Zion

[uncfan in ky]

Me personally, I would never want our program ran like UK's. I don't want 5-6 OADs every year.
The frustrating part is when we have tons of PT available at a certain position & kids are choosing to go to UK or Duke or Arizona when there's not nearly as PT available at those schools.
Like Knox for example, Carolina should be a no brainer for him but yet here's UK & Duke still in play for him.

 

[RoseHeel]

So 3 seasons of 10+ losses means we sound the alarm? Good graciousness...you guys are hard to please. Just as a frame of reference, during that same 3 year period you're referencing, Cal and the might UK recruiting machine has had two 10+ loss seasons (in a much worse conference). Duke didn't have any 10+ loss seasons in that same 3 year period of time, but they had one last year and maybe it's because they're scared of true OOC road games, that they are able to keep their losses down. And maybe our losses aren't so much attributed to recruiting misses as they are to the growing parity we've seen in college basketball over the past several years.

Look, I'm not saying that I don't want us to recruit well. And I'm not saying that we should absolutely stay away from OAD players. One here and there is fine. All I'm saying is that Carolina fans are screaming like their hair is on fire because of a small, statistically invalid sample of recruiting downswing. I'm just not freaking out like everyone else.

Dude, you're the one who said "as long as our W/L doesn't suffer". Now you're complaining when someone provides you with the facts? Jesus dude, It's not even about being pleased, it's simply fact that our W/L HAS suffered.

And in that very same 3 year span, UK had 2 FFs, while Dook won a national title.

And since the beginning of the OAD, "Cal and the mighty UK recruiting machine" also have four Final Four appearances and a National Title. Duke has 2 national championships.

Look, If Roy was recruiting 3 star guys year in, year out and reaching Final Fours, or at the very least, actively competing with the likes of Dook and UK with this same talent, I couldn't care less what the number beside these guys' name was. But most (and probably all) of our Final Four teams have had top recruits on their team. Even the team last year had multiple upperclassmen and underclassmen who were in the top 50 or so.

People trying to act like this isn't completely new territory regarding our recruiting are off their rockers, which judging by the ageism being perpetuated, is what quite a few may be writing from.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Dude, you're the one who said "as long as our W/L doesn't suffer". Now you're complaining when someone provides you with the facts? Jesus dude, It's not even about being pleased, it's simply fact that our W/L HAS suffered.

And in that very same 3 year span, UK had 2 FFs, while Dook won a national title.

And since the beginning of the OAD, "Cal and the mighty UK recruiting machine" also have four Final Four appearances and a National Title. Duke has 2 national championships.

Look, If Roy was recruiting 3 star guys year in, year out and reaching Final Fours, or at the very least, actively competing with the likes of Dook and UK with this same talent, I couldn't care less what the number beside these guys' name was. But most (and probably all) of our Final Four teams have had top recruits on their team. Even the team last year had multiple upperclassmen and underclassmen who were in the top 50 or so.

People trying to act like this isn't completely new territory regarding our recruiting are off their rockers, which judging by the ageism being perpetuated, is what quite a few may be writing from.

Please answer the following questions:

1 - What do you plan on doing about our recruiting strategy other than bemoan it on a message board?
2 - If we win the title this year, will you still be discussing how the OAD strategy is superior?
3 - How many wins is acceptable to you with a majority of 3 star recruits?
4 - How many wins is acceptable to you with a majority of 5 star recruits?
5 - What are your goals for the program in general?

Thanks.

 

[mikeirbyusa]

And yet.............................................

 

[carolinablue34]

@gunslingerdick

I know you don't give a shit about recruiting, but can you not see how missing out on the top talent equates to less winning? We will lose a great deal of our roster after this year and our replacements are three stars. Talent is critical to a winning program. And I would rather not see us go the way of Indiana.

 

[carolinablue34]

And yet.............................................

Mike, you cite that graph all the time. Keep in mind, a great majority of that was in the first decade.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Mike, you cite that graph all the time. Keep in mind, a great majority of that was in the first decade.

Lol yeah, that graphic has nothing to do with this discussion.

 

[Archer2]

Millenials, schmenials. It's not what have you done in the past. It's not what have you done for me lately. It's not even what are you doing for me today. Now it's what are you going to do for me in the future. And they wonder why we call it the age of entitlement. Sheesh.

Want to know the difference between my generation and the millenial and centenial generations? When JFK said "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country", we applauded him. Millenials and centenials would try to have him impeached for saying that.

 

[mikeirbyusa]

It has EVERYTHING to do with this discussion.

 

[heels05champs]

Well, at least it wasn't the millenials that got this country trillions in debt but it dang sure is the millenials that will have to pay for it.

As for recruiting, I'm not sure how people can't foresee what is coming next year. We were fortunate that Roy had stockpiled some talented 5* recruits that stuck around. Because of that, it takes several years for poor recruiting to show itself.

Starting next year, we will begin yielding the results of the last two classes. We could be looking at a starting lineup of Berry, Williams, Pinson, Maye and Bradley. That might be a top 25 team but sure won't be a title contender. If Berry were to leave This year, we'd be fortunate to just make the NCAA tourney.

 

[Archer2]

It has EVERYTHING to do with this discussion.

Yes it does, Mike. If they can't see that, there's no point in even trying to discuss it with them. Roy's methods have been as successful as anyone's since he returned to his alma mater and we're one of the favorites to win it all this year, a year after going to the final game last year. So without knowing what tomorrow will bring, and not even being able to enjoy the current success fo worrying about the future, they assume the worst. That's a poor way to go through life.

You know better than most that tomorrow isn't guaranteed, Mike. So all of us should enjoy the here and now and live every day like it may be our last, because it just might.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Millenials, schmenials. It's not what have you done in the past. It's not what have you done for me lately. It's not even what are you doing for me today. Now it's what are you going to do for me in the future. And they wonder why we call it the age of entitlement. Sheesh.

Want to know the difference between my generation and the millenial and centenial generations? When JFK said "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country", we applauded him. Millenials and centenials would try to have him impeached for saying that.

Lol ok

 

[RoseHeel]

Please answer the following questions:

1 - What do you plan on doing about our recruiting strategy other than bemoan it on a message board?
2 - If we win the title this year, will you still be discussing how the OAD strategy is superior?
3 - How many wins is acceptable to you with a majority of 3 star recruits?
4 - How many wins is acceptable to you with a majority of 5 star recruits?
5 - What are your goals for the program in general?

Thanks.

I see anything that's not claiming Roy is god is still unacceptable. I won't bother answering these since they're not only invalid and unnecessary, seeing I obviously have zero affect on our program, but borderline stupid and unfunny.

This running gag of asking every poster with realistic criticisms how many wins they have or their "plans" for our program is completely stale. None of us have any NCAA wins, so you're essentially damaging your own credibility on this board while trying to "expose" the other person. But whatever. Nice meme, I suppose.

If you have serious question you'd like to discuss, feel free to try again.

 

[gauchoheel]

The refusal to move away from the age/respect discussion is truly perplexing. Who am I not respecting? Roy??? I am the one championing his recruiting strategy as the best way to win!! For the 3rd time, the man has continued to recruit multiple OADs year after year. I think that's a great strategy. In what world do you get to pervert that into me not respecting our basketball coach?

I never watched Dean coach, but based off everything I've heard it seems clear he would be going hard after multiple OADs too. He's an all-time great, and all time greats adapt with the times. Roy certainly has, he's made it loud and clear he wants multiple OADs on this team.

Make some connection between the random topics about age to basketball. Nothing I have said has anything to do with instant gratification.

 

[venom660turbo]

Um yeah....can we freakin' talk about Zion now like the Thread Title states. Seriously some of you are completely out in left field most days. Why some of you devolve into consenting pricks is really beyond me! Every other thread title is a pissing contest. Unbelievable!

 

[RoseHeel]

And yet.............................................

Lol, how many times does this need to be tossed around?

As CB34 pointed out, basic math shows that if you took the half way mark of that timespan (i.e. right after our last Championship in 2009-2010), we have 15 wins. Over a third of those were thanks to last year's run.

In that same span:
UK has 23, Duke has 19, KU has 16, and even Michigan St. has 15. I didn't even check Florida or Louisville, but I'd bet they're close as well.

UConn, who I believe has missed the tourney twice due to Academic issues, even has 13. Both were the year before and after. Chances are, they would have had at least 2 wins had they been eligible.

But hey, tell me more about how any perceived drop-off is just a myth

 

[RoseHeel]

Um yeah....can we freakin' talk about Zion now like the Thread Title states. Seriously some of you are completely out in left field most days. Why some of you devolve into consenting pricks is really beyond me! Every other thread title is a pissing contest. Unbelievable!

Uh, did you actually bother to read beyond the title? This thread was hardly ever about Zion. The first post was someone talking about Drake wearing a Zion jersey and how Calipari is shady because of that.

 

[coryfly]

Roy tries to get some OAD guys. He just doesn't want a team loaded with them. He just isn't getting them. Roy's pitch isn't that you can come here and develop for a few years. His really good freshman have had tons of opportunities, which includes them starting. Heck, sometimes his not so good freshman have plenty of opportunities. He has had some guys who didn't perform as well as some thought they should which has killed the perception. They weren't restricted by a lack of shots or chances though, unless we are simply talking about not having more of a 'four out and one in' type offense.

Next year is definitely a year we could see some recent misses hurt. I feel ok about the backcourt (feel ok there for the next few years actually). In the frontcourt we could really struggle. Bradley and Maye will start. After that we have two guys backing them up who are not ready to play at this level yet. We need some guys like that but it will tough with the minutes Roy likes to give them. I have a feeling there will be a lot of small ball next year.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I see anything that's not claiming Roy is god is still unacceptable.

Lol. From me? I hardly even poast here at the asylum. So don't look at me.

I won't bother answering these since they're not only invalid and unnecessary, seeing I obviously have zero affect on our program, but borderline stupid and unfunny.
.

Some of those questions were legit. For example, the ones asking what's acceptable to you would give me an idea of if you just have unrealistic expectations for the program or if you're just an all around malcontent. If it was found to be the former then I would continue telling you why you're misguided and more discussion could have been had. If I had found it to be the latter, I would have probably just avoided any more discussions with you and chalked you up as one of those types of people that can't be pleased. I don't care. If you want to be mad and sulk because our recruiting might not be up to your lofty standards, that's fine. You're right. Neither of us have any effect on the situation (although sometimes your poasts read like you have it all figured out).

This running gag of asking every poster with realistic criticisms how many wins they have or their "plans" for our program is completely stale. None of us have any NCAA wins, so you're essentially damaging your own credibility on this board while trying to "expose" the other person. But whatever.

Running gag? I'm afraid I'm not in on the zany Radar games. As I stated above, my poasting is sparse on this board. As far as credibility, from the little I know of this place, that's a really big deal around here. But fear not, I dont seek to build any credibility with you or any of the other patients here and I wasn't trying to ruin yours. I was arguing the recruiting issue and doing it well. And you weren't doing too bad either. Maybe a couple of my questions were smartassy. So I'll take some blame for the discussion going south. But you should take some blame too, you know, for being all sourpuss and whatnot all the time. Amirite?

.

If you have serious question you'd like to discuss, feel free to try again.

If any of that was serious enough for you, by all means, feel free to respond. If not, GFY.

It's no surprise to anyone that @TarHeelNation11 is lurking. If there's bitching and moaning to be done, about anything, he's in line.

 

[Steat]

The Heels need to win the title this year and the pressure will be off for next season. Getting a #1 seed is critical. If Berry leaves (and I think he will), then the Heels need a go to player to score points at critical times of the game next season. Felton may be that player. Thus, a starting line-up of:

Felton
Williams
Pinson
Maye
Bradley

Seventh will have to make significant improvement in several areas to start over Felton next season. I am ecstatic over the improvement of Luke Maye this season. This team would make it to the round of 32.

As far as Zion is concerned, I think that ship has sailed and suffered a fate worse than the Titantic.

 

[Archer2]

Felton
Williams
Pinson
Maye
Bradley

Seventh will have to make significant improvement in several areas to start over Felton next season. I am ecstatic over the improvement of Luke Maye this season. This team would make it to the round of 32.

Felton
Williams
Theo
Maye
Bradley

Robinson
Woods
Rush
Huffman
Manley
Platek

And perhaps Berry as well, I think JJ is gone. But that's a pretty darn good team even if Berry leaves. I think Huffman will be ready to contribute right away. And I also think we will see the Sophomore jump from 7th, Brandon, Tony, and Shea.

Dook could very well be losing Allen, Kennard, Tatum, and Giles. We know they're losing Jefferson. So I think we'll be fine. But I'm focused on the here and now and enjoying the ride this year.

 

[montana_heel]

I am not a young man but think that we should be concerned about recruiting. It is a simple fact that we have had to dip will below a level than typical for bigs that is unprecedented in the Roy Williams era.

No one know the effect that will have in competitiveness. Both camps are blowing smoke by telling us what will happen. It is all just a guess. I would say that lower rated players will bring lower level play in general. Even Roy tells you that Ol' Roy ain't that good even though he is.

I agree with whoever posted that all it takes is one. We just need to break the ice. I have been around long enough to see recruiting cycles and we are in the dip. Soon we will be riding on the swell. That is one reason why Roy's 800 wins should be made a big deal from a marketing of recruits perspective.

I do not advocate all OAD but most don't. Some are claiming that is what other posters want. I don't think so. I like a mix based on Roy's judgment. After all, he has to coach them and create a team out of these individuals.

Everyone seems to be taking an extreme view either way to the left or right and it is more contentious on this site than I have ever seen it. Rarely is anything black or white. It is either darker or lighter gray.

I find it difficult and honestly annoying to have to filter through bickering to read quality opinions about basketball or recruiting.

 

[Raising Heel]

As CB34 pointed out, basic math shows that if you took the half way mark of that timespan (i.e. right after our last Championship in 2009-2010), we have 15 wins. Over a third of those were thanks to last year's run.

That's a neat trick, the way you started counting NCAA wins in 2010, the year that UNC missed the tournament but one year after they won the National Championship. Surefire way to drag UNC's total down and prop up your argument.

Actually, exactly one-third (5) of UNC's 15 wins during those seven years came from last year's run. So what? One-third of dook's total came in a single year (2015). One-third of Kansas' total came in a single year (2012). And 40% of Louisville's 15 wins in that time frame came in a single year (2013).

In that same span:
UK has 23, Duke has 19, KU has 16, and even Michigan St. has 15. I didn't even check Florida or Louisville, but I'd bet they're close as well.

Since we're arbitrarily selecting dates, how about we look at the last two years? UNC (7) has more NCAA Tournament wins than any of the other six programs you named except dook (8). Over the last three years, UNC (8) has more wins than anybody except UK (10) and as many as dook (8). If we just move that time span forward one year to exclude UNC's NIT season, the Tar Heels (15) have more wins than anybody except UK (20) and Florida (16) and as many as Kansas and Louisville. Maybe dook should be concerned that they only have 13.

UNC is also one of only two teams (Kansas) out of those seven that hasn't lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament during that span. Kentucky (Robert Morris) and Florida (BYU) have each lost one first-round game. dook (Lehigh, Mercer), Michigan State (UCLA, Middle Tennessee), and Louisville (Cal, Morehead State) have all suffered two embarrassing first-round losses in that time.

I think the Heels are doing just fine, personally.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

We lose these guys (assuming Berry stays and Justin leaves)

Nate
Stilman
Justin
Isaiah
Kennedy

That's a complete team. In fact, it's 60% of our starting team plus one of the first guys off the bench. It may not be as good as our starters, but it would certainly be respectable in the ACC and would probably gain a berth in the NIT, if not the NCAA (and I wouldn't rule that out).

It ain't easy to lose a potential playoff team. You sort of need to replace it with a potential playoff team. I like our recruiting class, but I wouldn't call it a potential playoff team. Jalek, probably. A couple other guys may grow to reach that level over several years.

Knox would elevate that class to the level we need.

 

[tarheel0910]

I think the Heels are doing just fine, personally.

Today we are, but we are talking about recruiting not today. I'm to lazy to research, but I think players like Marcus, Brice and Meeks weren't 3 star players. The real question is how are we going to do when our recruiting isn't at that high of a level, which will be next year. Hopefully that will be a one year thing and the year after we can start bringing in better classes. If it becomes a trend it's hard to see that not being a problem.

 

[carolinablue34]

Today we are, but we are talking about recruiting not today. I'm to lazy to research, but I think players like Marcus, Brice and Meeks weren't 3 star players. The real question is how are we going to do when our recruiting isn't at that high of a level, which will be next year. Hopefully that will be a one year thing and the year after we can start bringing in better classes. If it becomes a trend it's hard to see that not being a problem.

I think those of us who are concerned completely acknowledge that we're doing fine at the moment. It's the future that is the problem and our lack of recruiting prowess will start to hurt us.

 

[RoseHeel]

That's a neat trick, the way you started counting NCAA wins in 2010, the year that UNC missed the tournament but one year after they won the National Championship. Surefire way to drag UNC's total down and prop up your argument.

There's also this other neat trick that you should've used, called context. As I've said multiple times in this thread, the OAD era is often attributed to getting it's official start when John Wall and the other Kentucky kids went first round in the draft. Which you know, is basically what this entire discussion evolved into? (or devolved, based on your opinion) It just happens to fall right after our last title.

There's no conspiracy theory as to why I picked those dates, that's just how the numbers go. Blame the stats, not me.

Actually, exactly one-third (5) of UNC's 15 wins during those seven years came from last year's run.

Correct. That was my error saying "over one-third". I counted a 6th win last year. Maybe freudian slip, probably because I wish I could count a 6th win. Maybe I was tired. Either way, I was wrong.

So what?

So, two of those teams have a title to show for it. That's what.

You could make an argument that KU has underachieved since 2012, but that's not the point that the graphic was making.

Since we're arbitrarily selecting dates,

Yeah, already said I'm not "arbitrarily selecting dates." Stop trying to feed this conspiracy narrative.

how about we look at the last two years? UNC (7) has more NCAA Tournament wins than any of the other six programs you named except dook (8). Over the last three years, UNC (8) has more wins than anybody except UK (10) and as many as dook (8). If we just move that time span forward one year to exclude UNC's NIT season, the Tar Heels (15) have more wins than anybody except UK (20) and Florida (16) and as many as Kansas and Louisville. Maybe dook should be concerned that they only have 13.

Now this is arbitrarily selecting dates.

UNC is also one of only two teams (Kansas) out of those seven that hasn't lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament during that span. Kentucky (Robert Morris) and Florida (BYU) have each lost one first-round game. dook (Lehigh, Mercer), Michigan State (UCLA, Middle Tennessee), and Louisville (Cal, Morehead State) have all suffered two embarrassing first-round losses in that time.

Three of those teams you claimed had embarrassing losses also have a title to make up for it.

I think the Heels are doing just fine, personally.

Based on last year and early signs from this year, I'd certainly agree. Next year, it's anyone's guess.

 

[RoseHeel]

Some of those questions were legit. For example, the ones asking what's acceptable to you would give me an idea of if you just have unrealistic expectations for the program or if you're just an all around malcontent. If it was found to be the former then I would continue telling you why you're misguided and more discussion could have been had. If I had found it to be the latter, I would have probably just avoided any more discussions with you and chalked you up as one of those types of people that can't be pleased. I don't care. If you want to be mad and sulk because our recruiting might not be up to your lofty standards, that's fine. You're right. Neither of us have any effect on the situation (although sometimes your poasts read like you have it all figured out).

It's not about a certain # of wins being acceptable or unacceptable, I just find it amazing (and honestly, hilarious) that we have a select group of people who seem to be able to deny that recruiting top players has zero link to winning titles and competing. Especially when many of our Final Four teams had multiple 4 & 5 * caliber players.

Like I said in my previous post, if we were recruiting guys with 3 * each and every year and having fairly deep title runs, that's a different story. But that's not the case. So when you have that group of fans trying to call others negative for not buying into this narrative, it's like you're trying to piss on our heads and call it rain.

Of course there's more to it, but I think that's about all these arguments ever boil down to anyway.

Running gag? I'm afraid I'm not in on the zany Radar games. As I stated above, my poasting is sparse on this board. As far as credibility, from the little I know of this place, that's a really big deal around here. But fear not, I dont seek to build any credibility with you or any of the other patients here and I wasn't trying to ruin yours. I was arguing the recruiting issue and doing it well. And you weren't doing too bad either. Maybe a couple of my questions were smartassy. So I'll take some blame for the discussion going south. But you should take some blame too, you know, for being all sourpuss and whatnot all the time. Amirite?

I wouldn't know, but I know I've been reading a bunch of "how many titles do you have?"-type comments lately when people question Roy or the team. Tbqh, it's getting harder to distinguish every poster, minus a select few, from the "loony bin"

I also wouldn't say I'm a sourpuss, but I think even you'd agree some of these posts on the "asylum" get a bit farfetch'd. It's a bit hard to tell who's making jokes and who actually buys into some of this stuff being said.

If any of that was serious enough for you, by all means, feel free to respond. If not, GFY.

It's no surprise to anyone that @TarHeelNation11 is lurking. If there's bitching and moaning to be done, about anything, he's in line.

 

[gunslingerdick]

When it comes to something I have zero control over, I'll worry about the future in the future. I think I'd rather enjoy the present than bemoan something that may or may not happen. That's all I'm saying. But I will try not to derail the "woe is us" threads from now on. Carry on.

 

[Steat]

Assuming that Jackson is gone.

I don't know what Roy needs to do extra on Knox's OV, but he needs to pull out all stops for this young man. Even if he has to promise Knox the starting position at the 3. Heck, who on the current roster can beat Knox out for the 3? Theo would start at the 4. Time to get creative.

 

[Raising Heel]

...the OAD era is often attributed to getting it's official start when John Wall and the other Kentucky kids went first round in the draft.

Attributed by whom? Your use of passive voice is duly noted. Kevin Durant, Mike Conley Jr., Brandan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Thaddeus Young, Derrick Rose, Kevin Love, Jerryd Bayless, Michael Beasley, Eric Gordon, J.J. Hickson, DeAndre Jordan, O.J. Mayo, DeMar Rozen, Jrue Holiday, and Tyreke Evans all say hello. And that's not even a full listing of the OADs that preceded Wall. But you want us to believe that the advent of the OAD era came *after* these guys?

Yeah, already said I'm not "arbitrarily selecting dates." Stop trying to feed this conspiracy narrative.

I'm not trying to feed any conspiracy. I'm just disagreeing with you and providing ample evidence to show why you're wrong.

 

[coryfly]

Don't believe we are getting Knox. I don't think he is a OAD anyway (even though he may leave early regardless) so it would hurt our perception more than help it if that is the concern. That isn't my concern. I'm fine with getting guys like we have been getting. The issue at hand comes into play next year, where we won't have guys like we have been getting but guys below them. I think next year is a struggle but I do think there is a good possibility it is only next year.

 

[Raising Heel]

I just find it amazing (and honestly, hilarious) that we have a select group of people who seem to be able to deny that recruiting top players has zero link to winning titles and competing.

Somebody said this? Where?

 

[gunslingerdick]

Attributed by whom? Your use of passive voice is duly noted. Kevin Durant, Mike Conley Jr., Brandan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Thaddeus Young, Derrick Rose, Kevin Love, Jerryd Bayless, Michael Beasley, Eric Gordon, J.J. Hickson, DeAndre Jordan, O.J. Mayo, DeMar Rozen, Jrue Holiday, and Tyreke Evans all say hello. And that's not even a full listing of the OADs that preceded Wall. But you want us to believe that the advent of the OAD era came *after* these guys?

I'm not trying to feed any conspiracy. I'm just disagreeing with you and providing ample evidence to show why you're wrong.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Somebody said this? Where?

I don't know if anyone has ever outright said that recruiting rankings have zero correlation to winning titles, but the inference has been made, as has the idea that Roy can win with whoever he recruits regardless of ranking. One off comparisons to successful role players that weren't highly ranked have been made, and the implication has been that future recruits of that skill level will be able to provide an equal contribution, even when they are now the best players on the team, as opposed to complimentary pieces to highly talented players.

We both know I'm too lazy to look up instances of these being poasted on here, but if you've perused several Radar threads recently, you should have seen things such as this mentioned (and if you haven't perused over here much, you're a better man than me).

 

[Raising Heel]

... if you've perused several Radar threads recently, you should have seen things such as this mentioned (and if you haven't perused over here much, you're a better man than me).

I win again.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Nobody ever said or implied that recruiting rankings have zero to do with team success. This is idiotic and and just a distraction. Nobody said Roy could be successful without any good players either. What many have said is that Roy keeps winning despite not getting the sure fire OADs so far and the factories are not pulling very far ahead with them! Many have also said that Roy's success has less to do with his coaching ability and more to do with recruiting at Blueblood Us that rake in the stars. I think recent history has proven that Roy can win because of his coaching and not despite it. I believe he will keep us in the conversation every year whether he gets player X or not and this is enough for me. I do believe recruiting is on the uptick and will correct soon as well.

I'm really hoping the OAD barrier is broken soon, but I'm calm because we have a coach that can win under any circumstances. Final point to me is that peeps continually say that any criticism of Roy is forbidden. I do peruse this site a great deal and seldom go to any other (only TOS very rarely) and this argument is always used when someone's opinion is countered and they don't like it. This is the same tired argument that player-bashers use when they run out of salient points! Why don't peeps who criticize our coach and players EXPECT argument here? I welcome a good argument against any points I make as long as the person does not make it personal or devolve into Middle school name calling.

Why do peeps believe the Zion and Knox ships have sailed? I have seen nothing definitive.

 

[mikeirbyusa]

Somebody said this? Where?

Exactly! And do all of you not think this scandal mess has hurt us on the recruiting trail? If not, I'd sure like to read your reasoning power behind it.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Everyone with even the slightest intelligence believes the "stuff" has effected recruiting, but some want to pretend they don't since it does not fit their agendas.

 

[Ozheelfan]

Recognising I'm very late to the discussion, I have to address the "3yrs of 10+ losses"

No denying they happened, but please don't look at them in a vacuum... a horror run, before the NCAA "Stuff" of mitigating circumstances:
Larry Spew
The Twins
PJ and LMac being idiots
Rash!t McC*nt and his dad
All contributed to roster instability, poor public perception and negative recruiting.
.... and then came Mary, Kane and the NCAA!

So yeah, Roy lost more games in a 3 yr span than ever, and that alone must have hurt recruiting, the "stuff" piled on and it hurt more, the slower than expected development of JMM might have also hurt.

Point being, it's not just one thing that's made it tougher to reel in the odd OAD.