Re: Let's talk '23
Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:47 pm
lock him up TL
If we lose 2 scholies due to the NCAA/IARP (thats what everyone else is getting) and only Mathurin leaves we are already 1 scholarship over the limit for next year.............who do you propose "Romaring"?goslingswagg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:57 pmneed him to reclass and commit. the exact kind of player we need on next year's team imo
Kier is a senior and someone else always leaves.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:07 pmIf we lose 2 scholies due to the NCAA/IARP (thats what everyone else is getting) and only Mathurin leaves we are already 1 scholarship over the limit for next year.............who do you propose "Romaring"?goslingswagg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:57 pmneed him to reclass and commit. the exact kind of player we need on next year's team imo
Maybe Aiken never comes back?gronk4heisman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:13 pmKier is a senior and someone else always leaves.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:07 pmIf we lose 2 scholies due to the NCAA/IARP (thats what everyone else is getting) and only Mathurin leaves we are already 1 scholarship over the limit for next year.............who do you propose "Romaring"?goslingswagg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:57 pmneed him to reclass and commit. the exact kind of player we need on next year's team imo
Kier and Ben M. makes two.......we have Anderson coming in. That would leave us 1 over if we get penalized 2 scholarhips by the NCAA. Again, we don't have any scholies to give out at the moment. If nobody else leaves we would have to Romar someone. Even if 1 additional person went pro (Koloko......who isn't ready) that would leave us with no additional scholarships to hand out.gronk4heisman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:13 pmKier is a senior and someone else always leaves.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:07 pmIf we lose 2 scholies due to the NCAA/IARP (thats what everyone else is getting) and only Mathurin leaves we are already 1 scholarship over the limit for next year.............who do you propose "Romaring"?goslingswagg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:57 pmneed him to reclass and commit. the exact kind of player we need on next year's team imo
If Aiken leaves and only Mathurin goes pro (Kier is gone) we would be even on scholarships (assuming we are penalized 2). That would leave no additional scholarships to pass outDrWildcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:17 pmMaybe Aiken never comes back?gronk4heisman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:13 pmKier is a senior and someone else always leaves.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:07 pmIf we lose 2 scholies due to the NCAA/IARP (thats what everyone else is getting) and only Mathurin leaves we are already 1 scholarship over the limit for next year.............who do you propose "Romaring"?goslingswagg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:57 pmneed him to reclass and commit. the exact kind of player we need on next year's team imo
We have an open schollie this year already, so that math doesn't workdmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:10 pmKier and Ben M. makes two.......we have Anderson coming in. That would leave us 1 over if we get penalized 2 scholarhips by the NCAA. Again, we don't have any scholies to give out at the moment. If nobody else leaves we would have to Romar someone. Even if 1 additional person went pro (Koloko......who isn't ready) that would leave us with no additional scholarships to hand out.gronk4heisman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:13 pmKier is a senior and someone else always leaves.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:07 pmIf we lose 2 scholies due to the NCAA/IARP (thats what everyone else is getting) and only Mathurin leaves we are already 1 scholarship over the limit for next year.............who do you propose "Romaring"?goslingswagg wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:57 pmneed him to reclass and commit. the exact kind of player we need on next year's team imo
You are indeed correct CCCat, we are one under at the moment.ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:38 pm Obsessing over the scholy count when these things always work out is silly. If Arizona wants Proctor for ‘22 and vice versa there will be room.
Also recheck your numbers, if Aiken, Benn, and Kier are all gone then we only have 10 scholarship players and would have room for one (if we are penalized two scholys).
If that is correct, will they give us credit for the reduction this season, as many think the self imposed ban last season will count toward punishment?TheCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm I think we are misunderstanding the scholarship reduction process. The ones I have seen are 2 scholarships reductions in 3-4 years. In other words you have 3 years to take them. Could be one for 2 years in a row or any other way. I have never heard of them saying take away something you already offered. Maybe I'm wrong but don't think so.
Sure. When you no longer want Azuolas. Now you’ve freed up two schollies.
If he isn't the Romar type, he'd better learn. That's necessary, and really frankly fine for players too.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:33 pmYou are indeed correct CCCat, we are one under at the moment.ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:38 pm Obsessing over the scholy count when these things always work out is silly. If Arizona wants Proctor for ‘22 and vice versa there will be room.
Also recheck your numbers, if Aiken, Benn, and Kier are all gone then we only have 10 scholarship players and would have room for one (if we are penalized two scholys).
The math only works if someone other than Mathurin/Kier depart. We don't know about Aiken at the moment If only Mathurin leaves (along with Kier who is a senior) we would still have to Romar someone to sign another 22 player (assuming we get the expected NCAA sanctions). I could be wrong, but Lloyd doesn't seem like the "Romar" type.
No. One of the inexplicable things about Lloyd saying that was it's not a formal self-imposed punishment. He just said he was keeping spots open and raised the specter of a reduction.Postmaster wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:17 pmIf that is correct, will they give us credit for the reduction this season, as many think the self imposed ban last season will count toward punishment?TheCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm I think we are misunderstanding the scholarship reduction process. The ones I have seen are 2 scholarships reductions in 3-4 years. In other words you have 3 years to take them. Could be one for 2 years in a row or any other way. I have never heard of them saying take away something you already offered. Maybe I'm wrong but don't think so.
Not sure why you wouldn’t find someone to use it.Spaceman Spiff wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 8:56 amNo. One of the inexplicable things about Lloyd saying that was it's not a formal self-imposed punishment. He just said he was keeping spots open and raised the specter of a reduction.Postmaster wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:17 pmIf that is correct, will they give us credit for the reduction this season, as many think the self imposed ban last season will count toward punishment?TheCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm I think we are misunderstanding the scholarship reduction process. The ones I have seen are 2 scholarships reductions in 3-4 years. In other words you have 3 years to take them. Could be one for 2 years in a row or any other way. I have never heard of them saying take away something you already offered. Maybe I'm wrong but don't think so.
If he was going to say that was the motivation, I never understood why the school wouldn't formally self-sanction. You get none of the credit with the NCAA and all of the impact.
Because then you have to push them out? Can't imagine that is fun even if it is necessary.Postmaster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 9:11 amNot sure why you wouldn’t find someone to use it.Spaceman Spiff wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 8:56 amNo. One of the inexplicable things about Lloyd saying that was it's not a formal self-imposed punishment. He just said he was keeping spots open and raised the specter of a reduction.Postmaster wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:17 pmIf that is correct, will they give us credit for the reduction this season, as many think the self imposed ban last season will count toward punishment?TheCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:04 pm I think we are misunderstanding the scholarship reduction process. The ones I have seen are 2 scholarships reductions in 3-4 years. In other words you have 3 years to take them. Could be one for 2 years in a row or any other way. I have never heard of them saying take away something you already offered. Maybe I'm wrong but don't think so.
If he was going to say that was the motivation, I never understood why the school wouldn't formally self-sanction. You get none of the credit with the NCAA and all of the impact.
Even if it’s a warm body for practice.
I can understand that logic, but if that's it, I don't really understand why Lloyd would say it's because of potential sanctions...despite the fact it isn't a self imposed punishment.DrWildcat wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 9:34 amBecause then you have to push them out? Can't imagine that is fun even if it is necessary.Postmaster wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 9:11 amNot sure why you wouldn’t find someone to use it.Spaceman Spiff wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 8:56 amNo. One of the inexplicable things about Lloyd saying that was it's not a formal self-imposed punishment. He just said he was keeping spots open and raised the specter of a reduction.Postmaster wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:17 pm If that is correct, will they give us credit for the reduction this season, as many think the self imposed ban last season will count toward punishment?
If he was going to say that was the motivation, I never understood why the school wouldn't formally self-sanction. You get none of the credit with the NCAA and all of the impact.
Even if it’s a warm body for practice.
I don't see it like this. At Arizona, if you don't make it on the floor, you will get other offers if you leave.TheCat wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 12:08 pm First of all I am totally against Romaring any player period. You asked that individual to make a commitment and he should expect the same from you. I don't care about the ramifications. You are paid millions to evaluate talent and if you blow it it is on you not the kid. If they leave on their own so be it.
I'm all for being honest and telling a guy the truth. Players know the portal is out there so if THEY want to leave they know they can without penalty. If they want to fight thru that and try and make it, to me, they have that right. Example...When C-Lo came in most said he should red shirt or wasn't AZ quality. He just said fine...kept working....got early playing time no one predicted and built on that. You can't take an evaluation mistake on your part and take it out on a kid. They develop friendships and interest and even classes that they want to pursue and that should be what we support. You have a deep roster and a third never play and as long as they live up to the rest of their obligations ( grades, being a good team player, good citizen) he is okay. If you want another example look at Mitch Lightfoot from Kansas. Guy has been their 6 yrs and is now starting to be a rotational player.Spaceman Spiff wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 12:46 pmI don't see it like this. At Arizona, if you don't make it on the floor, you will get other offers if you leave.TheCat wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 12:08 pm First of all I am totally against Romaring any player period. You asked that individual to make a commitment and he should expect the same from you. I don't care about the ramifications. You are paid millions to evaluate talent and if you blow it it is on you not the kid. If they leave on their own so be it.
Look at every player who left under Miller. None struggled to find a landing spot. Arizona is at a level where everyone who leaves will get national looks and no one's getting kicked out of their only shot at college. Worst case scenario, you just move to a midmajor like Daniel Bejarano or Angelo Chol and get the PT you never would have at Arizona.
The flip side question, is it fair to lie to kids to keep them around? Because "Romaring" is usually just being honest with a player that it's really unlikely they'll do anything but ride the bench at Arizona and that there's no legitimate chance they will ever have a role.
It may be an uncomfortably harsh conversation, but it's better the kid hear it instead of being lied to and then having to live the harsh truth out when he was expecting different.
Yup, but I think the writing is on the wall with Aiken honestly.dmjcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:33 pmYou are indeed correct CCCat, we are one under at the moment.ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:38 pm Obsessing over the scholy count when these things always work out is silly. If Arizona wants Proctor for ‘22 and vice versa there will be room.
Also recheck your numbers, if Aiken, Benn, and Kier are all gone then we only have 10 scholarship players and would have room for one (if we are penalized two scholys).
The math only works if someone other than Mathurin/Kier depart. We don't know about Aiken at the moment If only Mathurin leaves (along with Kier who is a senior) we would still have to Romar someone to sign another 22 player (assuming we get the expected NCAA sanctions). I could be wrong, but Lloyd doesn't seem like the "Romar" type.
We haven't self-imposed anything officially, BUT we could always claim that we did if it comes down to it seeing as we are currently playing a roster that is one scholarship short.
No
He still has one more year after this season.
That's probably fair at this point.Alieberman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:36 am He could have 5 years of eligibility left... it still wouldn't matter
I'd say so.IndianaZonaFan wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:42 am Is this fairly accurate?
1. Kerr
2. Terry
3. Koloko
4. Tubelis
5. Pelle
6. Ballo
7. Nowell
8. Bal
9. Tubelis2
10. Anderson (open from this season)
11. Open (Mathurin)
12. Open (Kier)
13. Open (Aiken)
lots of talk about the Euro big, and I would be happy adding him (and we need a 4 without Aiken), but this team needs a dynamic, create-his-own shot guard. if he is really good (e.g., Proctor), that’s a national title contender.ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:43 amI'd say so.IndianaZonaFan wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:42 am Is this fairly accurate?
1. Kerr
2. Terry
3. Koloko
4. Tubelis
5. Pelle
6. Ballo
7. Nowell
8. Bal
9. Tubelis2
10. Anderson (open from this season)
11. Open (Mathurin)
12. Open (Kier)
13. Open (Aiken)
Are we ever going to find out what happened with Aiken, or is he just going to fade off into the distance?ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:42 amThat's probably fair at this point.Alieberman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 8:36 am He could have 5 years of eligibility left... it still wouldn't matter