Roy Williams Podcast

[dadika13]

Roy joined a podcast (not sure if they are competitive so I won't link), nothing ground breaking, some highlights:

- Mentioned how he saw Lawson after 05 and Barnes after 09, both committed to UNC. Wants to continue that with Langford this year.
- One ACC coach was surprised Roy offered Platek, Roy said "I like this guy, he can play for me"
- Little shot at Calipari for wanting to be on TV hugging his players after they are drafted, "John tells them to hug their mom then hug me" Roy thinks it should just be family there.

 

[RP12]

Got to love Roy.

 

[superstar57]

Sell that Natty Roy.... Amazing in today's environment TB going first round is prolly more of an effective recruiting tool than winning a chip. SMH

 

[tarheel0910]

Amazing in today's environment TB going first round is prolly more of an effective recruiting tool than winning a chip

Agreed. I don't think the higher ranked kids are that impressed with championships and rings anymore. I think he would make a greater impact by showing a picture of JJ and TB holding up a first round jersey.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Sell that Natty Roy.... Amazing in today's environment TB going first round is prolly more of an effective recruiting tool than winning a chip. SMH

Agree. Sadly, I'll add.

 

[pln2013]

Agreed. I don't think the higher ranked kids are that impressed with championships and rings anymore. I think he would make a greater impact by showing a picture of JJ and TB holding up a first round jersey.

If you're a top recruit whose plan is to star for a year in college and then become a millionaire (and that should be a top recruit's plan), why would you care about a ring won by juniors and seniors?

 

[gary-7]

Sell that Natty Roy.... Amazing in today's environment TB going first round is prolly more of an effective recruiting tool than winning a chip. SMH

...and Roy just not-too-subtly indicated that Tony's gamble was just that... a gamble. Said there were two late-first possibilities and he was defintiely relieved TB got picked up. Also sounds like Roy did some lobbying with those teams.

 

[gary-7]

Roy joined a podcast (not sure if they are competitive so I won't link), nothing ground breaking, some highlights:

- Mentioned how he saw Lawson after 05 and Barnes after 09, both committed to UNC. Wants to continue that with Langford this year.
- One ACC coach was surprised Roy offered Platek, Roy said "I like this guy, he can play for me"
- Little shot at Calipari for wanting to be on TV hugging his players after they are drafted, "John tells them to hug their mom then hug me" Roy thinks it should just be family there.

I loved his recount of the play that led to Luke's shot vs uk. I'm with Roy in that I knew Luke was gonna make that shot before the ball hit his hands. As soon as Theo turned to make the pass I grabbed my buddy's shoulder, stood up and pointed to the screen and said "There it is!"... and then "BOOM!!!" when it went in.

I also love Roy's description of how and whom he recruits. I think all our fans on here should take a listen --- it might answer some questions about why certain guys just aren't options here.

Still, Roy genuinely likes recruiting and scouting players, and his work in recruiting, and moreover his role as coach at UNC, is a labor fo love. Sounds like we'll have Ol' Roy for some years to come.

 

[bfowler991]

I enjoyed the story Roy told about being in NC after making a couple of final 4s with Kansas and people still only recognizing him over here for being Dean's assistant.

 

[gunslingerdick]

If you're a top recruit whose plan is to star for a year in college and then become a millionaire (and that should be a top recruit's plan), why would you care about a ring won by juniors and seniors?

There was a time when kids committed to programs to play ball. They enjoyed representing an institution of higher learning and people in general felt good about success shared with friends, teammates and other students. They were happy to make a paycheck one day in the future by playing ball but it wasn't their sole focus in life. Kids played because of a passion for the game and kids got off on having team success. They built friendships and even learned a thing or two. Some even became well rounded individuals that went on to do better things with their life than play basketball. I know that sounds like a fairly tale, but I promise, it really happened.

 

[pln2013]

There was a time when kids committed to programs to play ball.

They still do. They just want to play pro ball, too.

TThey enjoyed representing an institution of higher learning and people in general felt good about success shared with friends, teammates and other students.

They still do, in general.

They were happy to make a paycheck one day in the future by playing ball but it wasn't their sole focus in life.

Because leaving after one year wasn't really an option unless you were a generational talent. They have opportunities now that they didn't have before. But livelihood was always the primary priority for those for whom it was a realistic option. That's true of everybody. But the benefit of making the NBA has increased by orders of magnitude, while the benefit of playing college ball has stayed flat.

Kids played because of a passion for the game and kids got off on having team success.

They still do.

They built friendships and even learned a thing or two.

They still do.

Some even became well rounded individuals that went on to do better things with their life than play basketball.

Many still do. But the growth in the benefits of playing pro ball has outpaced the benefits of doing something else by an unbelievable rate.

I know that sounds like a fairly tale, but I promise, it really happened.

A fairy tale in which the kids were roughly the same in terms of character but had dramatically less to gain from playing their sport professionally.

 

[Sk1310]

They still do. They just want to play pro ball, too.



They still do, in general.



Because leaving after one year wasn't really an option unless you were a general talent. They have opportunities now that they didn't have before. But livelihood was always the primary priority for those for whom it was a realistic option. That's true of everybody. But the benefit of making the NBA has increased by orders of magnitude, while the benefit of playing college ball has stayed flat.



They still do.



They still do.



Many still do. But the growth in the benefits of playing pro ball has outpaced the benefits of doing something else by an unbelievable rate.



A fairy tale in which the kids were roughly the same in terms of character but had dramatically less to gain from playing their sport professionally.

Why?

 

[pln2013]

Why?

Because teams were super skittish about unknowns. Same reason why Manu Ginobili was drafted with pick #57.

In case it matters: I meant to say, "generational"

 

[dadika13]

They still do. They just want to play pro ball, too.



They still do, in general.



Because leaving after one year wasn't really an option unless you were a generational talent. They have opportunities now that they didn't have before. But livelihood was always the primary priority for those for whom it was a realistic option. That's true of everybody. But the benefit of making the NBA has increased by orders of magnitude, while the benefit of playing college ball has stayed flat.



They still do.



They still do.



Many still do. But the growth in the benefits of playing pro ball has outpaced the benefits of doing something else by an unbelievable rate.



A fairy tale in which the kids were roughly the same in terms of character but had dramatically less to gain from playing their sport professionally.

So I get what you're saying here - but is it coincidence that the last two #1 picks cared very little about college bball?

While it isn't there yet (meaning young kids not caring at all about college) it's going there fast. OAD needs to go.

 

[superstar57]

AAU has been big for years, but this is the problem that is starting to rear its head. Parents are being told as early as middle school there kid will be in the pros, back in my day early 90s kids that age were being told they are good enough to play college ball. Amazing parents use to just be happy there kid was getting a free education, and this goes for the top recruits. Now parents are acting as if having to send there kid to college for free is a burden.

The rise of mid major teams in college basketball is exactly the same time kids starting leaving in masses after there Freshman and soph season. I respect Butler and VCU, but there is no way they make final fours if the Blue bloods kept all there talent until they were junior or seniors.

As a Carolina fan I could care less if kids keep this attitude because we are winning championships because our guys are staying until junior and senior years, but as a college basketball fan I like to see these young guys develop in the college atmosphere and in the end they are either getting degrees or just a few classes away. I know 8-10 million over three years is a lot of money, but in today's time you still could be broke in three years and really don't have crap to show for it. Tax man going to get close to half that doe, and if your not a special player or just marginal your not getting another contract because NBA prefers to use that money on the next crop of "potentials".

Keep coaching Roy because everyone is just recruiting!!!!!!!!!!

 

[pln2013]

So I get what you're saying here - but is it coincidence that the last two #1 picks cared very little about college bball?

While it isn't there yet (meaning young kids not caring at all about college) it's going there fast. OAD needs to go.

I'd be perfectly fine with none-and-done players, but that won't happen unless/until the NBA sees it as beneficial.

 

[gunslingerdick]

They still do. They just want to play pro ball, too.



They still do, in general.



Because leaving after one year wasn't really an option unless you were a generational talent. They have opportunities now that they didn't have before. But livelihood was always the primary priority for those for whom it was a realistic option. That's true of everybody. But the benefit of making the NBA has increased by orders of magnitude, while the benefit of playing college ball has stayed flat.



They still do.



They still do.



Many still do. But the growth in the benefits of playing pro ball has outpaced the benefits of doing something else by an unbelievable rate.



A fairy tale in which the kids were roughly the same in terms of character but had dramatically less to gain from playing their sport professionally.

Let me make clear that my sarcastic tone was to be taken as me being dismissive and condescending. It was also meant to portray today's youth as selfish and shallow. I'm not sure if you picked up on those and I definitely didn't want my smarmy comments to go to waste.

I find many of your responses to be horseshit. The few comments that I don't consider to be horseshit only validate my feelings about today's youth - "gotta get that cheddar", right? Because that's what life is all about. And instead of there being a hint of innocence in college sports like there used to be, we now train kids from the ripe age of 10 or 12 to be focused on not doing anything for society, but instead getting that $200 million contract as soon as possible by running fast and jumping high.

 

[Sk1310]

Because teams were super skittish about unknowns. Same reason why Manu Ginobili was drafted with pick #57.

In case it matters: I meant to say, "generational"

I mean, Darko Milicic was taken ahead of Carmelo Anthony. I think there is more to it, then front offices having the balls to take "unknowns".

 

[heels05champs]

Question: Will Langford break the streak of Roy landing his top recruit via visiting said recruit the day after his national championship?

 

[gauchoheel]

Man I love Roy Williams.

 

[JumboShrimp017]

And instead of there being a hint of innocence in college sports like there used to be, we now train kids from the ripe age of 10 or 12 to be focused on not doing anything for society, but instead getting that $200 million contract as soon as possible by running fast and jumping high.

Innocence in college sports? Since when? The term "student-athlete" was pretty much made up by the NCAA in the 50s so they could side-step potential litigation regarding player compensation. There's never been innocence. I know you're just pining for the good ol' days when dudes were staying three, four years, and I get that. But don't associate that with purity in college sports... and it's a rather big leap to try and relate OAD/NBA dreams with declining societal morality.

 

[pln2013]

I mean, Darko Milicic was taken ahead of Carmelo Anthony. I think there is more to it, then front offices having the balls to take "unknowns".

Darko wasn't taken in the era when teams were skittish about unknowns. An international or HS player went #1 for 4 straight years (Kwame Brown, Yao, LeBron, Dwight Howard).

Compare that to the '80s, when basically every top pick spent multiple years in college. Not because the players were different, but because the environment was.

 

[gary-7]

Darko wasn't taken in the era when teams were skittish about unknowns. An international or HS player went #1 for 4 straight years (Kwame Brown, Yao, LeBron, Dwight Howard).

Compare that to the '80s, when basically every top pick spent multiple years in college. Not because the players were different, but because the environment was.

And that's where it went south --- HS players. Go back into the history in the 70s with the early guys (Bill Willoughby and Darryl Dawkins) after Spencer Haywood's case created the old "Hardship Rule". Moses Malone (who could barely read coming out of HS) couldn't get into MD even with Lefty's shenanigans and went early to the ABA. Moses was a freak and maybe the most ready guy ever out of HS but Dawkins and Willoughby (who came out next) weren't. Dawkins was only an entertaining role player and Willoughby was a career sub, and they both would have benefitted from college ball. Pretty much anyone could claim "hardship" then and the league wanted to reign that in.

The NBA previously had used a 4-year rule which was effectively ended, but then was able to eventually get around the antitrust issues of the Haywood case via Collective Bargaining and re-imposing restrictions (currently 1-year). To the league's credit they recognized that HS players are just generally not ready, but even the OAD year is just a blip, and as some above pointed out the move to greed is coming from certain characters telling kids and parents that they are destined for NBA greatness at a young age, and yes, that does create a values deficit, and no, that's not a "get-off-my-lawn" view.

There will be kids like Moses (who later educated himself into an articulate adult) for whom college was a no-go, but having a time restriction is perfectly reasonable. Trouble is, as long as NBA execs keep salivating over the new and shiny in their draft strategies it will encourage an instant gratification culture in the game.

 

[Sk1310]

Darko wasn't taken in the era when teams were skittish about unknowns. An international or HS player went #1 for 4 straight years (Kwame Brown, Yao, LeBron, Dwight Howard).

Compare that to the '80s, when basically every top pick spent multiple years in college. Not because the players were different, but because the environment was.

Well you used Ginobli as an example, but in the same draft, 2 HS and 2 other international players were taken in the first round.

You are right, the environment was different. Now kids are having ESPN specials to make their college choice. The exposure these HS kids are getting is what has changed. Euro basketball is starting to grow, that is why you are seeing more and more being taken in the first round of drafts.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I know you're just pining for the good ol' days when dudes were staying three, four years, and I get that. But don't associate that with purity in college sports... and it's a rather big leap to try and relate OAD/NBA dreams with declining societal morality.

How is it a leap? It's a perfect reflection of what society values.

 

[gunslingerdick]

And that's where it went south --- HS players. Go back into the history in the 70s with the early guys (Bill Willoughby and Darryl Dawkins) after Spencer Haywood's case created the old "Hardship Rule". Moses Malone (who could barely read coming out of HS) couldn't get into MD even with Lefty's shenanigans and went early to the ABA. Moses was a freak and maybe the most ready guy ever out of HS but Dawkins and Willoughby (who came out next) weren't. Dawkins was only an entertaining role player and Willoughby was a career sub, and they both would have benefitted from college ball. Pretty much anyone could claim "hardship" then and the league wanted to reign that in.

The NBA previously had used a 4-year rule which was effectively ended, but then was able to eventually get around the antitrust issues of the Haywood case via Collective Bargaining and re-imposing restrictions (currently 1-year). To the league's credit they recognized that HS players are just generally not ready, but even the OAD year is just a blip, and as some above pointed out the move to greed is coming from certain characters telling kids and parents that they are destined for NBA greatness at a young age, and yes, that does create a values deficit, and no, that's not a "get-off-my-lawn" view.

There will be kids like Moses (who later educated himself into an articulate adult) for whom college was a no-go, but having a time restriction is perfectly reasonable. Trouble is, as long as NBA execs keep salivating over the new and shiny in their draft strategies it will encourage an instant gratification culture in the game.

Excellent poast.

 

[JumboShrimp017]

How is it a leap? It's a perfect reflection of what society values.

It's a leap because it's lazy to associate staying in college for x number of years with the possession of higher values. In effect, you're also arguing that the past eras in which the NCAA restricted a player's earning power even more than they do today is somehow less greedy, and holds a higher moral ground.

 

[RoseHeel]

Question: Will Langford break the streak of Roy landing his top recruit via visiting said recruit the day after his national championship?

Yes

 

[gunslingerdick]

It's a leap because it's lazy to associate staying in college for x number of years with the possession of higher values. In effect, you're also arguing that the past eras in which the NCAA restricted a player's earning power even more than they do today is somehow less greedy, and holds a higher moral ground.

It's not lazy, it's a natural and in most cases, the correct assumption to make. I'm not necessarily placing all the blame on the players. All the powers that be have created a culture where money is valued higher than a learning experience. And we've yielded to immediate gratification.

The problem is not a couple kids skipping college or going pro after one year. That's always been the case. The problem is all kids going pro after one year - or more specifically, that being the focus of all kids. It's one thing for a few freaks to be outliers. It's totally different for society to accept that the masses view college as an 8 month pit stop. And it's even worse for kids to verbalize their desire to get away from college as quickly as possible. It's shallow. To me it illustrates a materialistic and thoughtless character. It's thumbing their nose at the idea of college creating better, more well rounded individuals that might give a shit about something in life other than making an absurd amount of money. Now, to your point about kids of yesteryear having the same desires; maybe that's true. But we as a society had social mores and constructs that at least directed kids to create the perception that the college experience was important. It sent the right message. But who gives a shit about that, right? Because at least these kids aren't being taken advantage of with their opportunity for free education and exposure, right? Give me a break.

I guess I'm not railing against the rule. I'm actually in favor of a system that allows kids to go straight out of high school. I'm more bemoaning the deterioration of those social mores and constructs that helped create a better message to the masses.

 

[tarheel0910]

It's not lazy, it's a natural and in most cases, the correct assumption to make. I'm not necessarily placing all the blame on the players. All the powers that be have created a culture where money is valued higher than a learning experience. And we've yielded to immediate gratification.

The problem is not a couple kids skipping college or going pro after one year. That's always been the case. The problem is all kids going pro after one year - or more specifically, that being the focus of all kids. It's one thing for a few freaks to be outliers. It's totally different for society to accept that the masses view college as an 8 month pit stop. And it's even worse for kids to verbalize their desire to get away from college as quickly as possible. It's shallow. To me it illustrates a materialistic and thoughtless character. It's thumbing their nose at the idea of college creating better, more well rounded individuals that might give a shit about something in life other than making an absurd amount of money. Now, to your point about kids of yesteryear having the same desires; maybe that's true. But we as a society had social mores and constructs that at least directed kids to create the perception that the college experience was important. It sent the right message. But who gives a shit about that, right? Because at least these kids aren't being taken advantage of with their opportunity for free education and exposure, right? Give me a break.

I guess I'm not railing against the rule. I'm actually in favor of a system that allows kids to go straight out of high school. I'm more bemoaning the deterioration of those social mores and constructs that helped create a better message to the masses.

You're putting way too much value on college. This country would be better off if more people acknowledged the fact that some people shouldn't go to college. They would be better off going to a technical school and some might just be better off going ahead and getting a job. Going to college or staying in college isn't what develops character or makes someone a better person. Your attitude that college is some kind of saving grace to society comes off as snobbish and elitist.

 

[JumboShrimp017]

It's not lazy, it's a natural and in most cases, the correct assumption to make. I'm not necessarily placing all the blame on the players. All the powers that be have created a culture where money is valued higher than a learning experience. And we've yielded to immediate gratification.

The problem is not a couple kids skipping college or going pro after one year. That's always been the case. The problem is all kids going pro after one year - or more specifically, that being the focus of all kids. It's one thing for a few freaks to be outliers. It's totally different for society to accept that the masses view college as an 8 month pit stop. And it's even worse for kids to verbalize their desire to get away from college as quickly as possible. It's shallow. To me it illustrates a materialistic and thoughtless character. It's thumbing their nose at the idea of college creating better, more well rounded individuals that might give a shit about something in life other than making an absurd amount of money. Now, to your point about kids of yesteryear having the same desires; maybe that's true. But we as a society had social mores and constructs that at least directed kids to create the perception that the college experience was important. It sent the right message. But who gives a shit about that, right? Because at least these kids aren't being taken advantage of with their opportunity for free education and exposure, right? Give me a break.

I guess I'm not railing against the rule. I'm actually in favor of a system that allows kids to go straight out of high school. I'm more bemoaning the deterioration of those social mores and constructs that helped create a better message to the masses.

A lot of kids that are making the jump to the league early, which isn't even close to "all kids" or "the masses using college as a pit stop," are worth way more to their school than the monetary amount of their tuition and boarding, meal plan, current stipend, etc.

Eh, and the kids of yesteryear too. You say right message, I say more of a tool intended to monopolize the players' talents during their 18-23 years and turn that into profit, excuse me, "budget surplus" since we're talking about a non-profit institution.

You're arguing that things have gotten worse concerning values in college sports, basketball specifically. I'm saying they were never good, the players just stopped being as naive.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Your attitude that college is some kind of saving grace to society comes off as snobbish and elitist.

I've never denied being those things. I fully admit to it. I also believe we'd all be better off if more people felt like I do.

As to the rest of your poast, I agree that college isn't for everyone. When I was a recreation therapist for kids with emotional disorders at an alternative school in Charleston, SC, I lobbied for more vocational training at the high school level. The world does indeed need the blue collar worker. I have great respect for people working those professions. So kids that want to play ball for a living should get their training somewhere other than a 4 year college - just like a welder gets their training from somewhere other than a 4 year college. Just like mechanics, massage therapists and many other professions. My point is that if basketball is going to be looked at as a serious career and only a career, then it should be treated as such. And kids that want to play basketball as an extracurricular activity can still be recruited to 4 year colleges, study an academic field and then go on to have the choice of playing professionally if they have achieved that level or go on to do something meaningful with the degree they earned.

A lot of kids that are making the jump to the league early, which isn't even close to "all kids" or "the masses using college as a pit stop," are worth way more to their school than the monetary amount of their tuition and boarding, meal plan, current stipend, etc.
.

I vehemently disagree. You're putting a price tag on things that are worth more than a monetary value. But for argument's sake, let's say I agree with you. So the kids are worth more than what they get out. Big deal. I'm worth more to my company than what they pay me. A lot of people are. But oh well, thems the breaks. It's called "paying your dues".

Eh, and the kids of yesteryear too. You say right message, I say more of a tool intended to monopolize the players' talents during their 18-23 years and turn that into profit, excuse me, "budget surplus" since we're talking about a non-profit institution.

Bullshit.

You're arguing that things have gotten worse concerning values in college sports, basketball specifically. I'm saying they were never good, the players just stopped being as naive.

Maybe that's true. I don't think so but maybe so. Even if you're right, as a whole, society was better off with a little naivete.

 

[JumboShrimp017]

I vehemently disagree. You're putting a price tag on things that are worth more than a monetary value. But for argument's sake, let's say I agree with you. So the kids are worth more than what they get out. Big deal. I'm worth more to my company than what they pay me. A lot of people are. But oh well, thems the breaks. It's called "paying your dues".






Maybe that's true. I don't think so but maybe so. Even if you're right, as a whole, society was better off with a little naivete.

First off, anything that is worth more than monetary value is purely a personal opinion and nothing more. You should have ended that sentence with "to me," and it would have been immensely more accurate.
And furthermore, it works both ways. Fans are disappointed that kids are only "paying their dues" for one year instead of voluntarily declining an NBA contract, betting on their game and, 100x more importantly, their health with millions at stake? Big deal.

Your last point definitely does have some merit, especially as a whole, lmao

EDIT: I actually totally agree with you on the idea that kids hell-bent on the Association ideally shouldn't mess with a 4-year school. The only reason they do is because, obviously, the alternatives to college ball are markedly inferior.

 

[gunslingerdick]

First off, anything that is worth more than monetary value is purely a personal opinion and nothing more. You should have ended that sentence with "to me," and it would have been immensely more accurate.
And furthermore, it works both ways. Fans are disappointed that kids are only "paying their dues" for one year instead of voluntarily declining an NBA contract, betting on their game and, 100x more importantly, their health with millions at stake? Big deal.

Your last point definitely does have some merit, especially as a whole, lmao

EDIT: I actually totally agree with you on the idea that kids hell-bent on the Association ideally shouldn't mess with a 4-year school. The only reason they do is because, obviously, the alternatives to college ball are markedly inferior.

im not going to debate it anymore...for now. I'm sure I'll pick it up again next time someone's crying over an 18 year old being taken advantage of with their free education.

 

[Archer2]

It's all about Instant gratification for most young Americans these days. Most of them don't want to pay their dues, they want/expect it all now.

 

[superstar57]

I think college basketball is better when you have guys committed for multiple years. I also think NBA needs to just let kids go straight to pros.

As an example I like to use Toney Bradley. Did TB make the right choice leaving? Of course he did because he got guaranteed money, but could he have used more development? Of course he does. Was he going to be our main big man? Yes and now we are in a tight situation. Is there a good chance he plays G league? Yes.

So tell me who wins on making this guy spend a year in college? Nobody

 

[RoseHeel]

The fact that turning your middle/lower income families to Millionaires almost overnight is considered "instant gratification" because they won't win your team championships is shameful. Not even an argument worth having.

Not sure what kinda lives y'all were blessed with, but those FY contracts are nothing to sneeze at in my book.

 

[gary-7]

I think college basketball is better when you have guys committed for multiple years. I also think NBA needs to just let kids go straight to pros.

As an example I like to use Toney Bradley. Did TB make the right choice leaving? Of course he did because he got guaranteed money, but could he have used more development? Of course he does. Was he going to be our main big man? Yes and now we are in a tight situation. Is there a good chance he plays G league? Yes.

So tell me who wins on making this guy spend a year in college? Nobody

I disagree with that premise. The answer is he should have played 2 years In college. His dad took a big gamble (based on sketchy advice) and fortunately it worked out for them (by the skin of his teeth) to get that guaranteed money.

Watching him in Summer League Tony is clearly not ready offensively, and as you said could end up in DLeague. The larger point is that (other than the freaks like Moses) no HS kid is ready to play in the NBA. Tony came to Carolina on a 3/2 plan. Unfortunately they deviated from that sound thinking. A 2AD rule would be a large improvement IMO.

 

[gary-7]

The fact that turning your middle/lower income families to Millionaires almost overnight is considered "instant gratification" because they won't win your team championships is shameful. Not even an argument worth having.

Not sure what kinda lives y'all were blessed with, but those FY contracts are nothing to sneeze at in my book.

You are making some very broad assumptions (and frankly stereotypes) about some of these kids' income status.

 

[superstar57]

I disagree with that premise. The answer is he should have played 2 years In college. His dad took a big gamble (based on sketchy advice) and fortunately it worked out for them (by the skin of his teeth) to get that guaranteed money.

Watching him in Summer League Tony is clearly not ready offensively, and as you said could end up in DLeague. The larger point is that (other than the freaks like Moses) no HS kid is ready to play in the NBA. Tony came to Carolina on a 3/2 plan. Unfortunately they deviated from that sound thinking. A 2AD rule would be a large improvement IMO.

We actually agree (bad wording on my part). Happy TB was a Heel, but instead of spending one year at Carolina in a limited role, I would have preferred he either had a chance to pursue his dream straight out of high school or have to commit to our program for 2-3 years. I can see the benefit to him and the UNC program if he had done either.

I can't see how in TB's case it benefitted him or us having him just one season in a "limited role". Just so I don't get bashed, I will say he was nice to have with Hicks in foul trouble so much, but I can't help but think how maybe having a 4 star big man going into his 2nd season "might" have been a better long term plan because now we have 2-3 freshman 4 star and under trying to fill a big hole on a talented team. Not mad with TB at all, I am upset he was not able to go pro after HS and a little upset he is allowed to leave after one year as he was definitely a big part of our programs plans his soph year.