Malik Newman Update | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Malik Newman Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
sdhusky said:
Maybe the fact they've won the Big 12 every year for the past 10. Maybe because they had two guys on top on the NBA draft.

UCONN is in front of KS in NC, which is huge. But virtually every other measure - wins, conference championships, all americans, FF, TV exposure - KS is in front of UCONN.
Its an elite program and beating them for recruits is tough and a big deal.
Expand ...

If you could choose either program from this point going forward, who would you choose?

Beating them for a recruit is a big deal. But that is based on history and pedigree. They won more conference championships because they weren't in the Big East and we were. You think they dominate the Big 12 if we were in it? We dominated the best conference in the nation for almost 2 decades while they kept winning a lessor one.
We have had more players in the NBA than they have. If you want to argue they have had more top notch recruits--I agree. We have done more with less. They have done less with more.

I respect them. Great program. Greater history. They are not better than us.
 
champs99and04 said:
I've read this post twice and am still trying to figure out what you're arguing. I'm also not thrilled with the Ali decommitt, but to me, that's an example of a kid being a kid rather than any sort of statement on UConn's recruiting philosophy. In regards to the Turtle speculation, it's just that, speculation. Unless and until the kid makes it clear that he doesn't see himself at UConn, I am going to assume that he's part of our long-term plan here. If he has a problem with our continued pursuit of kids like Adams and Newman, then he can either fight them for minutes or find another place to play. Under neither of those scenarios would I fault either the kid or the program. If Ollie were to revoke an offer after a kid had committed, then that would be something I'd be uncomfortable with. If another kid on the roster was forced out due to over-recruiting, that's another thing that would bother me. But if there are scholarships to use, you use them on the best players and don't think twice.
Expand ...
Ha, youre right, I danced and my perspective so much so it would seem no one could actually pull anything intelligible out of it. I should have stated in my original post that I interpret "recruiting over" as having the intent to cause an already committed recruit, or in UK's case, an established player, to decommit, leave the program, or in the least desirable case, be forced out of a program by scholarship revocation. How we are recruiting now, I do not believe constitutes recruiting over, but my opinion doesn't matter, only those of our players and recruits does as they are the ones with the decision whether or not to maintain their participation with UConn. I used Cal's UK as example because I believe they are currently the only CBB franchise with the recruiting might to actually deploy this strategy not so much at a intrayear recruiting level, but in order to actively reshape their roster annually. I firmly believe that there was no way in hell Cal. would have let Kyle W or Ryan H eat anymore years of scholarship and as such they were pushed out of the program. A scholarship at UK is basically a 2yr contract offer, unless youre a local brought in mostly for fandom moral purposes, where if you haven't left the program for the NBA or already transferred to another program Cal will sit down and "discuss with you" your future, ie. we want your scholarship back, make it happen or we will for you. Also, because they recruit so successfully, they would never offer out 35 scholarships for 4 open spots. One of the only things I can actually appreciate about Cal is that hes made this model of active annual roster upgrading about as transparent as he possibly could have. As in, if a recruit commits there, it can be necessarily understood that it is very unlikely that they will be playing scholarship basketball at UK past their sophomore year. We are currently the hot chick on the dance floor and I fully understand that many of our scholarship offers occurred prior to the 'ship, but we have also upgraded our recruiting of a few backcourt guys which could leave our past commits feeling a bit short in the shorts, which I believe contributed to Ali leaving. Every school has to recruit based on need, compensate for player injuries, transfers etc. and of course the guys who show up at practice are the guys that win the playing time, but to me at least "recruiting over" requires the intent to manipulate recruits/players by active scholarship allocation manipulation. I don't believe we are doing this, but I also don't think we are doing all we could to ensure everybody involved knows we aren't either. Im also kind of disappointed more than a few posters seemingly advocate this sort of stuff, like the guy Fishy nuked yesterday. I guess winning just doesn't mean enough to me to want to be a fan of a program that would want to engage in the above.
 
Last edited:
elduderino said:
Ha, youre right, I danced and my perspective so much so it would seem no one could actually pull anything intelligible out of it. I should have stated in my original post that I interpret "recruiting over" as having the intent to cause an already committed recruit, or in UK's case, an established player, to decommit, leave the program, or in the least desirable case, be forced out of a program by scholarship revocation. How we are recruiting now, I do not believe constitutes recruiting over, but my opinion doesn't matter, only those of our players and recruits does as they are the ones with the decision whether or not to maintain their participation with UConn. I used Cal's UK as example because I believe they are currently the only CBB franchise with the recruiting might to actually deploy this strategy not so much at a intrayear recruiting level, but in order to actively reshape their roster annually. I firmly believe that there was no way in hell Cal. would have let Kyle W or Ryan H eat anymore years of scholarship and as such they were pushed out of the program. A scholarship at UK is basically a 2yr contract offer, unless youre a local brought in mostly for fandom moral purposes, where if you haven't left the program for the NBA or already transferred to another program Cal will sit down and "discuss with you" your future, ie. we want your scholarship back, make it happen or we will for you. Also, because they recruit so successfully, they would never offer out 35 scholarships for 4 open spots. One of they only things I can actually appreciate about Cal is that hes made this model of active annual roster upgrading about as transparent as he possibly could have. As in, if a recruit commits there, it can be necessarily understood that it is very unlikely that they will be playing scholarship basketball at UK past their sophomore year. We are currently the hot chick on the dance floor and I fully understand that many of our scholarship offers occurred prior to the 'ship, but we have also upgraded our recruiting of a few backcourt guys which could leave our past commits feeling a bit short in the shorts, which I believe contributed to Ali leaving. Every school has to recruit based on need, compensate for player injuries, transfers etc. and of course the guys who show up at practice are the guys that win the playing time, but to me at least "recruiting over" requires the intent to manipulate recruits/players by active scholarship allocation manipulation. I don't believe we are doing this, but I also don't think we are doing all we could to ensure everybody involved knows we aren't either. Im also kind of disappointed more than a few posters seemingly advocate this sort of stuff, like the guy Fishy nuked yesterday. I guess winning just doesn't mean enough to me to want to be a fan of a program that would want to engage in the above.
Expand ...
I think understand what you are saying a commitment should mean just that a commitment.

The recruit should say commit to Temple and then call Georgetown asking for a spot. And then when georgetown gives him one - he commits and then starts calling UCONN for a spot.

Both the school and the recruit should be committed to each other.

BTW this is how we got Boatright. WV recruited another PG so he de-committed. So enough of the "I don't want a guy who doesn't want to compete" stuff.

I don't know what KO said to turtle but I will give KO the benefit of the doubt and that he was honest and explained to him that they are looking to take multiple guards.
 
elduderino said:
Ha, youre right, I danced and my perspective so much so it would seem no one could actually pull anything intelligible out of it. I should have stated in my original post that I interpret "recruiting over" as having the intent to cause an already committed recruit, or in UK's case, an established player, to decommit, leave the program, or in the least desirable case, be forced out of a program by scholarship revocation. How we are recruiting now, I do not believe constitutes recruiting over, but my opinion doesn't matter, only those of our players and recruits does as they are the ones with the decision whether or not to maintain their participation with UConn. I used Cal's UK as example because I believe they are currently the only CBB franchise with the recruiting might to actually deploy this strategy not so much at a intrayear recruiting level, but in order to actively reshape their roster annually. I firmly believe that there was no way in hell Cal. would have let Kyle W or Ryan H eat anymore years of scholarship and as such they were pushed out of the program. A scholarship at UK is basically a 2yr contract offer, unless youre a local brought in mostly for fandom moral purposes, where if you haven't left the program for the NBA or already transferred to another program Cal will sit down and "discuss with you" your future, ie. we want your scholarship back, make it happen or we will for you. Also, because they recruit so successfully, they would never offer out 35 scholarships for 4 open spots. One of they only things I can actually appreciate about Cal is that hes made this model of active annual roster upgrading about as transparent as he possibly could have. As in, if a recruit commits there, it can be necessarily understood that it is very unlikely that they will be playing scholarship basketball at UK past their sophomore year. We are currently the hot chick on the dance floor and I fully understand that many of our scholarship offers occurred prior to the 'ship, but we have also upgraded our recruiting of a few backcourt guys which could leave our past commits feeling a bit short in the shorts, which I believe contributed to Ali leaving. Every school has to recruit based on need, compensate for player injuries, transfers etc. and of course the guys who show up at practice are the guys that win the playing time, but to me at least "recruiting over" requires the intent to manipulate recruits/players by active scholarship allocation manipulation. I don't believe we are doing this, but I also don't think we are doing all we could to ensure everybody involved knows we aren't either. Im also kind of disappointed more than a few posters seemingly advocate this sort of stuff, like the guy Fishy nuked yesterday. I guess winning just doesn't mean enough to me to want to be a fan of a program that would want to engage in the above.
Expand ...

Even after trying to get through all of this I'm still not sure what the point is that you're trying to make. College basketball coaches are constantly looking to sign the best players possible. If the net result of that is that a guy who thought he was going to be in the rotation ends up being squeezed out then that's sort of how life goes. He can (a) accept his reduced role and focus on being a great teammate; (b) bust his a s s to beat out those guys who are ahead of him; or (c) transfer some place else. This happens literally at every program. It has nothing to do with "active scholarship allocation manipulation" - whatever that means. The end result of the process might be that scholarships get moved around, but that's not the intent - it's just about getting the best possible players. I'm not sure of any college coach worth a damn who would say "Well, [#1 rated pg] is dying to come play for me, but I have two point guards already so I think I'll pass."
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
Even after trying to get through all of this I'm still not sure what the point is that you're trying to make. College basketball coaches are constantly looking to sign the best players possible. If the net result of that is that a guy who thought he was going to be in the rotation ends up being squeezed out then that's sort of how life goes. He can (a) accept his reduced role and focus on being a great teammate; (b) bust his a s s to beat out those guys who are ahead of him; or (c) transfer some place else. This happens literally at every program. It has nothing to do with "active scholarship allocation manipulation" - whatever that means. The end result of the process might be that scholarships get moved around, but that's not the intent - it's just about getting the best possible players. I'm not sure of any college coach worth a damn who would say "Well, [#1 rated pg] is dying to come play for me, but I have two point guards already so I think I'll pass."
Expand ...
If youre comfortable pulling a committed recruit's or current team member's scholarship/offer to chase what may be a better player that's fine, I'm not. Personally I cant fathom being 10-toes-in as a one way street and it certainly wouldn't allow a player to fight for playing time in practice if the program is yelling NEXT all the time, discarding guys who many not be allstars on arrival or in the anticipated timeframe. UConn is still a school right? Also, you don't seem to have realized that your option (c) per my post would be a forced imposition. I am not talking about any mutual parting of the ways.
 
Last edited:
.-.
David 76 said:
I respect them. Great program. Greater history. They are not better than us.
Expand ...

KS is a better program. Its just a fact.

Better recruits. More FF. NBA players. HOF coaches. Wins. Conference wins. etc

Besides 3 NC vs. 4 NC, what metric is KS behind UCONN?
 
sdhusky said:
KS is a better program. Its just a fact.h

Better recruits. Morie FF. NBA players. HOF coaches. Wins. Conference wins. etc
A
Besides 3 NC vs. 4 NC

You ignored my question. Who would you pick?

NCs
Recent NCs
Coach
PLAYERS IN THE NBA
Better player development
Better University

KU has a better history that is all
Expand ...
 
Last edited:
.-.
sdhusky said:
KS is a better program. Its just a fact.

Better recruits. More FF. NBA players. HOF coaches. Wins. Conference wins. etc

Besides 3 NC vs. 4 NC, what metric is KS behind UCONN?
Expand ...

They have more history than us, no question. On the pantheon of all-time great college basketball programs, they're at the very least tied with us, and probably ahead. But in the here and now, it's tough to make the case that they're the better program when we've got them beat 4 to 1 in titles in the last 25 years.
 
champs99and04 said:
They have more history than us, no question. On the pantheon of all-time great college basketball programs, they're at the very least tied with us, and probably ahead. But in the here and now, it's tough to make the case that they're the better program when we've got them beat 4 to 1 in titles in the last 25 years.
Expand ...

And over the last 25, they have more wins. More conference championships. More All Americans, More FF's.
 
sdhusky said:
And over the last 25, they have more wins. More conference championships. More All Americans, More FF's.
Expand ...

So you defend UCONN on a Syracuse board and Kansas on a UCONN board...what is your deal?

And about your metrics: for the past 25 years they have been playing in the damn Big 12 so wins and conference championship don't mean a damn thing to me. And the hero worship that you and others share about Kansas leads to the All-Americans. So that leaves their FF's to our championships.

If you want to argue about the Dust Bowl era I suppose you might have a case, but even then we were at the beach while their land blew it's way to the Rockies.
 
elduderino said:
Haha. In all seriousness, did you ever actually construct the noose when UConn hired Pasqualoni?
Expand ...

Even on the basketball board this dudes name surfaces?!? Get me outta here!!!
 
BNich said:
Even on the basketball board this dudes name surfaces?!? Get me outta here!!!
Expand ...
Ha, imagine how I felt, I went to 'Cuse while he was there but Ive always been a much bigger UConn fan. It was like having your psycho Ex randomly move into your building several years down the line.
 
elduderino said:
Ha, imagine how I felt, I went to 'Cuse while he was there but Ive always been a much bigger UConn fan. It was like having your psycho Ex randomly move into your building several years down the line.
Expand ...

Safe to say you've had enough for one lifetime.
 
.-.
sdhusky said:
And over the last 25, they have more wins. More conference championships. More All Americans, More FF's.
Expand ...

They have one more final four, while UConn has three more national championships. Same number of elite eights.
 
sdhusky said:
And over the last 25, they have more wins. More conference championships. More All Americans, More FF's.
Expand ...
WestHartHusk said:
So you defend UCONN on a Syracuse board and Kansas on a UCONN board...what is your deal?

And about your metrics: for the past 25 years they have been playing in the damn Big 12 so wins and conference championship don't mean a damn thing to me. And the hero worship that you and others share about Kansas leads to the All-Americans. So that leaves their FF's to our championships.

If you want to argue about the Dust Bowl era I suppose you might have a case, but even then we were at the beach while their land blew it's way to the Rockies.
Expand ...
Although I wont concede that its a simple fact that KS is a better program than UConn, you've laid out a much appreciated reasonable and rational argument here. Theres just no way to reliably, formulaically, determine the value of a win, whether it be against an early season scrub team, league, tourney or a NC. I do enjoy the devil's advocate role though very much, and the Dust Bowl quip was hysterical.
 
WestHartHusk said:
So over the past 25 years you two would rather be Kansas fans than UCONN fan? Good lord.
Expand ...

No. I would rather be a UCONN fan but that doesn't stop me from seeing why some people would consider KS an elite program.
 
I see why Kansas is considered an elite program. It is their history. It is one of the very best.
I understand that landing a recruit over KS is a victory.
But I don't think it is logical for a HS bball player to choose, or be expected to choose KS over UCONN as a better program in 2014. Still happens, but it is based on the brand.
If I was buying stock in a program, I'd buy UCONN. You can buy KS if you really believe that. I have a sneaking hunch you would buy UCONN too.

Anyway, I think we understand each other's points and we can agree to disagree
 
.-.
David 76 said:
I see why Kansas is considered an elite program. It is their history. It is one of the very best.
Expand ...

Well, the statement I took issue with is when you said

"Those 4 "blue chip" teams include KU (for reasons I can't understand)"

And now you are saying:

"Anyway, I think we understand each other's points and we can agree to disagree"

Seems like you agreeing to disagree with yourself.

No worries. You are not the first succomb to my iron logic.
 
sdhusky said:
No. I would rather be a UCONN fan but that doesn't stop me from seeing why some people would consider KS an elite program.
Expand ...

Back-pedalling. Nobody said Kansas wasn't elite, we were reacting to what you said which was: "Kansas is a better program. It's just a fact."
 
WestHartHusk said:
Back-pedalling. Nobody said Kansas wasn't elite, we were reacting to what you said which was: "Kansas is a better program. It's just a fact."
Expand ...

Backpedaling?

Nobody? Go back and read:

""Those 4 "blue chip" teams include KU (for reasons I can't understand)""

Seems like someone is saying that KS isn't elite.

Go ahead and backpedal. You earned it.
 
sdhusky said:
And over the last 25, they have more wins. More conference championships. More All Americans, More FF's.
Expand ...

Wins and conference championships aren't all created equal. The NCAA Tournament is the one common denominator we have in college basketball.
 
Anyway said:
That was an attempt to be nice & move on.

If you want to insist that I don't understand the significance of KU, go ahead.
If you want to keep repeating that Kansas IS a better program than UCONN, go ahead. But I don't agree
Expand ...
 
WestHartHusk said:
So over the past 25 years you two would rather be Kansas fans than UCONN fan? Good lord.
Expand ...
Where did I say I would rather be a Kansas fan? I was just trying to point out what a complete idiot you are, but I guess there is no need because you make it obvious with every post. Enjoy your life as a homer though. No crime in that.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,285
Messages
4,561,408
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom