ADVERTISEMENT

Our Offers - 2021 vs 2022

What Would Jesus Do?

Hall of Famer
Nov 28, 2010
10,736
5,772
113
I'm excited to see Hubert extending offers to some top players in the 2022 class. If he can actually reel them in, we should be in good shape. Assuming he can coach.

For 2021, we offered 12 players...

6 in the top 10​
3 more in the top 20​
1 in the top 40​
2 in the top 70​

We ended up with the 2 in the top 70.

For 2022, so far, we have put 11 offers out there...

4 in the top 10​
1 in the top 20​
1 in the top 30​
1 in the top 40​
1 in the top 50​
1 in the top 60​
1 in the top 90​
1 out of the top 100​

I'm glad to see the offers spread out a bit more evenly. But I'd like to see a few more in the 20-50 range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPFKAPFS
1 offer outside the top 100? I'd argue that we should hold onto those given the current landscape in college athletics with the transfer rule, and keep one in our pocket for a grad transfer/transfer at any time
 
Recruiting at UNC should be easy. Alabama football signs twenty top 200 players every year. In basketball, signing three in the top 100 should be a piece of cake
 
I want to see some commitments. I've found researching all our offers that eventually don't pan out a depressing hobby.
Do yourself a big favor and quit trying to figure out what teenagers are going to do. I used to follow recruiting closely, now I generally wait for them to commit before getting too hyped up. With OAD’s and the Stargate, it’s the wild, wild west.
 
1 offer outside the top 100? I'd argue that we should hold onto those given the current landscape in college athletics with the transfer rule, and keep one in our pocket for a grad transfer/transfer at any time
The new transfer rule is definitely going to change the way schools recruit. While I’m in favor of holding a scholarship or a few for transfers, we still must go after the OADs. We should also recruit four year players especially at the PG position. Having an experienced player available to run the offense could be invaluable considering the new transfer rule, the OADers or injuries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPFKAPFS
The new transfer rule is definitely going to change the way schools recruit. While I’m in favor of holding a scholarship or a few for transfers, we still must go after the OADs. We should also recruit four year players especially at the PG position. Having an experienced player available to run the offense could be invaluable considering the new transfer rule, the OADers or injuries.

i agree. i just don’t see any value in offering a scholly to a sub 100 player....ever.
 
i agree. i just don’t see any value in offering a scholly to a sub 100 player....ever.
Mostly I agree, but that may be giving too much credit to the folks who do the ranking.

Some coaches seem to be quite good at spotting diamonds in the rough. For most of his career, Roy didn't need to, because he was pretty adept at landing higher ranked players.

When recruiting got harder, Roy did sign several players in the 100s and 200s and beyond. Some panned out quite well and became starters (155 Luke, 131 Garrison, 133 Kerwin), occasional starters (121 Nate Britt), and solid contributors (217 Platek).

Skimming through 247, here are the guys Roy signed who were not in the top 100 (listed chronologically)

542 Michael Copeland
307 Justin Watts
124 Desmond Hubert
426 Jackson Simmons
431 Stilman White
121 Nate Britt*
155 Luke Maye
131 Garrison Brooks
193 Brandon Huffman
217 Andrew Platek
267 Sterling Manley
179 Jeremiah Francis*
133 Kerwin Walton

* to be fair, Jeremiah was ranked 51 when we signed him, before his bad injury; and something similar happened with Nate.

I also seem to recall that either Kenny Williams (96) or Will Graves (93) or both may have gotten a Carolina bump in their rankings when they signed with us.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TPFKAPFS
Mostly I agree, but that may be giving too much credit to the folks who do the ranking.

Some coaches seem to be quite good at spotting diamonds in the rough. For most of his career, Roy didn't need to, because he was pretty adept at landing higher ranked players.

When recruiting got harder, Roy did sign several players in the 100s and 200s and beyond. Some panned out quite well and became starters (155 Luke, 131 Garrison, 133 Kerwin), occasional starters (121 Nate Britt), and solid contributors (217 Platek).

Skimming through 247, here are the guys Roy signed who were not in the top 100 (listed chronologically)

542 Michael Copeland
307 Justin Watts
124 Desmond Hubert
426 Jackson Simmons
431 Stilman White
121 Nate Britt*
131 Garrison Brooks
193 Brandon Huffman
217 Andrew Platek
267 Sterling Manley
179 Jeremiah Francis*
133 Kerwin Walton

* to be fair, Jeremiah was ranked 51 when we signed him, before his bad injury; and something similar happened with Nate.

I also seem to recall that either Kenny Williams (96) or Will Graves (93) or both may have gotten a Carolina bump in their rankings when they signed with us.


The notion that we or any college basketball program would recruit based on high school rankings is absurd. Here is just a few guys you might have heard of and their high school ranking:

Cameron Johnson - 224
Fred Van Vleet - 138
Admiral Schofield - 251
Jarrett Culver - 312

Those are 4 guys that were very good college basketball players that helped their teams to very successful years during their tenure. But if you're still unimpressed, here are a few more you might know:

Steph Curry - 263
Damien Lillard - 214
Jimmy Butler - 1253
Paul George - 202
Victor Olidipo - 139
Russ Westbrook - 137
Ja Morant - unranked

Yes, I get it...they're the exception and not the rule. But the point remains that if any program is relying on rankings to do their recruiting, they're potentially missing out on program changing players. We and all programs need to focus on the recruits themselves, their play, their coachability, their fit and their commitment to getting better rather than how many stars they have or what arbitrary number was given to them by guys who probably know as much about the game as people posting on message boards.
 
The notion that we or any college basketball program would recruit based on high school rankings is absurd. Here is just a few guys you might have heard of and their high school ranking:

Cameron Johnson - 224
Fred Van Vleet - 138
Admiral Schofield - 251
Jarrett Culver - 312

Those are 4 guys that were very good college basketball players that helped their teams to very successful years during their tenure. But if you're still unimpressed, here are a few more you might know:

Steph Curry - 263
Damien Lillard - 214
Jimmy Butler - 1253
Paul George - 202
Victor Olidipo - 139
Russ Westbrook - 137
Ja Morant - unranked

Yes, I get it...they're the exception and not the rule. But the point remains that if any program is relying on rankings to do their recruiting, they're potentially missing out on program changing players. We and all programs need to focus on the recruits themselves, their play, their coachability, their fit and their commitment to getting better rather than how many stars they have or what arbitrary number was given to them by guys who probably know as much about the game as people posting on message boards.
So I get what you're saying...and I agree, to a point. Having 1-2 of those guys every 2 classes is fine...filling out your roster with more than that will create 2020 type results, which I'm sure you agree with.

Another point though...how many national titles do those 11 players you listed have? Zero.

We are held to a different standard here. Looking at our championship teams, they were littered with 5 star recruits in the starting lineup (or 6th man). Our issue has been our 5 star recruits are either underperforming or bolting after 1 year or both. Cole/Jalek/Sharpe/Walker/Caleb/ is a pretty uninspiring list. Recruiting is really freaking hard these days. That said, you're about to see a junior Bacot be REALLY good and I think a sophomore Caleb will be a lotto pick.

So I agree, we should be absolutely doing our due diligence to find those diamonds in the mostly rough of 100+ ranked kids. We also need to be prepared for more Platek's than Steph's if we go that route with any type of consistency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPFKAPFS
The notion that we or any college basketball program would recruit based on high school rankings is absurd. Here is just a few guys you might have heard of and their high school ranking:

Cameron Johnson - 224
Fred Van Vleet - 138
Admiral Schofield - 251
Jarrett Culver - 312

Those are 4 guys that were very good college basketball players that helped their teams to very successful years during their tenure. But if you're still unimpressed, here are a few more you might know:

Steph Curry - 263
Damien Lillard - 214
Jimmy Butler - 1253
Paul George - 202
Victor Olidipo - 139
Russ Westbrook - 137
Ja Morant - unranked

Yes, I get it...they're the exception and not the rule. But the point remains that if any program is relying on rankings to do their recruiting, they're potentially missing out on program changing players. We and all programs need to focus on the recruits themselves, their play, their coachability, their fit and their commitment to getting better rather than how many stars they have or what arbitrary number was given to them by guys who probably know as much about the game as people posting on message boards.
It's actually a lot more guys ranked outside top 100 who end up better than some guys in the ACC and other Power 5 conferences. Some guys don't play for shoe circuit teams or play at smaller schools and just never get seen. Trevor Hudgins would have been one of the best point guards in the ACC and he plays D2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPFKAPFS
The notion that we or any college basketball program would recruit based on high school rankings is absurd. Here is just a few guys you might have heard of and their high school ranking:

Cameron Johnson - 224
Fred Van Vleet - 138
Admiral Schofield - 251
Jarrett Culver - 312

Those are 4 guys that were very good college basketball players that helped their teams to very successful years during their tenure. But if you're still unimpressed, here are a few more you might know:

Steph Curry - 263
Damien Lillard - 214
Jimmy Butler - 1253
Paul George - 202
Victor Olidipo - 139
Russ Westbrook - 137
Ja Morant - unranked

Yes, I get it...they're the exception and not the rule. But the point remains that if any program is relying on rankings to do their recruiting, they're potentially missing out on program changing players. We and all programs need to focus on the recruits themselves, their play, their coachability, their fit and their commitment to getting better rather than how many stars they have or what arbitrary number was given to them by guys who probably know as much about the game as people posting on message boards.
You are certainly correct to say that those are exceptions, not the rule.

I'd be very surprised if programs did NOT look at rankings. Not that they would or should be wedded to them, of course, but simply because members of a small staff simply can't know about everybody. So rankings for them, just as for fans, are one way to avoid overlooking talent.

Not really related, but one of the things I've wondered is how much coaches at different colleges share - or hide - the prospects they are thinking about from fellow coaches. Simiarly, how much do they steer other coaches toward players that they like but have decided not to pursue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TPFKAPFS
I'd be very surprised if programs did NOT look at rankings. Not that they would or should be wedded to them, of course, but simply because members of a small staff simply can't know about everybody. So rankings for them, just as for fans, are one way to avoid overlooking talent.

Before rankings were a thing, head coaches and assistant coaches built relationships that provided them leads on specific players. This was more in the days when even power schools recruited more regionally. I suspect that’s still largely the case for lesser programs.

I’d like to hear Roy’s thoughts on recruiting rankings. I’d bet that he would rip them, say he paid little to no attention to them and found the guys who ranked players to be unqualified to do so. Maybe assistant coaches would peruse rankings and then feed certain players to Roy for him to research them on his own. I think Roy “discovered” players not currently on his radar by attending events to watch current targets and then noticing their game, and then looking into that player by making phone calls to AAU programs or high schools or any contact he may have had in that particular area.

But I acknowledge that Roy is old school and maybe younger head coaches of other programs do indeed watch the ranking services. If they do, I’d caution them about how seriously they take them. As we’ve seen, they’ve missed big time on some guys and as pointed out above, a lot of great players don’t play for larger, well known AAU programs, thus reducing their exposure.
 
Another point though...how many national titles do those 11 players you listed have? Zero.
Not really fair. Look who they played for. On how many teams would they have been the final touch needed to win a championship? Also, there are a few Final Fours represented in that list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
i agree. i just don’t see any value in offering a scholly to a sub 100 player....ever.
There's definitely room for a couple guys. Luke Maye, Kerwin Walton, and Garrison Brooks were well worth the roster spot. Or Jordan Goldwire for dook. We shouldn't have too many, but if Hubert really likes someone he should offer. Heck, Justin McKoy was also outside the top 100. We need top talent, but there are some good guys below 100.
 
Not really fair. Look who they played for. On how many teams would they have been the final touch needed to win a championship? Also, there are a few Final Fours represented in that list.
Ok but the point is that a school like Murray State misses on 4-5 sub 100 recruits every year and hit on one every 10 years but no one cares when they stink 8 out of 10 seasons. That’s why they aren’t UNC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gobblercalls
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT