|
Post by JG Panthers on Jul 29, 2009 16:16:27 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Aug 3, 2009 19:58:59 GMT -6
Per rivals, Will Artino -- the 6-11 center from Waukee, Iowa -- committed to Creighton today.
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Aug 4, 2009 15:47:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by raar on Aug 5, 2009 7:50:43 GMT -6
Where is Godfrey ranked if at all? Thought he was coming back to Milw to play his senior year? When can he sign a LOI? Does he still intend on coming to UWM?
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Aug 5, 2009 12:17:28 GMT -6
I commented on McWhorter this past winter and thought he'd be a guy UWM should pay close attention to. He's a tremendous penetrator who gets after it defensively. Decent jump shot that probably improved over the summer. Please, somebody tell me we're actively recruiting him.
Reid Koenen from Prarie was also mentioned, and I also saw him play last season. He's basically Ryan Thornton. Yeah, he can shoot, mostly because he's 6'6" shooting over kids 6'1" in the conference he's in. He's not quick and he's very skinny. He's more of a D-3 prospect in my view.
|
|
|
Post by Title on Aug 5, 2009 19:29:44 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Aug 5, 2009 21:08:52 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Aug 6, 2009 8:05:08 GMT -6
If it wasn't obvious before, it's safe to cross Gasser off the 2010 wish list.
I found it interesting he referred to Butler as a "high major" with the likes of ASU, Maryland, etc. Perceptions change when a team is a perennial Tournament and top-20 team like Butler has been the past three or four years, no matter what conference they play in.
|
|
|
Post by FTA1982 on Aug 6, 2009 10:01:48 GMT -6
If UWM loses another WI recruit to Loyola.....
|
|
|
Post by hanson on Aug 6, 2009 10:07:19 GMT -6
No kidding. I definitely don't like the fact that Randall is his coach.
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Aug 6, 2009 12:57:37 GMT -6
We don't "lose" recruits to anyone. Kids just pick different schools. You can't lose what you don't have. I have never understood why people believe that the fact a kid is local somehow makes him the local school's recruit to "lose." Most kids prefer to go away to college. It's the first big adventure of life. Why should ballplayers be any different? I'm more impressed when a local school successfully recruits a local player.
People also tend to focus too much on comparing basketball programs (or whatever sport) in recruiting, as if a kid would or should naturally always choose the currently better team. For recruited athletes their focus is usually on the program, granted, but there's still a lot more to college, and all those other factors play a critical role. Just to compare Milwaukee and Loyola, in most respects the schools could scarcely be more different. The only things they really have in common are urban locations (and even those are very, very different) and weather.
From a basketball standpoint, like most people on this board I can't imagine why a recruited player would prefer Loyola's program to ours. We have better coaches, better facilities, better success, etc. But I can also see a hundred other differences between the schools, any couple of which might (and sometimes has) swayed a recruit notwithstanding whatever differences he might perceive in the programs.
If you want to follow recruiting, fine, but you should always understand that you'll win some and you'll "lose" more -- usually many more. That's especially true at the mid-major level.
|
|
|
Post by FTA1982 on Aug 6, 2009 13:12:40 GMT -6
We don't "lose" recruits to anyone. Kids just pick different schools. You can't lose what you don't have. I have never understood why people believe that the fact a kid is local somehow makes him the local school's recruit to "lose." Most kids prefer to go away to college. It's the first big adventure of life. Why should ballplayers be any different? I'm more impressed when a local school successfully recruits a local player. People also tend to focus too much on comparing basketball programs (or whatever sport) in recruiting, as if a kid would or should naturally always choose the currently better team. For recruited athletes their focus is usually on the program, granted, but there's still a lot more to college, and all those other factors play a critical role. Just to compare Milwaukee and Loyola, in most respects the schools could scarcely be more different. The only things they really have in common are urban locations (and even those are very, very different) and weather. From a basketball standpoint, like most people on this board I can't imagine why a recruited player would prefer Loyola's program to ours. We have better coaches, better facilities, better success, etc. But I can also see a hundred other differences between the schools, any couple of which might (and sometimes has) swayed a recruit notwithstanding whatever differences he might perceive in the programs. If you want to follow recruiting, fine, but you should always understand that you'll win some and you'll "lose" more -- usually many more. That's especially true at the mid-major level. Think of it how you want, I tend to disagree...
|
|
|
Post by uwmplanner on Aug 6, 2009 14:22:38 GMT -6
I tend to agree with FTA 1982. There are plenty of good kids in our backyard i want to see at Milwaukee.
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Aug 6, 2009 16:28:25 GMT -6
We all want to see good local prospects at Milwaukee. I'm just saying we need to be as realistic about recruiting them as we are (or should be) about recruiting kids from Kalamazoo or Timbuktu. Every fanbase I know of seems to think local kids should always come to its school, yet also finds it perfectly reasonable that its team should regularly get recruits from far flung places, too -- recruits that are, ipso facto, passing on their own local school.
I understand the psychology of it, but it doesn't actually make much sense.
Just get good kids who can play, no matter where they're from.
|
|
|
Post by nohopspanther on Aug 7, 2009 20:48:02 GMT -6
Tell Bret Bielema that he shouldn't expect to keep each Wisconsin kid he wants, he'll laugh in your face Fran.
|
|