MVCfans.com

ictjay wrote:PS Getting #21, 26 and 48 in the state of Texas is pretty damm good.

Considering that there are hundreds of D-1 quality athletes in the state, there are four BCS teams in Texas and a total of 10 D-1 basketball schools, landing 21,26 and 48 is very, very good. But, recruiting is a funny game and I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in how these kids will develop. A few will, a few won't.

Enjoy the recruiting victorys, they are hard earned. That said, developing the players and winning the games on the court will be much more difficult than the recruiting wars.

Even tho we did not get Chatman we have even better players looking at us.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... onsidering

oneNEIGHBOR wrote:Even tho we did not get Chatman we have even better players looking at us.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... onsidering

Recruting isn't a sprint. Double G knows what he's doing.

Like I said before, 6'0 PGs are not something to wave your flag about unless they're receiving national pub.

So Creighton takes Chatman over Campbell who the next day commits to UTEP and because Rivals says Campbell is #140 in their Top 150 he is a good 6' PG and Chatman is a suspect 6' PG because he is not? Personally, I'll take the CU coaching staff's analysis that they preferred Chatman. Said it before, no one will know for years how their recruits from this year will turn out.

I'm pleased that the CU coaches got the kids that THEY wanted to get. I'm especially pleased that Coach Mac thinks Groselle, the 6'11 kid, may prove to be a monster steal once this season is over.

LJay wrote:So Creighton takes Chatman over Campbell who the next day commits to UTEP and because Rivals says Campbell is #140 in their Top 150 he is a good 6' PG and Chatman is a suspect 6' PG because he is not? Personally, I'll take the CU coaching staff's analysis that they preferred Chatman. Said it before, no one will know for years how their recruits from this year will turn out.

They're all suspect. They're recruits. That's the nature of the game.

Like I said before, 6'0 PGs are not something to wave your flag about unless they're receiving national pub.

They're all suspect. They're recruits. That's the nature of the game.

M'thinks you say one thing in one post and then the opposite in another.

LJay wrote:

Like I said before, 6'0 PGs are not something to wave your flag about unless they're receiving national pub.

They're all suspect. They're recruits. That's the nature of the game.

M'thinks you say one thing in one post and then the opposite in another.

Ah, I will try and explain myself.

If a highly touted recruit (4* and 5*) choses your school then go ahead and boast; not because there is a guarantee that he will be a star but because your school scored a major recruiting victory on the national scene.

With that being said, there are NO absolutes. The only guarantee is that there isn't one.

I wouldn't consider anyone in the year's MVC class to be a "highly touted recruit" but some will be stars.

I find it funny that we now have a 5 page thread on a young man who isn't very highly regarded on the national scene (yet).

It's 5 pages long because the kid was a pretty visible recruit who spurned one MVC team for another.

LMS wrote:It's 5 pages long because the kid was a pretty visible recruit who spurned one MVC team for another.

Exactly what I said. CU fans were more excited for the "spurning" of WSU than for getting the kid themselves.

WSUbballer wrote:

LMS wrote:It's 5 pages long because the kid was a pretty visible recruit who spurned one MVC team for another.

Exactly what I said. CU fans were more excited for the "spurning" of WSU than for getting the kid themselves.

So it's more about the rivalry and less about the actual player?