I'm making that into a t-shirt Shun!
Brandon Huffman
- Thread starter Steat
- Start date
I'm making that into a t-shirt Shun!
Some people tend to see the glass as half full, some half empty. If you spend a little time on this board, it's pretty easy to see who falls into which category. Like Shun said, I choose to be optimistic and try my best to tune the "dire choir" out as much as possible.
But they, like all of us, are certainly entitled to voice their opinions.
But they, like all of us, are certainly entitled to voice their opinions.
First, I love Joel James. Got that out of the way. But Huffman is a whole lot better than Joel James and it's not even close.
If you ever needed an argument for redshirting, JoelJ makes the case. He was coming along every year but just didn't have enough years to get there.
WoW, feel free to see this kid or any of our recruits any way you want but you don't get the right to insist I or any other poster see things as you do. Geez, you go on and on about heads buried in the sand and blah blah blah, as if your view point is the only one of any merit. It is as if for every decent thing anyone has to say about these recruits there is this need to counter it with some form of darkness? Every one of our 2017 freshmen will play like they play when they get here, we all expect them to play like freshmen and I would HOPE we ALL would want them to play well as freshmen and some of us actually do see some potential for that, clearly you do not. Excuse me and many others for wanting to see the potential solutions in the problem more so than the potential problems in the solution.
As you said "I'd like to point out that this is a "Brandon Huffman" thread, not a "Brandon Huffman Praise""...But that does not mean it has to be a let's minimize Brandon Huffman thread either, respectfully please don't complain about one extreme if you are going to the other extreme, the real truth is usually found in the middle.
1point I want to make concerning Brandon Huffman, hard to argue that he played anything but great vs Oak Hill, one of the strongest HS level programs in the country. Now I would think his playing so well against them would bode well for the chances that he plays really well in his lesser talented regular schedule of games. That actually does bode well for his chances of being strongly elevated from his prior ranking, that isn't guess but simple common sense. There does not need to be a I told ya so moment, it isn't about I told ya so in the first place, it is about players becoming Tar Heels and fans supporting them, who the heck needs I told ya so moments? I could care less what your opinion is now if Brandon comes in and plays well for us as a frosh, I am gonna be way more in to what he is doing that what you said before ever watching him play a single game in a UNC uniform. I don't mean that in any mean spirited way at all, I mean for this entire post to be respectfully stated toward you and your opinion.
Well said, Dave. If some people are overzealous in their praise for incoming recruit(s), and they often are because they're UNC fans and want them to be great, so what? I've been known to advise posters to tap the brakes a little myself. But I love it when people are optimistic and enthusiastic about UNC. If time proves Huffman and Manley are simply role players like Joel James, fine. Joel, while not a star on the court, was one of my all time favorite UNC players, and I'm so glad he was a part of our program.
It's not about being "right", it's about supporting your team. I think some people are a little too concerned with being right about their predictions.
It's not about being "right", it's about supporting your team. I think some people are a little too concerned with being right about their predictions.
I don't even think it's about predictions or anything like that. Some of us just acknowledge the fact-and the reality that not one big man ranked where these guys are has made any huge impact at unc under Roy. It's a fact that is magnified because they both may be asked to try and do way more than what they're capable of, and way earlier than they should have to.
Yeah, I don't think anyone is trying to spin Huffman in to Wendyl Carter or Manley in to Bamba, I at least have been trying to consider these kids for what I think they reasonably can bring and it not be more than should reasonably be expected. I really at this point do not see the point in lamenting what we do not have, so why not consider what we do have and what we may have on the way?
Rose IMO is a good poster, a bit more glass half empty than I am but usually solid and I am trying not to be anything but respectful even thou I do strongly disagree on Huffman and Manley and their ability to become Tar Heel players.
"They're only 3*'s for a reason." Pragmatism or pessimism?
"They're underrated." Lack of realism or optimism?
Who the hell knows at this point? Again, only time will tell. Why don't we agree to disagree and just wait and see how it plays out? Fair enough?
"They're underrated." Lack of realism or optimism?
Who the hell knows at this point? Again, only time will tell. Why don't we agree to disagree and just wait and see how it plays out? Fair enough?
I am one of those who think they will both eventually play better than their rankings. I also see that some people confuse critique with bashing. I also see that some peeps just don't know what the word, "fact" means. Lastly, I mostly see that many peeps believe that if you are not pointing out something negative, you are ignoring reality.
Well, if reality is so negative, then I choose to ignore it every day! I live in a world that suits me just fine, and I have no need for that type of reality!
Huffman is a Family member and I am proud to have him! Welcome to your dream youngster!
Manley is a Family member and I am proud he represents us. I fully expect him to out perform some of the more highly ranked peeps out there!
Well, if reality is so negative, then I choose to ignore it every day! I live in a world that suits me just fine, and I have no need for that type of reality!
Huffman is a Family member and I am proud to have him! Welcome to your dream youngster!
Manley is a Family member and I am proud he represents us. I fully expect him to out perform some of the more highly ranked peeps out there!
It's laughable that people on this board are so keen on avoiding OADs, but will have us believe that 3 * Freshman will do the same thing those players can do. Which is exactly what they'll have to do next year when we may only have 1 non rookie big left on our roster.
But tell me more about how realism is negativity.
But tell me more about how realism is negativity.
"The Sky is falling"
"Some form of darkness"
"Dire Predictions"
Clearly we're in some type of Science Fiction movie.
It really is a bizarre form of cognitive dissonance that is on display. I get it, we are all fans. But at some point to not even recognize or worse yet acknowledge that this is not the type of player Roy has ever done well with and we have 3 of them coming on board next year is just delusional, yet its being thrown under the guise of "positivity".. and those of us that have the gall to point towards the reality of it are the lords of darkness and spreading the word of the eye of sauron.
Also the lack of wanting to maintain a UNC standard of recruiting is pretty dissapointing as well. As you say these sunshine and rainbow positivity pushers at the same time say that OAD are bad etc etc. Its really weird.
If we are unfortunate enough to lose Jackson and Bradley and Berry next year the chickens certainly will be coming home to roost. We better hope these guys(Our apparent advanced scouts on here who can accurately diagnose from youtube footage that Huff and manley are indeed the real deal) are right about the both of them.
DSouth, I respect your opinion, as you're one of the more level headed posters here. None of this is meant as a slight, but I'm a bit frustrated from the constant insistence of certain posters making every single thing that's not a bunch of la-di-da posts out to be "dire" or "negative". The fact is, everything isn't sunshine and roses regarding recruiting, and anyone that doesn't buy into that load of crap is just passed off as "negative". It's asinine.
I'll point out that you were the one who asked me what my response would be should Huffman or others came in and plays well as a Freshman. I'll gladly own up to my errors, with or without someone calling me out. Because like you said, I'll be more happy to see him proving me wrong.
I'm also not saying to go and search for the exact posts that were wrong just to say "I told you so". But there are always people who lie in wait to do just that, from both sides. If Huffman came in and played solidly, we'd have plenty of people ready to call the others out. I'd just be happy he proved me wrong.
We've been through this cycle time and time again. Overestimating recruits and then passing off some excuse when it doesn't reach the expected level of success. It's an endless cycle of people unable to accept the situation around them, hence the "burying their heads in the sand". FFS, I see people in this thread that knew we needed an elite big(s) in 2017, yet suddenly switched up down the line when we weren't getting those types of players. Perhaps these are the guys that should be called out
Regardless, I've already stated time and time again I'll support our players when they get here, but I'm certainly not going to stop critiquing just because it doesn't sound positive to someone. So call it the sky is falling, doom or gloom, or whatever you'd like. But past experience with these situation suggest the #s are on my side.
Preaching to the choir.
We don't have a single archetype of a 3 star player that came in and overachieved. Especially on Day 1, which some people can't understand that's exactly what we're going to need them to do next year if we lose more than just seniors. god forbid we have as many injuries as we had at the start of this season.
And next year, we'll have a total of 5 of them on our roster.
I've heard all these "rumors" about Manley almost being a 5 * or Huffman being vastly underrated, yet there's not a single shred of evidence of this. Other than those quotes just being thrown around by people on this board.
It sure is looking like Brice playing up to his potential in his senior season is the new Barnes picking UNC. We're still hearing about Barnes over 7 years later even though there have been numerous top 10 recruits that have shunned us since, so I assume the same will be true for Brice even if there are numerous bigs that fail to outperform their rankings in the mean time.
I'm guessing we haven't even heard the beginning of it though, since there are still people touting taking an unproven, never before head coach, to replace Roy - just because it worked out with Dean Smith and that was 55 years ago.
To be fair, not many recruits start in Alaska like Huffman and have two devestating injuries like Manley. I am not going to sit here and say they should be ranked higher. I havent seen enough to make that call. Just throwing those tid bits out there where I can see why theyve been a bit under the radar.
Never once said anything remotely like I didn't want OADs!
Never said anything remotely like 3* are somehow the second coming of Hans!
I said both Manley and Huffman are better than their rankings!
I said I believe we will be fine with what we have AND our HOF coach!
I said I believe our coaching staff can turn these guys into starters! (Manley has real potential)
I believe we are not done with 2017!
I want SOME OADs, but only if they are team players with character and NO handlers!
I never want a starting lineup of JUST OADs!
Lastly, I support the Tar Heels through ups AND downs!
Never said anything remotely like 3* are somehow the second coming of Hans!
I said both Manley and Huffman are better than their rankings!
I said I believe we will be fine with what we have AND our HOF coach!
I said I believe our coaching staff can turn these guys into starters! (Manley has real potential)
I believe we are not done with 2017!
I want SOME OADs, but only if they are team players with character and NO handlers!
I never want a starting lineup of JUST OADs!
Lastly, I support the Tar Heels through ups AND downs!
If you didn't say those things, my words don't apply to you.
The point still remains: We have multiple 3 * freshmen coming in and we'll have to expect at least one of them to contribute as much as a OAD player would.
So unless you think that's very likely, or you know something about Knox, Vanderbilt, or our recruiting in general that the rest of the public doesn't know, those things don't hold much merit.
The point still remains: We have multiple 3 * freshmen coming in and we'll have to expect at least one of them to contribute as much as a OAD player would.
So unless you think that's very likely, or you know something about Knox, Vanderbilt, or our recruiting in general that the rest of the public doesn't know, those things don't hold much merit.
Hi alabamaheel, believe it or not, I am CATHLOIC. North Carolina, until a few years. ago was a missionary area for the catholic church.
Once again, the argument surrounding OAD type players is muddied.
Nearly every poster on this board would love for Roy to land one or two of his targeted OAD-type players each year.
However, it comes down to what needs to be done to achieve this. Some are happy with the prospect of Roy doing whatever it takes, others are not.
As for Huffman, he aint a OAD, but I also think he aint a 3*. It'll be fun to see what he is in about 18months to 2yrs.
Nearly every poster on this board would love for Roy to land one or two of his targeted OAD-type players each year.
However, it comes down to what needs to be done to achieve this. Some are happy with the prospect of Roy doing whatever it takes, others are not.
As for Huffman, he aint a OAD, but I also think he aint a 3*. It'll be fun to see what he is in about 18months to 2yrs.
Fair points Rose, kinda why I like discussing with you, we don't agree a ton but you do make fair valid points. It isn't that I don't get it, I fully understand the angst of our not getting the higher rated recruits in a class where they were in particular important. I get the notion that going in we needed impact front court guys and all we got was these 2 guys rated about where Joel James and Desmond were coming in, they didn't help us much so how can these 2 guys carry such a heavy load and they will have to next season. Trust me, I get that and I don't totally disagree with it either.
I look at it like this, we needed 5 star big men, Roy offered Carter, Bamba, Tilman, PJ, Vanderbilt, I think he offered and if he didn't was about to offer Mitchel Robinson. Well, all those guys have eliminated us except vanderbilt and he is not expected to end up with us. Roy took his shots there but the way things fell out we whiffed.
Next we have a group of 4 star guys, most Roy didn't offer, after watching them Roy selected Stokes, Manley, Brooks, and Huffman to offer. Now there where a couple 4 stars I would have liked to see Roy engage with but there were problems with both. The 7ft kid from cali, really raw but should be a nesty shot blocker, thing is this kid is more a west coaster and seems likely to stay there and our success with west coast big men not been great, we have seen 3 of our last 4 transfer back to cali aftre their freshman seasons. Ikey is another 7ft kid, just committed to FSU, as gary shared, has been falling in the rankings, he is kinda like many of the 7th guys FSU has got over the last few years, 7th foot is about all they bring. My point, there really were not a ton of the 4star kids better if they were even that, than the 4 guys Roy offered.
I'm sayin IMO if we move past the fact that we did not get what we needed, a 5 star or 2 big man, then we did the best we could do past that by getting as good a pair of 4 stars that were available, guys that Roy feels great about. I'm saying that IMO Huffman and Manley stand great chances of not only becoming 4 star ranked guys but strong 4 star guys.
Now it does not do us any good to lament guys we didn't get, we didn't get them we have to move past that., but does it not ease the pain to get 2 really strong 4 star players both with college ready bodies? No, the rankings do not show that right now and we can argue if they will or not, I believe that in the final analysis both will be solid to strong 4 stars. And even that would not be what we all wanted but it would be a lot more than just 3 way down the charts 3 stars which I think you see them as right now. I have explained why I feel better about these 2 players, no matter where they are ranked, will be glad to discuss and expand on that if you want us to. Rose I am not as much trying to change your mind as I am trying to ease it, hope ya understand that.
What does a OAD need to contribute in our offense? our Defense? We are not going to scrap what we do and just feed a greedy mouth at UNC (this might be one reason to add to why we whiffed so far). A OAD will be asked to do what every other starter at UNC is asked; contribute to the overall success of the team. The team will ride a hot hand and pick things up when none are hot-this will not change no matter who we get. So.....
My points still stand that Huffman eventually, and Manley next year will be UNC starter level and the ship will sail on!
I want some OADs that can fit themselves to our team and not the majority who must be placated and coddled.!
My points still stand that Huffman eventually, and Manley next year will be UNC starter level and the ship will sail on!
I want some OADs that can fit themselves to our team and not the majority who must be placated and coddled.!
On this OAD question, I think most agree that we would welcome a O&D player but I as well think "most" UNC fans would rather we not load up on them s0o much that we have to re-tool the team every single year. I as well want to believe that most UNC fans do not want us to engage in the dirty tricks that have allowed some programs to get the coveted O&D kid.
Heck, since we didn't get the bigs some of you guys "demand", Roy should just skip signing any big guys at all and we can let our walkons play a lot more. 
Roy can't force the players to come to UNC. Guns are not allowed in NCAA recruiting, just handlers and payoffs, neither of which Roy will be involved in.
For me, David and Oz nailed it in their last 2 posts.
Roy can't force the players to come to UNC. Guns are not allowed in NCAA recruiting, just handlers and payoffs, neither of which Roy will be involved in.
For me, David and Oz nailed it in their last 2 posts.
I think it's time to put a couple of people on ignore, nothing from them but the same ol' same ol'. They sound like a broken record. And no amount of logical discourse is going to budge them.Heck, since we didn't get the bigs some of you guys "demand", Roy should just skip signing any big guys at all and we can let our walkons play a lot more.
Roy can't force the players to come to UNC. Guns are not allowed in NCAA recruiting, just handlers and payoffs, neither of which Roy will be involved in.
For me, David and Oz nailed it in their last 2 posts.
Way ahead of you. I used to never use the ignore button, but as I have gotten older I figure it is less aggravation for me, and probably for those ignored as well. I win, and they win. Yay!!
"Logic" is not taught in the US educational system the way its supposed to be, thusly we have grown man children throwing the word around like they even know what it's real definition is.
Rather unfortunate and not the fault of those who have gone their whole lives being deprived of true knowledge, so the ignorance can be somewhat excused as they aren't even aware of it. I have to remind myself with what I'm dealing with when I engage some here and not be overly critical and try and exhibit patience. I confess it's difficult.
Rather unfortunate and not the fault of those who have gone their whole lives being deprived of true knowledge, so the ignorance can be somewhat excused as they aren't even aware of it. I have to remind myself with what I'm dealing with when I engage some here and not be overly critical and try and exhibit patience. I confess it's difficult.
Last edited:
I'm not going to lie, the offers/non-offers Roy made were downright baffling compared to last year. It's not even that we didn't offer any bigs between the 40-70 range, but we didn't even offer anyone between the 40-70, perhaps with the exception of Randolph, based on what ranking you use. Never have I seen Roy reach so far down the barrel when there were plenty of potential picks in the middle (you named a few of them). Especially when this is our sweet spot when it comes to our teams.
Not to mention the guys we didn't offer (that's a discussion for another time though )
Granted, I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, and I'm sure someone's waiting to chime in with that tired "Roy can't force these kids to sign" song and dance, as if people actually think this is what he's trying to do. But there was clearly a different level of talent pursued last year compared to this year. So I sure do hope Roy has some aces left over like some are predicting.
Regarding Huffman and Others, perhaps I am trying to temper expectations a bit, especially since it's apparent that calling people out for being incorrect down the line is frowned upon. I'd prefer to keep expectations on a realistic level than the astronomical levels we've seen in the past + the ones being set now.
Hell, remember when Luke Maye was going to be averaging 20 and 10 soon? Or how Joel James was the most "underrated NBA prospect"? This is not downing/bashing these guys, but far too often do these sky-high expectations end up leading to others unfairly bashing our guys down the line. And for those who often complain about people constantly "bashing" our own players, this should speak volumes.
Then again, I'm getting backlash and threats to be ignored (lmao) because I keep calling them out for their ridiculousness, so perhaps I'll just let them wallow.
People keep saying you can't compare them to J. James on Maye. And you're right. James was #58 in high school. Maye just finished in the top 100 on ESPN. Neither of these guys have touched the top 100 yet.
So in summary I can buy that these 3 * guys have the potential to be underrated, obviously I haven't seen them play (though most people here haven't either). But you have a good number of people in this thread convinced they'll be able to start day 1 and contribute 20-30 mins a game, something that many of our higher rated prospects couldn't do, when we were originally pursuing 5 * guys to do this.
Call it negative if you want. Just don't complain when you see a bunch of fans upset that Manley or Huffman aren't looking like Tony Bradley or Sr. Brice Johnson (LOL!) at the start of their careers.
Hell, forget OADs/5 star or 4 star guys for a minute, If 3 * recruits can play at Elite status from day 1, why should we waste our time offering 5 * OADs when they're just going to blow us off anyway??? Why not just go after those diamonds in the rough year in and year out? Clearly Roy has stumbled onto a master plan that all 350 other coaches have missed out on.
Who said either of them would play at an elite level from day 1?
Who said Luke would get those top level stats?
Luke has become an important contributor so that fits what I saw peeps saying about him.
Both our big recruits are underrated from my observation of their videos out right now. What is so controversial about this idea. I think both will contribute next year and eventually grow to starter level. (Huffman will take 2 years; Manley might be there by ACC play)
We missed on OADs so what, I think Roy will do fine with what we have.
Who said Luke would get those top level stats?
Luke has become an important contributor so that fits what I saw peeps saying about him.
Both our big recruits are underrated from my observation of their videos out right now. What is so controversial about this idea. I think both will contribute next year and eventually grow to starter level. (Huffman will take 2 years; Manley might be there by ACC play)
We missed on OADs so what, I think Roy will do fine with what we have.
Lmao, I love how you keep backtracking and glossing over the point. Not to mention skipping over the part where we actually need someone to start Day 1? The point I've been trying to make since the beginning.
But hey, tell me more about 2 or more years down the line. Even thought that's clearly not what I asked.
But hey, tell me more about 2 or more years down the line. Even thought that's clearly not what I asked.
