Today 11/11 is the start of the early signing period. Tucker is officially in the fold. Are there any surprises today ? This is so much more interesting than Biden, Trump or Covid. 11/25 can't come soon enough.
Results 1 to 10 of 152
Thread: Early signing day
-
11-11-2020, 12:01 PM #1
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- Indy
- Posts
- 3,161
Early signing day
-
11-11-2020, 03:01 PM #2
-
11-17-2020, 12:25 PM #3
Anyone know why we didn't get Cesare Edwards' paperwork last week??? Did he quietly de-commit?
"Xavier born and Xavier bred, and when I am gone I will be Xavier Dead!"
NJ!NP! 8/30/12
-
11-17-2020, 12:50 PM #4
-
11-17-2020, 04:07 PM #5
Xavier is not listed as being in the Top 8 of the Big East recruiting classes for 2021. We have two 3 star commits. While I never put any credence into "stars" that is not an impressive job. The staff says they want to sign 4 players, but what we have thus far is underwhelming- especially as related to the rest of the league.
Steele has been doing an awful lot of filling in via transfers. While I certainly appreciate the occasional one-off transfer, like Malcolm Bernard, making a practice of bringing in 2 or 3 a year to fill spots that you can't get recruits for is disturbing. Especially when those transfers are from lower D1 schools.
I have always said that great assistants make a great coach. What I have seen thus far from this entire staff is bothersome in all respects.
I hope that things will look up soon, but there is work to do."I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell
-
11-17-2020, 04:31 PM #6
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Plymouth, MI
- Posts
- 1,266
Last edited by xufan02; 11-17-2020 at 04:36 PM.
“Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.” -Michael Jordan
-
11-17-2020, 04:48 PM #7
- Join Date
- Dec 2018
- Location
- Cincinnati
- Posts
- 626
I think you meant MOR's take is a "crock" not "cock" of body waste. I would argue only that MOR's observation on 2021 is a bit too aggressive. I agree that we over-relied on transfers for the first couple of years of Steele's tenure. And, although it appears that we may have done so again this year, I think we may have upgraded the quality of the transfers over prior years (admittedly that remains to be seen). Given the changing protocols for transfers, we may see other schools increase their reliance on transfers vs. recruiting.
There are advantages + disadvantages to Steele's approach. By recruiting transfers Steele can focus on presently needed positions and skill sets and not have to worry about developing them over time (with all the attendant risks "development" entails). With transfers, he has far better odds of retaining the talent he does recruit. And, while we can swing and miss with transfers, there is less opportunity for some of the fails of the last few years (Harden, Bishop, etc.). Also, if you only have a transfer for a year or two, you don't have to watch their skills degrade as we did with Q the last couple of years. In fact, I would argue that Steele could have and should have gone out a recruited a veteran P.G. transfer before last season so he could have put Q's butt on the bench, where it belonged.
I get the bias toward recruiting. But, that bias assumes we recruit well (or that our recruits don't get "homesick" or have skills that otherwise depreciate). I think the model for recruiting may change as transfer barriers are reduced.
Still, I would never be so disrespectful of MOR's opinion. I always read what he has to say with great interest. This board is made far, far better with diversity of opinion than it is with insults.Last edited by Jumpin_Jamal_Forever; 11-17-2020 at 04:53 PM.
-
11-17-2020, 04:52 PM #8
Yeah, after two great classes I'm not terribly surprised the 2021 one is a little underwhelming because our roster is pretty young in terms of talent. I don't think we're gonna have a lot of surprises, or a prospect that we're insanely excited about (except Edwards, he looks pretty damn good), but we should have a damn good roster that year. I'll be worried if we flop in the 2022 class as well.
-
11-17-2020, 05:13 PM #9
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Posts
- 4,077
Yeah, I thought just about the only saving grace for Steele so far was recruiting was as good as ever. Two top 20 classes in three years and MOR is worried about recruiting. Has any X coach had 3 consecutive top 20 classes?
*I share a lot of same concerns MOR has with this staff. I hope we see more of what Steele wants this year and my concerns turn out to be off base. But recruiting is not a concern I have at all.Last edited by Xavier; 11-17-2020 at 05:22 PM.
-
11-17-2020, 05:14 PM #10
- Join Date
- Dec 2010
- Posts
- 4,068
It is pretty simple. You win more than you lose, then you can land some top recruits. Lose more often, quality of top frosh will be much harder to land.
I am not embarrassed by 2021 class. X will be very strong in guards over next 2 seasons. If X wants to be top in BE, X will need get at least one transfer per year. Odds are higher for impact by transfer than hit gold on a frosh.
It is a balanced approach. I honestly think Steele can get top 50 talent after his first two seasons. It is win this year at a minimum first round NCAA Tourney appearance.
The future is shining bright with current roster. I am a believer. Then again, it could get ugly with unanticipated losses. I am hedging my bet.
Bookmarks