wants to stay but be honest that unless he makes drastic improvements he'll probably have a limited role. That isn't running a kid off.

Exactly. Giving a kid a scholarship isn't a commitment to making sure that kid is playing starter minutes by the time he's an upper classmen. Wes owes these kids honesty and support and then allow the kids to determine if the role that they envision based on what they've seen from them fits.

The sense of entitlement in these young players is astounding. I don't think a scholarship should ever be revoked for non-disciplinary reasons, but playing time has to be conditional on performance. Everybody knows deep down that, whatever "promises" were made on signing, if you are getting outplayed eventually the guy who is outplaying you is going to get your minutes and that is the way it should be

What are you talking about? What player is complaining about his role? Neither side has to be at fault here. Mason worked hard for the program, stayed when we desperately needed guys to stay and then made a decision that he might be better served transferring. Spoke highly of Wes in his tweet on the way out. I'm not seeing an entitlement problem.

(03-16-2022 10:28 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:03 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 09:59 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Why is it so hard to admit the player has agency in his decision and deserves to know where he fits into the future of the program if he stays? A coach can like the kid, be committed to keeping him around if he wants to stay but be honest that unless he makes drastic improvements he'll probably have a limited role. That isn't running a kid off.

Exactly. Giving a kid a scholarship isn't a commitment to making sure that kid is playing starter minutes by the time he's an upper classmen. Wes owes these kids honesty and support and then allow the kids to determine if the role that they envision based on what they've seen from them fits.

The sense of entitlement in these young players is astounding. I don't think a scholarship should ever be revoked for non-disciplinary reasons, but playing time has to be conditional on performance. Everybody knows deep down that, whatever "promises" were made on signing, if you are getting outplayed eventually the guy who is outplaying you is going to get your minutes and that is the way it should be

What are you talking about? What player is complaining about his role? Neither side has to be at fault here. Mason worked hard for the program, stayed when we desperately needed guys to stay and then made a decision that he might be better served transferring. Spoke highly of Wes in his tweet on the way out. I'm not seeing an entitlement problem.

He was only here as part of a package deal with his brother. He brother bolted and left UC holding the bag. It's for the best that he was eased out

(03-16-2022 10:21 AM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 10:03 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(03-16-2022 09:59 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Why is it so hard to admit the player has agency in his decision and deserves to know where he fits into the future of the program if he stays? A coach can like the kid, be committed to keeping him around if he wants to stay but be honest that unless he makes drastic improvements he'll probably have a limited role. That isn't running a kid off.

Exactly. Giving a kid a scholarship isn't a commitment to making sure that kid is playing starter minutes by the time he's an upper classmen. Wes owes these kids honesty and support and then allow the kids to determine if the role that they envision based on what they've seen from them fits.

The sense of entitlement in these young players is astounding. I don't think a scholarship should ever be revoked for non-disciplinary reasons, but playing time has to be conditional on performance. Everybody knows deep down that, whatever "promises" were made on signing, if you are getting outplayed eventually the guy who is outplaying you is going to get your minutes and that is the way it should be

I'm not sure where you are seeing a sense of entitlement. Wes has said many times that he promises nothing in regards to playing time. Mason talked with Wes, realized that barring drastic improvement he wasn't going to get a lot of minutes and decided to look elsewhere, that's not entitlement.

I agree with Mark, Wes isn't running players off. But he is letting them know what role he sees them playing next season and not every player is going to want that role.

The way that Mason is entering the transfer portal this year vs last year is just more evidence that Brannen's firing was never about entitled kids, but about Brannen being a bad coach and a not very nice person.

(03-16-2022 10:32 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

Go get em’ Wes.