Jump to content

recruiting update


inmn

Recommended Posts

http://tinyurl.com/2tap62

Hate to see the rest of the ACC involved with better ranked recruits but that seems to be case after last year's misses. Jennings is ranked much higher by others but he seems to have chilled on Md. They have offered Cheeks for '09. They essentially took Tucker over Walsh, from a tools and class standpoint doesn't make sense but time will tell. Gary should get off the golf course in the next month or so just in time to pick over the leftovers!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply
http://tinyurl.com/2tap62

Hate to see the rest of the ACC involved with better ranked recruits but that seems to be case after last year's misses. Jennings is ranked much higher by others but he seems to have chilled on Md. They have offered Cheeks for '09. They essentially took Tucker over Walsh, from a tools and class standpoint doesn't make sense but time will tell. Gary should get off the golf course in the next month or so just in time to pick over the leftovers!!

Not sure what you're talking about, but you seem to be misinformed on some things.

We did not take Tucker over Walsh at all. Tucker is a point forward, Walsh is a pure shooter.

We did not lose Walsh. He was not our top priority. He wanted to commit, but we asked him to hold off for a month. He declined and is now at Xavier. We decided to pass on Walsh for other options that we seem to be doing well with, specifically Sean Mosley, but also Chris Turner. Both are more well regarded than Walsh.

Jennings was never a serious option due to his academic history. He'll likely wind up at a school such as Memphis. We are however the leaders for Quintrell Thomas, our top frontcourt option who has shot up the rankings (Kansas and Florida are now recruiting him).

If this is picking the leftovers and what results from Gary golfing...I'm happy to see it. If we get Thomas and Mosley our class will stack up well within the ACC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what you're talking about, but you seem to be misinformed on some things.

We did not take Tucker over Walsh at all. Tucker is a point forward, Walsh is a pure shooter.

We did not lose Walsh. He was not our top priority. He wanted to commit, but we asked him to hold off for a month. He declined and is now at Xavier. We decided to pass on Walsh for other options that we seem to be doing well with, specifically Sean Mosley, but also Chris Turner. Both are more well regarded than Walsh.

Jennings was never a serious option due to his academic history. He'll likely wind up at a school such as Memphis. We are however the leaders for Quintrell Thomas, our top frontcourt option who has shot up the rankings (Kansas and Florida are now recruiting him).

If this is picking the leftovers and what results from Gary golfing...I'm happy to see it. If we get Thomas and Mosley our class will stack up well within the ACC.

Eight,

Nothing personal but the "we" thing bothers me-are you an employee or a fan? Please re-read what I wrote, only so many to give and so much time to go around. Walsh decided Xavier was a better fit for him, if Md didn't take Tucker maybe it would be a different story. I've never heard of Md recruiting based on point forward v. shooter, if anything GW decides who and how hard based on defense and they both play the same position.

If Md wasn't hot for Jennings why was so much on him leaked? They can't comment directly on recruits but.........was it to make Md look better to be mentioned with a top recruit? Is that really what you are saying? Thomas is nice and he is rising but didn't do much last year (albiet for a loaded team).

No matter how you slice it Md is not recruiting top 50 players, and all that crap about GW picking kids he likes is just that-crap. It's "Groundhog Day" again with Md getting outhustled for recruits. Look around look at the kids going to Georgetown, the kids who signed with and are mentioned with UVA, Ga Tech, NC State, and Fl State. Are you really happy with who Md is recruiting? Based on comments she made last year Debbie Yow isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eight,

Nothing personal but the "we" thing bothers me-are you an employee or a fan? Please re-read what I wrote, only so many to give and so much time to go around. Walsh decided Xavier was a better fit for him, if Md didn't take Tucker maybe it would be a different story. I've never heard of Md recruiting based on point forward v. shooter, if anything GW decides who and how hard based on defense and they both play the same position.

If Md wasn't hot for Jennings why was so much on him leaked? They can't comment directly on recruits but.........was it to make Md look better to be mentioned with a top recruit? Is that really what you are saying? Thomas is nice and he is rising but didn't do much last year (albiet for a loaded team).

No matter how you slice it Md is not recruiting top 50 players, and all that crap about GW picking kids he likes is just that-crap. It's "Groundhog Day" again with Md getting outhustled for recruits. Look around look at the kids going to Georgetown, the kids who signed with and are mentioned with UVA, Ga Tech, NC State, and Fl State. Are you really happy with who Md is recruiting? Based on comments she made last year Debbie Yow isn't.

Walsh didn't choose Xavier because it was a better fit. He chose Xavier because he did not have a firm offer from us. There was an article in the Pittsburgh paper after his commitment last week stating that he was ready to come to Maryland, but we asked him to hold off for a month, and he elected not to do so.

As far as the Tucker vs Walsh, it's pretty clear they were recruited with different roles in mind. You've never heard of Maryland recruiting based on roles? I find that hard to believe. We took Tucker as a versatile backcourt option who could play the 1 or the 3. It's pretty clear based on who we were recruiting for '08 as a guard (Brian Walsh, Sean Mosley, Chris Turner) that we were looking to fill the spot with a good shooter and a player who will be a SG in college.

I'm not sure why you're comparing Tucker and Walsh when they were not even in the same recruiting cycle. Even if we didn't get or take Tucker, it was clear that Walsh was being evaluated against other SG prospects.

As far as Jennings, I'm not sure what was "leaked". We were in contact and recruiting him, but given his academic track record, it would seem hard to believe he was a top target. The staff clearly felt he was talented, and he is, so they recruited him to keep their options open.

We are recruiting top 50 talent. Mosley is a top 50 player and we seem to be in very good shape with him at this point. Say what you will about Thomas, but I find it hard to believe that a player who didn't do much last season is rising in the rankings and drawing interest from the likes of Kansas and Florida.

I'm not sure who I should be impressed with that UVA has signed under Leitao. GT can continue to recruit well and finish 8-8 every season. FSU can continue to recruit well and never make the tournament. I'll take our 2006 class that helped us win 25 games last season. Dr. Yow should perhaps be happy that the men's basketball continues to generate the revenue to allow the department to run so smoothly rather than concerning herself with who the very successful head basketball coach chooses to recruit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maryland had their most disappointing seasons under GW when they were led by their highest ranked recruiting class - Garrison, Gilchrist, McCray, NCM, et al - along with Jones - a blue chipper - the next season. I'll take the ratings with a pound of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walsh didn't choose Xavier because it was a better fit. He chose Xavier because he did not have a firm offer from us. There was an article in the Pittsburgh paper after his commitment last week stating that he was ready to come to Maryland, but we asked him to hold off for a month, and he elected not to do so.

As far as the Tucker vs Walsh, it's pretty clear they were recruited with different roles in mind. You've never heard of Maryland recruiting based on roles? I find that hard to believe. We took Tucker as a versatile backcourt option who could play the 1 or the 3. It's pretty clear based on who we were recruiting for '08 as a guard (Brian Walsh, Sean Mosley, Chris Turner) that we were looking to fill the spot with a good shooter and a player who will be a SG in college.

I'm not sure why you're comparing Tucker and Walsh when they were not even in the same recruiting cycle. Even if we didn't get or take Tucker, it was clear that Walsh was being evaluated against other SG prospects.

As far as Jennings, I'm not sure what was "leaked". We were in contact and recruiting him, but given his academic track record, it would seem hard to believe he was a top target. The staff clearly felt he was talented, and he is, so they recruited him to keep their options open.

We are recruiting top 50 talent. Mosley is a top 50 player and we seem to be in very good shape with him at this point. Say what you will about Thomas, but I find it hard to believe that a player who didn't do much last season is rising in the rankings and drawing interest from the likes of Kansas and Florida.

I'm not sure who I should be impressed with that UVA has signed under Leitao. GT can continue to recruit well and finish 8-8 every season. FSU can continue to recruit well and never make the tournament. I'll take our 2006 class that helped us win 25 games last season. Dr. Yow should perhaps be happy that the men's basketball continues to generate the revenue to allow the department to run so smoothly rather than concerning herself with who the very successful head basketball coach chooses to recruit.

They have three to give unless someone redshirts, and they may want to keep one in hand for 09 when it appears they have better prospects. I have not seen Mosley play but have never seen him described as shooter or someone with range.

Of course Md recruits based on roles (you seem to want to argue semantics)but have you ever heard GW use the term "point forward"? I was close to the program in his early years and can tell you that is a term he despises. Again I have not seen Thomas play (others like him) but he averaged 8/4 as a junior. Mosley is not a consencus top 50 talent. Interest again can be a load of crap-it was noted here that Kentucky was interested in Tucker-not true Gillespie recommended him to the Terp staff, he never recruited him.

Look, I like GW as a coach but recruiting is a big part of the job and he just isn't cutting it as you will see this year. One NCAA win in 4 years is unacceptable for my vision of where this program should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have three to give unless someone redshirts, and they may want to keep one in hand for 09 when it appears they have better prospects. I have not seen Mosley play but have never seen him described as shooter or someone with range.

Of course Md recruits based on roles (you seem to want to argue semantics)but have you ever heard GW use the term "point forward"? I was close to the program in his early years and can tell you that is a term he despises. Again I have not seen Thomas play (others like him) but he averaged 8/4 as a junior. Mosley is not a consencus top 50 talent. Interest again can be a load of crap-it was noted here that Kentucky was interested in Tucker-not true Gillespie recommended him to the Terp staff, he never recruited him.

Look, I like GW as a coach but recruiting is a big part of the job and he just isn't cutting it as you will see this year. One NCAA win in 4 years is unacceptable for my vision of where this program should be.

Mosley isn't a consensus top 50 prospect? According to whom? He's top 50 according to Gibbons, Telep, and Brick Oettinger, and Clark Francis has him at 57. I've only seen one ranking (Rivals) where he isn't top 50 or very, very close. He is most certainly a SG prospect with a strong shot (though he isn't as strong a shooter as Walsh).

As far as the point forward classification, call it what you will, but whatI meant was that he is a small forward with ball handling skills. He is not at all a similar player to Walsh, and Walsh's recruitment had nothing at all to do with Cliff Tucker. And yes, Tucker did have Kentucky interest. Gillispie had recruited him at Texas A&M and had offered him. He made contact with Tucker when he took over at Kentucky but by that time it was too late as Tucker was set to declare for the Terps within a week or two.

FWIW, Thomas averaged 9 and 7 as a junior last season for a very strong team.

inmn, out of curiousity how did you feel about the 2006 class on signing day and how does that compare to your feelings about that class now after a very strong season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ruz,

It means what it says and I think GW has said the same thing on the record.

I think GW is a great teacher and bench coach, his admin and recruiting weaknesses are well documented. I simply would like to see what he can do with better talent, talent which he has had in previous years. I don't think this year's team is particularly talented (and I'm not the only one). GW is at the age where he is what he is, I don't think his assistants bring anything to the table and I see Md becoming a middle of the pack (or slightly worse) ACC program. I think given Md's position in the ACC, recruiting base, facilities, and fan base they should be a much better-a top 20 program. My views are similar to the analysts on ESPN who thought MD was one of the top 10 programs of the past decade-I don't think anyone thinks they are close to that now. I have been around Md basketball for the last 40 years; I grew up playing at Cole, played HS basketball and my wife played D1-we have a few freinds still in the business coaching at D1 men's and women's programs on the West coast. I really think Md is slipping in recruiting and it will be telling in the coming years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maryland had their most disappointing seasons under GW when they were led by their highest ranked recruiting class - Garrison, Gilchrist, McCray, NCM, et al - along with Jones - a blue chipper - the next season. I'll take the ratings with a pound of salt.

Ruz,

This is simply not true, Rivals or someone similar came out with a top 5 and people ran with it. I have posted many times on this subject-it was a good class, nothing more. Forget about rankings look at who else was recruiting the kids, Ibekwe and McCray had national interest the others had flaws that were known. Please reference previous threads on this subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mosley isn't a consensus top 50 prospect? According to whom? He's top 50 according to Gibbons, Telep, and Brick Oettinger, and Clark Francis has him at 57. I've only seen one ranking (Rivals) where he isn't top 50 or very, very close. He is most certainly a SG prospect with a strong shot (though he isn't as strong a shooter as Walsh).

As far as the point forward classification, call it what you will, but whatI meant was that he is a small forward with ball handling skills. He is not at all a similar player to Walsh, and Walsh's recruitment had nothing at all to do with Cliff Tucker. And yes, Tucker did have Kentucky interest. Gillispie had recruited him at Texas A&M and had offered him. He made contact with Tucker when he took over at Kentucky but by that time it was too late as Tucker was set to declare for the Terps within a week or two.

FWIW, Thomas averaged 9 and 7 as a junior last season for a very strong team.

inmn, out of curiousity how did you feel about the 2006 class on signing day and how does that compare to your feelings about that class now after a very strong season?

Mosley is 85 on scouts which is Telep and 81 on Rivals. That being said I trust Brick and Gibbons more and Brick has him at 41. I wouldn't call that consensus but let's see after camps. Either way he would be a nice addition to the program after the guards Md lost to Georgetown last year (yes, I understand playing time with Hayes and Vasquez).

You are right on Thomas although Brick has him at 8/7, still not big numbers even at St Anthonys. He is rising, but can you play him and Dupree together?

I don't buy sincere interest from KY given their available scholarships, the Patterson/Lucas deal, next year's recruits and how all the sudden a top 250 kid (rising) signs over interest from (insert top program). Like it or not that's how things are done. I think we are arguing over different things on Tucker/Walsh-I just think Walsh is a talented kid that would have been a nice fit (especially academics and outside game). In turning him down you had better hope Mosley doesn't end up at Syracuse. I just think Md's efforts this year look like last year's when they missed on a lot of kids. Now you have Sims, Walsh, Braswell, Jennings.....and I know how the spin works-we really liked this kid better, higher ceiling, better character, better academics-yada, yada, yada.

I was pleasantly surprised by last year's class. I really like Vasquez and think he can be a star, great example of a player much better than his rankings. I like Haye's shot and handle but am somewhat concerned about his quickness and ability to contain quick 1's-I think he can be a nice complementary player, let's see how he progresses this year. I am a little concerned that Milbourne did not get more playing time last year. Miami let Burney go so I really don't expect much from him-maybe a poor man's Cedric Lewis. Big problem is you are asking an awful lot from freshman and sophmores and historically it just doesn't work.

I don't like this year's freshman class, this had to be a big recruiting year and I think they missed on a lot of targets and had to settle. Big problem because they are somewhat out of sequence in having 9 FR and SO's but no real difference makers other than maybe Vasquez. I really think the assistant situation has hurt recruiting. Who know's just my opinion and I am often wrong but the analysts I read and the people I know in the game really think Md is sliding-but given GW's track record most won't say publicaly because Gary has a done wonderful things with less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mosley is 85 on scouts which is Telep and 81 on Rivals. That being said I trust Brick and Gibbons more and Brick has him at 41. I wouldn't call that consensus but let's see after camps. Either way he would be a nice addition to the program after the guards Md lost to Georgetown last year (yes, I understand playing time with Hayes and Vasquez).

You are right on Thomas although Brick has him at 8/7, still not big numbers even at St Anthonys. He is rising, but can you play him and Dupree together?

I don't buy sincere interest from KY given their available scholarships, the Patterson/Lucas deal, next year's recruits and how all the sudden a top 250 kid (rising) signs over interest from (insert top program). Like it or not that's how things are done. I think we are arguing over different things on Tucker/Walsh-I just think Walsh is a talented kid that would have been a nice fit (especially academics and outside game). In turning him down you had better hope Mosley doesn't end up at Syracuse. I just think Md's efforts this year look like last year's when they missed on a lot of kids. Now you have Sims, Walsh, Braswell, Jennings.....and I know how the spin works-we really liked this kid better, higher ceiling, better character, better academics-yada, yada, yada.

I was pleasantly surprised by last year's class. I really like Vasquez and think he can be a star, great example of a player much better than his rankings. I like Haye's shot and handle but am somewhat concerned about his quickness and ability to contain quick 1's-I think he can be a nice complementary player, let's see how he progresses this year. I am a little concerned that Milbourne did not get more playing time last year. Miami let Burney go so I really don't expect much from him-maybe a poor man's Cedric Lewis. Big problem is you are asking an awful lot from freshman and sophmores and historically it just doesn't work.

I don't like this year's freshman class, this had to be a big recruiting year and I think they missed on a lot of targets and had to settle. Big problem because they are somewhat out of sequence in having 9 FR and SO's but no real difference makers other than maybe Vasquez. I really think the assistant situation has hurt recruiting. Who know's just my opinion and I am often wrong but the analysts I read and the people I know in the game really think Md is sliding-but given GW's track record most won't say publicaly because Gary has a done wonderful things with less.

inmn, Mosley is 43 on Telep's list. I believe he was 85 when the '08 rankings first came out last summer before having another excellent high school season and playing well so far on the AAU circuit. link

I agree that Walsh could have been a nice player for us, but I have to think that in turning him down the staff feels confident on Mosley. I doubt Mosley ends up at Syracuse - more like an ACC school, either Maryland or otherwise.

As for Tucker, I doubt I change your mind on that, but given that Gillispie had offered while he was still at Texas A&M, I don't find it all that hard to believe that he still had interest after moving onto Kentucky.

Thomas is a 4 and Dupree is a 5 so no problem there.

As far as being on the downswing, we shall see. The Terps certainly had a strong season last year after down years the past two. The team will be young, but the ACC is set to be down as compared to last year, so the Terps should still be able to compete. Aside from North Carolina, there isn't anyone that would seem to be definitively better than the Terps. Not to say the Terps will finish second in the conference, but all teams have their weaknesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ruz,

This is simply not true, Rivals or someone similar came out with a top 5 and people ran with it. I have posted many times on this subject-it was a good class, nothing more. Forget about rankings look at who else was recruiting the kids, Ibekwe and McCray had national interest the others had flaws that were known. Please reference previous threads on this subject.

My comment was that it was their highest rated class. When did they have a higher rated one? Also, it seems that you use ratings only when it's convenient for you to bash the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ruz,

It means what it says and I think GW has said the same thing on the record.

I think GW is a great teacher and bench coach, his admin and recruiting weaknesses are well documented. I simply would like to see what he can do with better talent, talent which he has had in previous years. I don't think this year's team is particularly talented (and I'm not the only one). GW is at the age where he is what he is, I don't think his assistants bring anything to the table and I see Md becoming a middle of the pack (or slightly worse) ACC program. I think given Md's position in the ACC, recruiting base, facilities, and fan base they should be a much better-a top 20 program. My views are similar to the analysts on ESPN who thought MD was one of the top 10 programs of the past decade-I don't think anyone thinks they are close to that now. I have been around Md basketball for the last 40 years; I grew up playing at Cole, played HS basketball and my wife played D1-we have a few freinds still in the business coaching at D1 men's and women's programs on the West coast. I really think Md is slipping in recruiting and it will be telling in the coming years.

Well, when you use the word unacceptable, the inference from average fans like me is that something basic has to change. Would you be in favor of GW being fired?

Yes, GW is what he is. He's a coach who won a national title. He's the coach who brought MD back to respectability. I think MD is currently a top 20 program, and I think most people would agree with that. You admitted, to your credit, that last year's class was better than you thought. I think you should consider that you're jumping the gun on your criticisms of this year's frosh class - or at least let them prove you wrong before declaring that the sky is in the process of falling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...