So your absurd argument for the justification of high transfers is that it gets teams more tournament wins. How many tournament wins did it get us? We don’t even make the tournament!!! LOL. The fact is we have not even competed for an SEC Championship in 10 years. Yet we have one of the highest transfer rates. Teams that have low transfer rates in the conference have been highly competitive.and have won conference championships. if you want to turn this into a “I got you” discussion I will get my 8 year grandson to discuss it with you. If you want seriously look at the undeniable facts Arkansas with high transfers has not won a regular season championship in 30 years. Trams that have low transfer rates in the conference have won 6 out of the last 7 regular season conference championship. It is no mystery that you conspicuously fail to acknowledge that reality even though in haplessly trying to prove your point, you provided the perfect illustration as to why high transfer programs are not succeeding in the SEC. How much tournament success have we had with the high transfers? Could you expound on that?
Isn’t the point of playing he CBK season to get 6 NCAA tournament wins? Of course that’s the metric that matters the most. Auburn was the SEC regular season champion last year, they started 3 transfers. Auburn’s best player this year was a transfer and they started 3 transfers again.
Richard and Lofton did not shoot under 30%. When we won back to back championships our front line was 6’10”, 6’9”, and 6’9”. We also had Richard off the bench ho was a huge 6’8”. There were NO spacing problems. Richard and Lofton are not as good at the 3 as Green and Humphrey, but we managed to avoid spacing problems with as big if not a bigger front line when we were a winning program. Why would I substitute a 6’11” 300 pound player to play against a 6’9” player as opposed to putting a 6’1” guard like Jones on him? Are you really asking me that question? You think that because Jones got more rebounds that Jitoboh that he should have played Power forward before Jitoboh did? Maybe the reason why Jones was such a horrificly poor 3 point shooter is because he was forced to rebound against guys 7 inches taller than he was game in and game out. You think that burden would have some impact on his 3 point shooting?
There were no spacing problems because Brewer shot 35% from 3pt range. Humphrey shot 44% from 3pt range. Green shot 39% from 3 pt range. That’s 3 guys shooting 35%+ and 2 shooting almost 40% or better. Fudge shot 22%, Lofton shot 28% and Reeves shot 26% from 3pt range. You don’t see a difference between those numbers? You don’t see how those numbers could punish a defense for trying to sag off Brewer, Humphrey or Green.
Castleton, Hudson, Appleby, Rosario, Finney-Smith were great transfers for us. So what is your point? Scuttle HS recruiting and hope that a player comes here and ends up like the ones in Auburn of the few that we have had here? I think that is a horrible strategy. Teams that are top recruiters will continue to clean up on HS talent. It’s one thing to plug a hole here or there with transfers or get exceptional talent that can immediately mesh with your program personnel. But to keep rolling the dice that a hodgepodge of players coming from different college programs are going create a stable program is nonsensical.
Nobody is saying abandon HS recruiting, but adding 3-4 transfers a year is turning into the norm for most CBK programs.
It makes me wonder . . . Certainly hyperbolic and overly negative but folks around here are answering pretty well.
He left the team before he bounced a ball on the court. So did Mann. There were a couple others CBD brought in or recruited that were ready to bolt. All eventually played or play in the NBA. But they really had no desire to hang around a college town for long.
Yeah, it's just silly. He's legit arguing that getting Castleton was a mistake because we should've let Jitoboh develop.
Why? There are teams that are ALWAYS at the top of the rankings in every NCAA sport. There are academic programs that have always been the cream of the crop. But just because a school does not have success in either sports or academics 80 years ago, does not lock them into insignificance forever in academics or sports with occasional flsres of brilliance! Thst’s nuts. My comments were in response to an individual.who reasoned that because historically Florida has had little or no success in basketball, expectations of success should be tempered even despite the success under Donovan. I don’t buy that all all.
The other thing that helped spacing is that we had two of the best pair of passing bigs we've seen in a long time collegiately in Noah and Horford (who both went on to lead NBA centers in assists at different times). You could play high-low between the two of them and they could easily beat doubles in the post by passing out or zones by skipping out of the high post. Both could also initiate the break and get us into early offense before the defense was set or score out of the high post (Horford with a jumper, Noah off the dribble drive). And, FWIW, one of the few weaknesses those title teams had, especially the first season, was their ability to execute called plays against set defenses in tight games, precisely because we didn't have the spacing (or the handlers outside of Brewer) to get into the lane and score. Those games against Purdue and Butler in the tourney, for instance, were real slogs because they consistently forced us into clogged lanes. We lived at the line against them. I think this is also why Golden has emphasized pursuing guys with high usage rate this offseason. It's one thing to have spacing, but another to be able to create shots when you don't have it. Our starting backcourt was at 16 and 15% respectively. And our best rate among perimeter players came from Reeves (26) and Bonham (24), but they only had effective fg percentages of 47 and 45, which are not good at all.
The Purdue game was a slog because the Boilermakers were bumping Taurean all the way down the court all game long, and because they were hacking and holding our bigs all game long. And getting away with it. In fact, several teams played us that way in the tournament, figuring it was the only way they could hang. Oregon fouled us like crazy but got whistled for it. Their fans were screaming about the disparity in foul shots, but it was called the way it's supposed to be called. The Ducks rolled the dice, hoping it wouldn't be, and paid for it. I can't fault the strategy but it sure is frustrating to watch. Butler makes every game a slog. That's what they do. Still, the Gators could beat you in any number of ways. They were built that way, and back-to-back titles remains an almost untouchable accomplishment.
My question is how is the NIL situation helping us get HS talent, if at all? Why don't we hear more about that? Seems like it could make a big difference. (duh) lol
I dunno. Rules, maybe? They aren't uniform around the country, and that's a huge problem. The State of Florida was one of the first to pass a NIL law, and it seemed like the State was ahead of the game. It wasn't. Other states subsequently passed laws a lot more lenient and so the Florida law has kind of handcuffed us in recruiting. My understanding is that both parties recognize this and have a new bill working its way through committees to fix the situation. But having dealt with a couple of bills in the past, my understanding of the process is that they never reach the governor's desk until July of each year.
