New Julius Francis Video

[The XtC]

[quote="mathman"][quote="papawasamustang"][quote="Stallion"]but that's not the point-the point is that Baylor signed National competitive recruiting classes for several years when they were one of the worst programs in the country and definitely the Big 12. Several observers on this board told you it was coming-it was just a matter of time. Recruit well for at least 3 years and count to 3 or 4 from the first good class.[/quote]

Baylor is on several of the TOP recruits in the country for 09, 10 & 11.
Drew is doing an outstanding job & the pipeline is well in place. I see the same thing starting to brew over in Cowtown. On the flipside, I'm not impressed with what young Knight is doing in Lubbock.[/quote]

I agree with most of what you said but I think the jury is still out on Christian at TCU. He is an excellent coach but really don't see the pipeline you are referring to. He signed Butler from Duncanville in the 08 class but the kid only had offers from SFA and UTA. He got the Moss kid in the same 08 class after the kid got a release from Kent State. Didn't show any other offers but he might have committed early. The only other high school kid with any rating at all in that class was two star Logan Lancon who had no other offers. I think the star of that class was Zvonko Buljan, a JC kid, who had offers from St. Johns and Colorado State. He has only signed one for the 09 class so far but he is a good one. Garlon Green. But he is from Missouri City, Tx.
I think the thing he has done that Doh should have done is get immediate help via the JC route. Big mistake on Doh's part there. And again, not saying Christian isn't getting it done, just don't see any pipeline at all yet.[/quote]


Yeah, their recruits really aren't much, are they? It's so strange though, that no one can seem to explain to me why a team that we beat the last 2 years, that lost most of last year's starters, and brought in what everyone has assured me is an inferior recruiting class, why is that team somehow getting much better results on the court? I must be really stupid, because I just cant figure this one out........ There's probably a really simple explanation, and I'm just not able to see it, because my poor brain just doesnt work very well on complicated tasks.... Can someone help me out on this, and explain what's going on? I sense that somehow, the answer lies in the number of big time offers Tomas Kwiatkowski recieved, and how talented that makes our benchwarmer. I never quite grasped the subtle nuances of that one, either.

[mathman]

Just asked what pipeline he was referring to. Nice sarcasm though.

[Stallion]

XTC

I bet you know what the argument would be. Almost all the significant contributors on the TCU team are upperclassmen except for Moss who is a Freshman eligibility wise(can't remember but wasn't be really a 2007 recruit -so I think he was a Prep recruit.). TCU has hit on some quick fixes from JUCO and mixed in with some other Seniors and Juniors including some Division 1A Transfers. I haven't followed the euros or where some of these guys are from but I'd bet you'd find some experienced players. Many of us strenuously argued that SMU should have signed some upperclassmen instead of his Freshman Class of 7-not sure that was really availiable as an option to Doherty. SMU's 2nd and 3rd leading scorers right now are transfer upperclassmen. The more you really focus on college basketball at this mid-major or lower level I think-no I know- that you can help tjhe competitiveness of your basketball team by grouping as many mature players as possible in the Junior/Senior Class of your program. That's what TCU is doing. SMU has few upperclassmen on their team. I'm sure we'll hear about the purist who think you have to recruit all freshman to build your program. That's simply nonsense really rarely the reality at this level anymore. To those that doubt that claim-check out your average CUSA Roster. You got to hand it to TCU though-Christian has done a great job-but he hasn't built the team like Doherty did-he built it ther way a lot of us wish Doherty had tried.

[mathman]

Looked at their roster.
Freshmen- 4
Sophomores- 0
Juniors- 8
Seniors- 2

[papawasamustang]

XTC

I bet you know what the argument would be. Almost all the significant contributors on the TCU team are upperclassmen except for Moss who is a Freshman eligibility wise(can't remember but wasn't be really a 2007 recruit -so I think he was a Prep recruit.). TCU has hit on some quick fixes from JUCO and mixed in with some other Seniors and Juniors including some Division 1A Transfers. I haven't followed the euros or where some of these guys are from but I'd bet you'd find some experienced players. Many of us strenuously argued that SMU should have signed some upperclassmen instead of his Freshman Class of 7-not sure that was really availiable as an option to Doherty. SMU's 2nd and 3rd leading scorers right now are transfer upperclassmen. The more you really focus on college basketball at this mid-major or lower level I think-no I know- that you can help tjhe competitiveness of your basketball team by grouping as many mature players as possible in the Junior/Senior Class of your program. That's what TCU is doing. SMU has few upperclassmen on their team. I'm sure we'll hear about the purist who think you have to recruit all freshman to build your program. That's simply nonsense really rarely the reality at this level anymore. To those that doubt that claim-check out your average CUSA Roster. You got to hand it to TCU though-Christian has done a great job-but he hasn't built the team like Doherty did-he built it ther way a lot of us wish Doherty had tried.

I think you are right on the $ with your analysis of the situation.
I'm sure Doh must see the impact that the JC's have after the job Williams has done for us stablizing the PG position. The magnificent 7 approach just doesn't work @ a school like SMU unless you are just looking for a built in"we are young" excuse. It was a major mistake.
It should be a priority IMO to sign @ least one PF or C out of the JC ranks this year that can put the ball in the hole & rebound.
Last year I posted about how we needed to go over to Weatherford JC
& check out Ruzgas & Roderick Flemings (from Dallas & 1st team All American JC last season) & this year I have posted about the great JC program right down the road @ Collin County. The caliber of basketball played in the JC ranks in Texas is outstanding.
I hope that Lutz & Doh' are focused on 1 or 2 big time JC hoopsters out there.

[The XtC]

[quote="mathman"]Just asked what pipeline he was referring to. Nice sarcasm though.[/quote]

Thanks, sarcasm is one of the things I do well, when I apply myself. Since you liked that, I have some more for you.

I must have missed your question about the pipeline, because I didnt see it the first time I read through your post. Even now I cant find it. In fact, I cant find anything resembling a question at all. Instead, all I see is a list of players who must not be any good because according to you they didnt get any "offers". "This guy didnt get any offers, so he cant be any good. Oh, and that guy? No offers, he must suck." These guys suck so hard, it completely boggled my poor little mind how they could have kicked SMU's [deleted] so bad? Particularly when you consider that SMU had won the year before, TCU had lost much more in regards to departing players and the points, rebounds, assists and minutes played that those players represented. Both teams would bring in 2 junior transfers and 4 freshmen, and since none of their recuits got offers and SMU's recruits all got major, uberduper, big time offers, then it would only follow logic that the team that was already better, lost less, and gained more, should still be superior, yes? No? No, really? How did that happen? That's what my poor little brain cant quite follow, somewhere there must be an explanation, and since you seemed to be real big on the offers and so on, I was hoping you might be able to help me.

So, now, turning off the sarcasm for a moment. You guys are seriously underestimating both Ronnie Moss and Kevin Butler, both of them can play, and I'd love to have either of them here. Ronnie Moss was on the Rivals national top-100 list before he went to prep school, and was one of the top 5 players in Texas. I have no idea why prep school didnt work out for him, or why his ranking went down, all I know was what I saw when he was in school here. He's a real player.

When SMU lost to TCU in November, Moss and Butler combined for 18 points and 10 rebounds. I think it's kind of ironic that TCU won by 18 points. Too bad Moss and Butler weren't good enough to get any offers from big time schools like SMU.

[The XtC]

[quote="mathman"]Looked at their roster.
Freshmen- 4
Sophomores- 0
Juniors- 8
Seniors- 2[/quote]

Look again. 4 of those 8 juniors never play. Literally never. Siebert has played in 3 games and Richardson, Metzger, and Smith havent seen the court this year. Collectively, they play less than Kwiatkowski.

[The XtC]

[quote="Stallion"]XTC

I bet you know what the argument would be. Almost all the significant contributors on the TCU team are upperclassmen except for Moss who is a Freshman eligibility wise(can't remember but wasn't be really a 2007 recruit -so I think he was a Prep recruit.). TCU has hit on some quick fixes from JUCO and mixed in with some other Seniors and Juniors including some Division 1A Transfers. I haven't followed the euros or where some of these guys are from but I'd bet you'd find some experienced players. Many of us strenuously argued that SMU should have signed some upperclassmen instead of his Freshman Class of 7-not sure that was really availiable as an option to Doherty. SMU's 2nd and 3rd leading scorers right now are transfer upperclassmen. The more you really focus on college basketball at this mid-major or lower level I think-no I know- that you can help tjhe competitiveness of your basketball team by grouping as many mature players as possible in the Junior/Senior Class of your program. That's what TCU is doing. SMU has few upperclassmen on their team. I'm sure we'll hear about the purist who think you have to recruit all freshman to build your program. That's simply nonsense really rarely the reality at this level anymore. To those that doubt that claim-check out your average CUSA Roster. You got to hand it to TCU though-Christian has done a great job-but he hasn't built the team like Doherty did-he built it ther way a lot of us wish Doherty had tried.[/quote]

I'll try to keep this simple, because it's a long answer, but I might wind up having to post, then come back and finish my thoughts with something I left out.

First, where I agree. It was a mistake to sign 7 freshmen in one class, and particularly to sign that many and not redshirt the guys who werent ready to contribute. It's a mistake to unbalance your classes to that degree, and it left a big hole in what should have been this years senior class. It should have been at most 5 high school players and 2 juniors. Four frosh and 3 juniors might have been preferable, depending on your ability to find guys ready to contribute who were interested in your program. I disagree that Doherty wasnt allowed to sign transfers, from what I can see he's allowed to sign anyone he wants. The football and womens basketball teams both signed JC players in the 2007 incoming class, so I dont see a realistic argument that mens basketball couldnt.

Ronnie Moss went to high school for 3 years, then 1 year at 2 different prep schools, so if he had stayed in school here he would have come out in the same class as Harp and Malone.

I understand the argument about experience, but both teams added 2 juniors and 4 freshmen. and TCU lost more from the previous year than SMU did.

From the players who participated in the 2007 game, SMU lost: Jon Killen, Derek Roberts, Paulius Ritter, and Cameron Spencer. ( 3 starters, 92 minutes played, 38 of 71 total points, 18 of 39 rebounds). TCU lost: Mike Scott, Henry Salter, Brent Hackett, Alvarado Parker, Neiman Owens, Ryan Wall, Luke Tauscher and Martiese Morones. (4 starters, 131 minutes played, 45 of 65 total points, 17 of 25 rebounds) So, by any objective measure, TCU lost more players who contributed more (statistically) to the prior game and prior season.

Both schools added 2 juniors and 4 freshmen, so from the perspective of experience, it's a wash. TCU get's a good contribution from 2 seniors and 2 juniors, but the rest of their returning players are non-contributors. Langford is the only starter returning. Comparing Langford to Bamba, SMU's only senior, the advantage tilts toward TCU. When you consider that 4 sophomores started a collective 60 games lastyear and they all return for SMU, then the balance of the Experience Scale swings back toward SMU.

So, the question remains is, does experience truly favor the frogs, and is that enough to explain the difference in the teams current fortunes? I dont think it does, not considering what both teams lost and added. I asked the question to see what other people would say and perhaps make them think about the question. I already know what I think, the question was mainly rhetorical.

That's all for now, perhaps I will think of more later.

[50's PONY]

XTC,
You are the man!
50's PONY

[Stallion]

5 of the Top 6 leading scorers on TCU's team are upperclassmen. Upperclassmen account for about 79% of their offense. I'm amazed at what TCU has done but I've pointed out team after team over the years that has done the same thing as TCU to attempt a quick turnaround. Penders does the same thing. UTEP does the same thing.

Group as many quality players in upperclassmen mix in some D1A transfers and you have more mature, older, seasoned players to compete with. Its the reason SMU always appears to be a young team.

Doherty did not take that option. I think we are starting to see how these kids can help. Nobody disagrees that the best recruits are the highly touted freshman. But if you swing and miss at the best Freshmen-what do you do? Take a kid who averages 4 ppg in high school? The theory is that long term projects in College BB end up costing experience and maturity-They end up sitting on the bench or struggling for 2-3 years. Two wasted years. See Tomas Kwiatoski(sp) You MIGHT get 2 productive years but have used 4 scholarship years(2/4th). Why not just get a more mature JUCO or transfer instead of the Project. You get two years for two scholarship years(2/2). 2/2 >2/4. That means you can double the number of mature seasoned players on your roster like TCU has. That's the concept-and its pretty successful at this level.

[smupony]

5 of the Top 6 leading scorers on TCU's team are upperclassmen. Upperclassmen account for about 79% of their offense. I'm amazed at what TCU has done but I've pointed out team after team over the years that has done the same thing as TCU to attempt a quick turnaround. Penders does the same thing. UTEP does the same thing.

Group as many quality players in upperclassmen mix in some D1A transfers and you have more mature, older, seasoned players to compete with. Its the reason SMU always appears to be a young team.

Doherty did not take that option. I think we are starting to see how these kids can help. Nobody disagrees that the best recruits are the highly touted freshman. But if you swing and miss at the best Freshmen-what do you do? Take a kid who averages 4 ppg in high school? The theory is that long term projects in College BB end up costing experience and maturity-They end up sitting on the bench or struggling for 2-3 years. Two wasted years. See Tomas Kwiatoski(sp) You MIGHT get 2 productive years but have used 4 scholarship years(2/4th). Why not just get a more mature JUCO or transfer instead of the Project. You get two years for two scholarship years(2/2). 2/2 >2/4. That means you can double the number of mature seasoned players on your roster like TCU has. That's the concept-and its pretty successful at this level.

Great post. I agree with the bolded.

[The XtC]

So now it's sort of like poker in reverse, 2 Juniors trumps 4 Sophomores, even when the sophomores all started at least half the previous season.

What you're really saying now is that the current coach is getting more out of Keon Mitchem, Jason Ebie, Kevin Langford and John Ortiz, than the previous coach did. The team is performing better, even though 3 former role players have replaced personnel that was superior (and I base that statement on minutes played and productivity last year). That was one of the points I hoped people would pick up on in my first post.

The second point was a simple one, Ronnie Moss and Kevin Butler are better than what most people here think. I dont care what they were rated or who offered them, they can play. I know they can play because I've seen them play. The real bottom line is in the score of the game, and I cant understand why people refuse to see that.

I dont think anyone will argue against the concept that a mature and experienced roster is preferable. Experience is important, just like recruiting is important, and coaching is important. Look at what experience did for Rice this year, going from 2-10 to 10-3. Lack of upperclassmen, particularly small or unproductive senior classes has been one of our football team's biggest weakenesses for 10 years now.

That's all for now, it's too late at night for debate.

[PoconoPony]

Several years back when George Mason turned some heads and went deep into the NCAA tournament, many of the announcers/media started looking around at the number of advancing mid-majors in the tourney. All had the same profile as George Mason, they were all comprised of 3d, 4th and some red shirt 5th year players mixed with JUCOs who had the strength, maturity, cohesiveness and experience to compete. That year many of the big boys were crippled by losing key under classmen to the NBA and their programs were in a state of flux. Thus, a solid core of very good, but not exceptionally great upperclassmen took a number of teams deep into the NCAAs.

What really developed after this tournament was an actual philosophical debate as to what coaching and recruiting philosophies should be. Do you spend huge amounts of time recruiting a top of the line kid and chance losing out on him and have a scholarship left in hand? If you lose out on the top kid, what level of late signing kid do you get with that scholarship you have been holding??? Does that late signing of possibly a "project" kid or lower level kid ultimately turn out to hurt your program by tying up a scholarship for 4 years??? If you get the top kids, do they give you a championship before leaving to the NBA after 1 or 2 years??? ( Syracuse; Carmello Anthony) How can you sustain a program if you keep losing several kids each year after only 1 or 2 years play??? The other side of the dilemma is to make a philosophical decision that your recruiting efforts are going to be for the level of kids who will probably not make the NBA; however, are going to be around for 4 years, can win at a high rate, sustain your program, get you into the NCAAs and maybe win several games and go deep. In this later category the common element is upper classmen bringing maturity and experience to the floor which will win games.

I think it is a solid argument that TCU has used both JUCOs and a core of upperclassmen to quickly build a solid winning team. Question is whether or not it is really necessary to discontinue this JUCO mix once your program is established?? Only tie up some of your scholarships for 2 years and replace your 4 year scholarship mistakes with experienced and more proven JUCOs. George Mason and other mid-majors clearly demonstrated this can be a sustaining and wining way. Doh chose to use only underclassmen and let them develop and mature. You can make a very strong argument this was not the best course of action because he did not get the talent level necessary for the program, now he has tied up a scholarship(s) for 4 years, has to wait at least 2 years for experience to kick in, has delayed the development of the program for at least 2 years, still may not have the talent necessary to compete, and is stuck for 2 more years ( 7 eggs in one basket) before he can rectify matters.

[Stallion]

For a streak of about 4 games there our Littl' 2009 project was doubling his usual scoring average of 4 up to about 8-but in his last game he did his best imitation of a 6-11 starting Center for the Dallas Academy Girls Team-getting shut out with the Big 0 as in zero not Omoniurhie. Yes he scored no more points than a 6-11 Dead Man.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/hss/ ... all/19933/

[StangEsq]

Shooting 46% from the line this year... and it's not the 3-point line.