Recruiting as of 5/15/25

[Herman Cain]

Theo John interviewed on Channel 5 tonight   16 offers so far.  6'9", 230, and pretty damned athletic.

He breaks up his daily workouts into 5 sessions every day. Kid's a gym rat.

We need him.

Theo is a high priority recruit for us.  This is the kind of tough hard working big we want as part of our team. 

[brewcity77]

We hear all this griping about college athletes not going to class, not finishing school, not focusing on academics. Is it that terrible to offer a carrot for the kids that do graduate?

Sure, it can be abused, but most grad transfers are transferring down, not up. I see nothing wrong with providing a benefit to the guys that did the work in the classroom, since that's supposedly what this is all about anyway.

[JakeBarnes]

YES AND THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE IS AFTER AND THAT IS THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE RULE. IT'S COMPLETELY REASONABLE!!!!!!

We should make this discussion transfer and sit out in a different thread so we can all read about actual prospects for Marquette.

[Jay Bee]

We hear all this griping about college athletes not going to class, not finishing school, not focusing on academics. Is it that terrible to offer a carrot for the kids that do graduate?

Sure, it can be abused, but most grad transfers are transferring down, not up. I see nothing wrong with providing a benefit to the guys that did the work in the classroom, since that's supposedly what this is all about anyway.

Why? Should we let guys with 3.8 GPAs transfer without sitting out a year as well? Why not?

[Jay Bee]

If we make grad transfers sit out a year.. what is the concern?

Will kids not try as hard in school to get a degree?

[MU82]

We hear all this griping about college athletes not going to class, not finishing school, not focusing on academics. Is it that terrible to offer a carrot for the kids that do graduate?

Sure, it can be abused, but most grad transfers are transferring down, not up. I see nothing wrong with providing a benefit to the guys that did the work in the classroom, since that's supposedly what this is all about anyway.

I agree with this and strongly, but respectfully, disagree with Jay Bee.

I'd lean toward making NO transfers have to sit out a year -- yes, I know -- anarchy would ensue! -- before I'd close the one "loophole" that benefits a kid who actually gets his degree.

The schools make big money. The coaches make big money. The conferences make big money. The TV networks make big money. The athletic directors make big money. The administrators make big money. Hell, even the refs make pretty darn good coin. Everybody but the athlete, who is the one responsible for the rest of them making the big money.

And yet some of us find the passion to get outraged when an athlete who actually is a student gets the benefit of this one rule? Wow.

[MuMark]

Nice. Never seen him play but everything I've read indicates he would be a great addition. Only 2 schools on that list truly scare me. Arizona (duh) and LSU (hometown advantage).

Western Kentucky has an assistant from Louisiana and could very well be a serious player.

[GGGG]

Everyone should be able to transfer once without sitting a year in residence.  I am all for the grad transfer rule.  FIGHT THE POWER!!!

[MU82]

Everyone should be able to transfer once without sitting a year in residence.  I am all for the grad transfer rule.  FIGHT THE POWER!!!

Or as we used to say at the MU Journalism school ... Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable!

[Dawson Rental]

YES AND THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE IS AFTER AND THAT IS THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE RULE. IT'S COMPLETELY REASONABLE!!!!!!

I've never known the definition of reasonable to include "that which can't be abused or taken advantage of".

[GGGG]

Why? Should we let guys with 3.8 GPAs transfer without sitting out a year as well?

Yes.

[GGGG]

I agree with this and strongly, but respectfully, disagree with Jay Bee.

I'd lean toward making NO transfers have to sit out a year -- yes, I know -- anarchy would ensue! -- before I'd close the one "loophole" that benefits a kid who actually gets his degree.

I love anarchy.  College athletics could use more of it.  I'm cool.

[BM1090]

Western Kentucky has an assistant from Louisiana and could very well be a serious player.

Agreed. I think if he doesn't go to WKU he will probably come here.

WKU got a commitment from a 2018 5* top 10 player today and is in the running for Malik Newman as well.

[rocky_warrior]

I'd lean toward making NO transfers have to sit out a year -- yes, I know -- anarchy would ensue! -- before I'd close the one "loophole" that benefits a kid who actually gets his degree.

At the end of a school year?  As long as their in good standing academically?  Or just go anywhere anytime?

[brewcity77]

Why?

Not sure what you didn't understand there. I'll try again, this time only including the parts that you already quoted that clearly and concisely answered your question before you asked it.

Is it that terrible to offer a carrot for the kids that do graduate?

I see nothing wrong with providing a benefit to the guys that did the work in the classroom, since that's supposedly what this is all about anyway.

[The Equalizer]

I agree with this and strongly, but respectfully, disagree with Jay Bee.

I'd lean toward making NO transfers have to sit out a year -- yes, I know -- anarchy would ensue! -- before I'd close the one "loophole" that benefits a kid who actually gets his degree.

The schools make big money. The coaches make big money. The conferences make big money. The TV networks make big money. The athletic directors make big money. The administrators make big money. Hell, even the refs make pretty darn good coin. Everybody but the athlete, who is the one responsible for the rest of them making the big money.

And yet some of us find the passion to get outraged when an athlete who actually is a student gets the benefit of this one rule? Wow.

The athlete is getting an education worth north $200,000 ($50,237 per year at MU including room & board).  For most of us, that's "pretty good coin."  That doesn't include invaluable free coaching, training, nutrition, and other benefits.

Can we please stop with the nonsense that the poor little old athlete gets nothing in return.

[jsglow]

Guys, please start a grad transfer thread if you'd like to carry on the conversation further.  Please.  Thanks.

[JakeBarnes]

Guys, please start a grad transfer thread if you'd like to carry on the conversation further.  Please.  Thanks.

Seconded

[MU82]

The athlete is getting an education worth north $200,000 ($50,237 per year at MU including room & board).  For most of us, that's "pretty good coin."  That doesn't include invaluable free coaching, training, nutrition, and other benefits.

Can we please stop with the nonsense that the poor little old athlete gets nothing in return.

The violin player on full scholarship also gets this. So does the genius.

Either is free to transfer to another school without penalty ... even within the same conference. Either also can graduate early and go to any grad school on scholarship.

The "value of the scholarship" argument is a strawman.

This will be my last comment on this subject in this thread, so anybody else can have the last word here. glow is right ... this thread isn't the right forum for this discussion.

[The Equalizer]

The violin player on full scholarship also gets this. So does the genius.

Either is free to transfer to another school without penalty ... even within the same conference. Either also can graduate early and go to any grad school on scholarship.

The "value of the scholarship" argument is a strawman.

This will be my last comment on this subject in this thread, so anybody else can have the last word here. glow is right ... this thread isn't the right forum for this discussion.

Let's back up for a moment, shall we?  You said"

"The schools make big money. The coaches make big money. The conferences make big money. The TV networks make big money. The athletic directors make big money. The administrators make big money. Hell, even the refs make pretty darn good coin. Everybody but the athlete, who is the one responsible for the rest of them making the big money."

I pointed out that this is categorically and demonstrably false. The player gets something of significant value--specifically $200,000 worth of scholarships, room, board, etc. 

There is nothing wrong or unreasonable for a school--after giving away a $200,000 education to a player--to expect that player NOT take his intimate knowledge on his former team's operation to a program where that knowledge will cause direct economic harm.

The red herring you thew out are the violin player and the genius--red herrings because neither are in a position to cause direct harm once they leave in the same way a basketball player could.   

You don't have a Marquette versus Xavier violin contest, therefore, a transferring violin player won't cause any economic harm to his former school. 

You do harm Marquette when player transfers to Xavier and hands the Marquette playbook to his new coach, increasing the likelihood of tagging two (possibly three)losses on his former team--which might be the difference between a tournament bid and not, costing the program significantly in terms of tournament revenue, future attendance (tournament teams sell more tickets), television (tournament teams appear on TV more frequently), local media rights (tournament teams can get more for their media rights), etc.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to ask the transferring Marquette player to go somewhere where hs insider knowledge has little to no chance of causing harm, and avoid going to programs where there is a significant chance it will cause harm.

[wadesworld]

Let's back up for a moment, shall we?  You said"
I pointed out that this is categorically and demonstrably false. The player gets something of significant value--specifically $200,000 worth of scholarships, room, board, etc. 

There is nothing wrong or unreasonable for a school--after giving away a $200,000 education to a player--to expect that player NOT take his intimate knowledge on his former team's operation to a program where that knowledge will cause direct economic harm.

The red herring you thew out are the violin player and the genius--red herrings because neither are in a position to cause direct harm once they leave in the same way a basketball player could.   

You don't have a Marquette versus Xavier violin contest, therefore, a transferring violin player won't cause any economic harm to his former school. 

You do harm Marquette when player transfers to Xavier and hands the Marquette playbook to his new coach, increasing the likelihood of tagging two (possibly three)losses on his former team--which might be the difference between a tournament bid and not, costing the program significantly in terms of tournament revenue, future attendance (tournament teams sell more tickets), television (tournament teams appear on TV more frequently), local media rights (tournament teams can get more for their media rights), etc.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to ask the transferring Marquette player to go somewhere where hs insider knowledge has little to no chance of causing harm, and avoid going to programs where there is a significant chance it will cause harm.

If you're a college coach, at any level, in any sport, and you can't come up with a gameplan based on your own scouting of a team you play two times every single year, then you shouldn't be getting paid to do that job.  If you need an incoming transfer to tell you "John Smith likes to pull up when he's going to his left" when you see John Smith twice a year, or, "When we're baseline out of bounds and set up like this we like to have Timmy here screen for Derrick to get a corner three and then dive to the hoop," you should be fired immediately.

[KampusFoods]

If you're a college coach, at any level, in any sport, and you can't come up with a gameplan based on your own scouting of a team you play two times every single year, then you shouldn't be getting paid to do that job.  If you need an incoming transfer to tell you "John Smith likes to pull up when he's going to his left" when you see John Smith twice a year, or, "When we're baseline out of bounds and set up like this we like to have Timmy here screen for Derrick to get a corner three and then dive to the hoop," you should be fired immediately.

We'll give him that shot all day long, eh?

[muhoops1]

Guys, please start a grad transfer thread if you'd like to carry on the conversation further.  Please.  Thanks.

[MU82]

Let's back up for a moment, shall we?  You said"
I pointed out that this is categorically and demonstrably false. The player gets something of significant value--specifically $200,000 worth of scholarships, room, board, etc. 

There is nothing wrong or unreasonable for a school--after giving away a $200,000 education to a player--to expect that player NOT take his intimate knowledge on his former team's operation to a program where that knowledge will cause direct economic harm.

The red herring you thew out are the violin player and the genius--red herrings because neither are in a position to cause direct harm once they leave in the same way a basketball player could.   

You don't have a Marquette versus Xavier violin contest, therefore, a transferring violin player won't cause any economic harm to his former school. 

You do harm Marquette when player transfers to Xavier and hands the Marquette playbook to his new coach, increasing the likelihood of tagging two (possibly three)losses on his former team--which might be the difference between a tournament bid and not, costing the program significantly in terms of tournament revenue, future attendance (tournament teams sell more tickets), television (tournament teams appear on TV more frequently), local media rights (tournament teams can get more for their media rights), etc.

Therefore, it is not unreasonable to ask the transferring Marquette player to go somewhere where hs insider knowledge has little to no chance of causing harm, and avoid going to programs where there is a significant chance it will cause harm.

I'd respond if this were in the new thread on this subject.

[Pakuni]

Let's back up for a moment, shall we?  You said"
I pointed out that this is categorically and demonstrably false. The player gets something of significant value--specifically $200,000 worth of scholarships, room, board, etc. 

There is nothing wrong or unreasonable for a school--after giving away a $200,000 education to a player--to expect that player NOT take his intimate knowledge on his former team's operation to a program where that knowledge will cause direct economic harm.

Do you really think college coaches are giving up one of their 13 scholarships just for the sake to getting the inside scoop on one other team's strategies?
I suspect Tom Izzo, Jay Wright, Jim Boeheim and, well, just about every other D1 coach, doesn't need much more than a day in the  video room to understand what other teams are trying to do. Like, what, you think Roy Williams needs to pick the brain of 19-year-old kid to understand Coach K's tendencies?