Recruiting as of 5/15/25

[MU82]

Well we made the cut for Mannion......competition is fairly tough though.....

https://twitter.com/coreyevans_10/status/1028343416898367491?s=21

I'd love to see that Final Four the first weekend in April!

[Herman Cain]

The camera angle in the highlight reel embedded in this story gives a good visual of Mannion's abilities.
https://www.azdesertswarm.com/basketball/2018/8/11/17679128/nico-mannion-arizona-villanova-duke-marquette-basketball-recruiting-2019-final-4-commits

[We R Final Four]

Marquette should have fired the bum at least 3 years ago. Can't recruit his way out of a paper bag. Hank hurt more than he helped. Squirmy "smoke and mirrors" irreparably damaged our brand. Joey chose MU only because of Sam, who chose MU only because F%cky was stoopid. Markus chose MU only because of Stan. The Michigan kids are too skinny. Bailey can't be any good because he wasn't ranked in the top 25.

Any recruiting success = Stan.

Any recruiting failure = Wojo.

This sums it up perfectly. Just waiting for the YouTube of Stan eating lasagna dinner at some recruit's house.

[Lennys Tap]

Well we made the cut for Mannion......competition is fairly tough though.....

https://twitter.com/coreyevans_10/status/1028343416898367491?s=21

I'm happy we made the cut, even if we lose out in the end. Some on Scoop would disagree, but I think being a finalist for a blue chipper is good news no matter the outcome.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'm happy we made the cut, even if we lose out in the end. Some on Scoop would disagree, but I think being a finalist for a blue chipper is good news no matter the outcome.

From a resources perspective it would be better to be cut here then to be cut later.

From a perception of our staff's recruiting ability perspective its better to cut later then to be cut here.

Both pale in comparison to actually landing the damn kid.

[Lennys Tap]

From a resources perspective it would be better to be cut here then to be cut later.

From a resources perspective it would be better to only recruit 3 guys a year and land them all.

I'd rather have a shot at the best players - that doesn't mean you don't have a back up plan to include lesser players.

[Herman Cain]

From a resources perspective it would be better to be cut here then to be cut later.

From a perception of our staff's recruiting ability perspective its better to cut later then to be cut here.

Both pale in comparison to actually landing the damn kid.

We have limited opportunities to get blue chip recruits. So it's worth the resources to chase when there is a possibility.Our coaching staff does a good job closing when it gets to the final stage. When the program returns to where it was in the Crean Buzz era from a results perspective , this coaching staff will generate more blue chip opportunities. In the meantime we have to have a high success rate with the Theos , Greg Elliotts and Jamal Cain's who have high ceilings with good coaching .

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

From a resources perspective it would be better to only recruit 3 guys a year and land them all.

I'd rather have a shot at the best players - that doesn't mean you don't have a back up plan to include lesser players.

This is all true. And none of it disagrees with anything I said in the post you quoted.

[MU82]

From a resources perspective it would be better to be cut here then to be cut later.

From a perception of our staff's recruiting ability perspective its better to cut later then to be cut here.

Both pale in comparison to actually landing the damn kid.

From a resources perspective it would be better to only recruit 3 guys a year and land them all.

I'd rather have a shot at the best players - that doesn't mean you don't have a back up plan to include lesser players.

Agree with both of these statements.

Very happy with the recruiting ability of Wojo and his assistants.

[Lennys Tap]

This is all true. And none of it disagrees with anything I said in the post you quoted.

Where I disagree, brother TAMU, is that IMO there are ancillary benefits to being a finalist for the top players that are positives for a program even when you don't land the big fish. It's good publicity to be in the "final four" with Nova, Duke and Kentucky or the final 3 with Michigan and MSU for a blue chipper. Conversely, it's bad optics when our top targets don't include us in their final 8, 9 or 10. Perception matters.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but has anyone ever said "Good news! We got knocked out in the Sweet 16. We weren't going to win it all anyway, now we won't waste all those resources going to the Final Four"? My point is that success "advancing" in the battle for top recruits is success, getting cut early is not. We have plenty of resources, enough that we don't have to celebrate or "spin" bad news.

[Herman Cain]

Where I disagree, brother TAMU, is that IMO there are ancillary benefits to being a finalist for the top players that are positives for a program even when you don't land the big fish. It's good publicity to be in the "final four" with Nova, Duke and Kentucky or the final 3 with Michigan and MSU for a blue chipper. Conversely, it's bad optics when our top targets don't include us in their final 8, 9 or 10. Perception matters.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but has anyone ever said "Good news! We got knocked out in the Sweet 16. We weren't going to win it all anyway, now we won't waste all those resources going to the Final Four"? My point is that success "advancing" in the battle for top recruits is success, getting cut early is not. We have plenty of resources, enough that we don't have to celebrate or "spin" bad news.

All these kids know each other so there is a word of mouth element that has a way of working to MU's  benefit when we are in the finals of these top prospects consistently year after year.  Recruiting is competitive , however we have a lot to offer and our coaches sell it well.

[MU82]

Where I disagree, brother TAMU, is that IMO there are ancillary benefits to being a finalist for the top players that are positives for a program even when you don't land the big fish. It's good publicity to be in the "final four" with Nova, Duke and Kentucky or the final 3 with Michigan and MSU for a blue chipper. Conversely, it's bad optics when our top targets don't include us in their final 8, 9 or 10. Perception matters.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but has anyone ever said "Good news! We got knocked out in the Sweet 16. We weren't going to win it all anyway, now we won't waste all those resources going to the Final Four"? My point is that success "advancing" in the battle for top recruits is success, getting cut early is not. We have plenty of resources, enough that we don't have to celebrate or "spin" bad news.

Although that is a very imperfect analogy, Lenny, I do get what you are saying.

I want Wojo to battle for every recruit. If there's a reasonable chance of landing the recruit, Wojo should pull out all the stops; and I do trust that Wojo knows when he has a "reasonable chance."

I do agree with TAMU that at some point, you get the vibe that "he's not that into me" and you move on. Silly to waste precious time (and money) on pursuits that will be unfruitful.

But yes, in general, I think it's better to be in every recruit's final 8 or final 4 or final 2 because I do agree it communicates to the basketball world that Marquette is a major player. And maybe, just maybe, a couple of them will choose MU for various reasons.

Again, I'm quite happy with the recruiting of Wojo & Co. If his on-court coaching (which I do think has improved) catches up with his recruiting prowess, we will enjoy great success as a program for years and years to come.

[Lennys Tap]

Although that is a very imperfect analogy, Lenny, I do get what you are saying.

I want Wojo to battle for every recruit. If there's a reasonable chance of landing the recruit, Wojo should pull out all the stops; and I do trust that Wojo knows when he has a "reasonable chance."

I do agree with TAMU that at some point, you get the vibe that "he's not that into me" and you move on. Silly to waste precious time (and money) on pursuits that will be unfruitful.

But yes, in general, I think it's better to be in every recruit's final 8 or final 4 or final 2 because I do agree it communicates to the basketball world that Marquette is a major player. And maybe, just maybe, a couple of them will choose MU for various reasons.

Again, I'm quite happy with the recruiting of Wojo & Co. If his on-court coaching (which I do think has improved) catches up with his recruiting prowess, we will enjoy great success as a program for years and years to come.

Well said, Mike.

I'm sure Wojo & Co. are disappointed when a target doesn't include us among his finalists. They would laugh at the "This is actually good news" spinners.

[Daniel]

The longer we are included in high profile targets pared down lists the more free publicity Marquette gets and the B.B. program.  So that is good.

[brewcity77]

Where I disagree, brother TAMU, is that IMO there are ancillary benefits to being a finalist for the top players that are positives for a program even when you don't land the big fish. It's good publicity to be in the "final four" with Nova, Duke and Kentucky or the final 3 with Michigan and MSU for a blue chipper. Conversely, it's bad optics when our top targets don't include us in their final 8, 9 or 10. Perception matters.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but has anyone ever said "Good news! We got knocked out in the Sweet 16. We weren't going to win it all anyway, now we won't waste all those resources going to the Final Four"? My point is that success "advancing" in the battle for top recruits is success, getting cut early is not. We have plenty of resources, enough that we don't have to celebrate or "spin" bad news.

Here's why the analogy doesn't work for me. When it comes to recruiting, you probably start with 30 targets that will have you on their ridiculous list of 19 schools. Say you may 12 final lists, that is 12 visits to schedule, to plan, and to pay for. That is 12 recruits you have to criss cross the country following. And in my opinion, because you spread yourself so thin, it is probably less likely you are able to give the attention to the ones you really want, especially when you only have 2 scholarships.

In the NCAA Tournament, there is one goal, winning it all. There is no other distraction, no downside to putting all your eggs in that basket. Recruiting is the opposite. If you go all in and miss your top target, you may lose your second target as a consequence because they see they aren't your priority. And the more targets, the less you are able to maintain focus.

At this point, I'm glad to be on 4 lists for 2 scholarships. That's a good number and it's easier to manage than if DJ Carton, Caleb Mills, Samuell Williamson, and Jalen Wilson all still had us listed and were stretching out their recruitments, with the knowledge we weren't going to get any of them.

Yes, you want top players, but you also want attainable players, and the more your resources are stretched thin, the less likely you'll get any of the guys got really want.

[jsglow]

Brew, trust Wojo to put in the appropriate effort on each individual kid.  He understands when he's 10th out of 10.  Don't sweat it brother.  This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum with no ongoing communication. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Where I disagree, brother TAMU, is that IMO there are ancillary benefits to being a finalist for the top players that are positives for a program even when you don't land the big fish. It's good publicity to be in the "final four" with Nova, Duke and Kentucky or the final 3 with Michigan and MSU for a blue chipper. Conversely, it's bad optics when our top targets don't include us in their final 8, 9 or 10. Perception matters.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but has anyone ever said "Good news! We got knocked out in the Sweet 16. We weren't going to win it all anyway, now we won't waste all those resources going to the Final Four"? My point is that success "advancing" in the battle for top recruits is success, getting cut early is not. We have plenty of resources, enough that we don't have to celebrate or "spin" bad news.

For the second time,  all true and doesn't disagree with anything I said in the original post.

No one is disagreeing that there aren't benefits to making a recruits final list.  It is also true that that getting cut early allows you to reallocate resources to other recruits. This is all anyone has ever said on this topic.

I'm ecstatic that weve made four final lists this week, as is every other poster on this board. No one is happy when we get cut from a recruits list which is what you have clsimed in multiple posts this week.

They would laugh at the "This is actually good news" spinners.

No one has claimed that it is good news. Just pointed out a silver lining in bad news.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Double post

[brewcity77]

Brew, trust Wojo to put in the appropriate effort on each individual kid.  He understands when he's 10th out of 10.  Don't sweat it brother.  This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum with no ongoing communication.

I'm not sweating anything. When we were after Grimes, we were able to bring the full staff to games and visits. That's not nearly as easy to do if he's one of five guys for that one spot. Especially if you feel you really need to get at least one of those other guys if you miss the top target.

It's simple physics. If you want to watch multiple guys the same day, you can't put a full staff in from of anyone. Making a list for the sake of making a list ultimately gives little tangible benefit and could cost you other recruits. That's why I'd rather be knocked out of a recruitment early than lose it late. Yes, you'd always rather win, but if it's going to be a loss, an early loss is better than a late loss.

[Newsdreams]

No Big Daddy for a while. Hope he is doing well.

[WarriorDad]

In the last 10 days or so:

We have made the final 4 teams four a Five Star recruit
Final 6 teams for a Four Star recruit
Final 9 teams for a Four / Five star recruit
Final 10 teams for a Four star recruit

We may land none, but we are in the conversation.

[Herman Cain]

Here's why the analogy doesn't work for me. When it comes to recruiting, you probably start with 30 targets that will have you on their ridiculous list of 19 schools. Say you may 12 final lists, that is 12 visits to schedule, to plan, and to pay for. That is 12 recruits you have to criss cross the country following. And in my opinion, because you spread yourself so thin, it is probably less likely you are able to give the attention to the ones you really want, especially when you only have 2 scholarships.

In the NCAA Tournament, there is one goal, winning it all. There is no other distraction, no downside to putting all your eggs in that basket. Recruiting is the opposite. If you go all in and miss your top target, you may lose your second target as a consequence because they see they aren't your priority. And the more targets, the less you are able to maintain focus.

At this point, I'm glad to be on 4 lists for 2 scholarships. That's a good number and it's easier to manage than if DJ Carton, Caleb Mills, Samuell Williamson, and Jalen Wilson all still had us listed and were stretching out their recruitments, with the knowledge we weren't going to get any of them.

Yes, you want top players, but you also want attainable players, and the more your resources are stretched thin, the less likely you'll get any of the guys got really want.

On these higher profile recruits it is relatively easier to know when to stop dedicating resources. Were it gets tricky is in the guys in that next tier when your dealing with multiple players all of who are attainable.  So for example, do you spend your time on a Terrence Lewis or a Greg Elliott, Cain etc.? With the knowledge you can't be all things to all people.  I think our staff does a good job of making those resource allocation choices and weighing the probabilities of success.   Hopefully we can get to the finals with 4 or 5 kids and that turns into two commits.

[onepost]

No Big Daddy for a while. Hope he is doing well.

I can't remember a Big Daddy post since Quentin Grimes' recruitment way back when, when he said he'd share what all went down there.

I know he took exception to some dumbasses on this board criticizing him because God forbid not everyone we're linked to ends up committing here.  Such a bummer, I hope he rejoins the board sometime.

[Loose Cannon]

I can't remember a Big Daddy post since Quentin Grimes' recruitment way back when, when he said he'd share what all went down there.

I know he took exception to some dumbasses on this board criticizing him because God forbid not everyone we're linked to ends up committing here.  Such a bummer, I hope he rejoins the board sometime.

Time heals.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

I can't remember a Big Daddy post since Quentin Grimes' recruitment way back when, when he said he'd share what all went down there.

I know he took exception to some dumbasses on this board criticizing him because God forbid not everyone we're linked to ends up committing here.  Such a bummer, I hope he rejoins the board sometime.

He has posted since then.  Look up his profile and it will display all posts in reverse chronological (i.e., newest first) order IIRC.