Potential Transfers '14
- Thread starter LLCoolCY
- Start date
With how aggressive Crean has been in spring recruiting and coming off a poor season, I am guessing the latter. Crean's seat is getting warm.
Why does it matter?
The best gets are former top-100 high-school guys as seasoned transfers with multiple years left to play.
The nice thing with the sit out transfers is that it let's the staff develop guy and get them acclimated for a year without having to worry about a lot of playing time drama.
You're right and believe me, what Fred is doing is great.
It is mostly a selfish thing. I would love to be able to root for these guys for 2, 3, 4 years. Guys like Monte and Georges are going to be so much fun to watch for 2/3 more years.
Kane has been amazing this year, but imagine if he was coming back next year.
Just mostly the fan coming out in me. I love watching these guys play. You don't get as much of that from the transfers.
GoodmanESPN Jeff Goodman
Temple transfer Anthony Lee told ESPN he's trimmed his list to five: Ohio State, Indiana, Louisville, Iowa State and Notre Dame.
Temple transfer Anthony Lee told ESPN he's trimmed his list to five: Ohio State, Indiana, Louisville, Iowa State and Notre Dame.
Last edited:
As a fan I want someone that I can watch for 3-4 years. Yes, the transfer thing has worked out this long. Playing time can be an issue for some players because of what the coach has said to them during recruiting. Red shirting and having a core group of guys that you know is going to be there year in and year out builds better team chemistry. Like DSMCy said it would be nice to use JC or transfers to fill the holes where CFH didn't get a high school recruit or missed on a guys ability to play at this level.
I like our chances, especially with the exposure we have been getting over the last few weeks.
So you're telling me that Jon Miller was wrong about Iowa being in the mix for Lee? Is that what you're telling me?
If you like, I'll tell you that you pay too much attention to anything Jon Miller says. That help?
After 4 years there are still people spewing this garbage?
-The transfer thing has worked out this long? Of course it has, as almost every aspect of it is less risky than high school recruiting. Watch for 3-4 years is nice, but the type of talent you need, if coming from all high school recruits, will not be there 3-4 years. See Kansas. There are not many places that are winning at a high level that watch players for 3-4 years.
-Playing time LESS of an issue than it is when recruiting only high school guys. Instead of having a roster of 13 guys competing for 8 to 9 spots, you have 10 or 11 guys competing for those spots. Plus, underclassmen are not having to look at so many years of being behind so many players in their class or one above. A lot easier to convince Morris that his wait will not be long behind a senior in Kane than a sophomore (who also likely is not as good as Kane).
-Better team chemistry? Have you even watched this team? You do know most transfers redshirt, right?
The teams have been put together with great balance like we have a great NBA GM running the show.
Last edited:
Really? Now that's shocking. I don't want that ********* to come here. I hope he goes to some loser school who never wins a single game next season.
I get the sentimental reasons for favoring 4-year guys. I mean how special has it been to watch Ejim rake in the awards and big wins this year after watching him develop from day 1? But you're right, from a team results standpoint, you can't argue with transfers. That has been a proven success at this point.
