trueblue32

Hopefully Segu is ready by then. He's shown flashes. I think Nickelberry will be capable of playing a Blake Hamilton-esque point forward role, but with more talent around him he'll have less weight on his shoulders. I also have a good feeling about Gallion, although he might be more of a combo guard. I think it says a lot that the staff has landed 3 3-stars (maybe 4 with John) and scooped up Gallion in the middle of them. I think they feel that they found a diamond in the rough with him.

I posted a paraphrase from a third party website because I figured people in a college basketball recruiting forum had a basic understanding of college recruiting lol. Here's the official NCAA rulebook. Tweeting someone is absolutely not private between sender and recipient.

Not while contacting individuals publicly. Find me a single tweet at a recruit prior to them signing.

Uhh no you can't post about recruits until the LOI is signed. even if he could why would he create a burner to do something he's allowed to do?

There's no way Jenkins got a D1 job and the first thing he did was commit public NCAA violations and tell people about it lmao

I think they just tweet at everyone the coaches follow lol

Eric Hamilton committed to Pitt, sucks but maybe that helps with the Nigel John recruitment.

They used this line in the NIT (smaller sample size) 3 point % dropped by 1.4% and % of shots from 3 dropped by 0.6%. I wouldn't expect any major changes but we'll see. https://watchstadium.com/news/examining-the-effects-of-nit-rule-changes-extended-3-point-line-wider-lane-04-12-2019/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

This had been rumored for a while and I saw Whitesell say somewhere that they took about 30 3s per game last year and will look to continue to do that even if the rule changed.

1.) We're not losing recruiting battles to Georgia State, we offered Jones 4 years ago, and Thomas 2 years ago. Not everybody that we've ever offered is actively being recruited. I didn't see a single thing about us hosting them for visits or otherwise showing interest, it was just speculation here. 2.) We definitely have a chance to win the MAC next year, and realistically that would be outstanding with the graduation of seniors, and loss of staff and recruiting class. If you think we're above hoping for say a 13 seed in a transition year because we were an at-large team one year, then you are the one wearing "blue-colored glasses". 3.) What were you realistically hoping for beyond keeping the team together and signing two 3 stars, with a limited timetable and talent pool at this point in the year?

He redshirted as a freshman which is interesting because 1.) I believe he'd have to burn a year of eligibility to transfer. 2.) I wonder if he's really 3 star caliber redshirting at North Dakota.

Our tournament in Ireland was on national TV though? If they were only to broadcast two, I'd imagine Buttgers and South Carolina's replacement (Bona) are the ones on the outs.

-Attendance: I agree but it doesn't happen overnight, that's why I see value in going there and starting to build that reach. -Schedule: Sure we should be able to land it but we haven't been able to land it so I see no problem in locking it up anyway you can. -Events: in name sure but this Toronto event is in addition to our exempt tournament, I don't recall ever being invited to something like this (not the Big 4 classic). Aside from name it shows our program is travelling and playing good teams. -Television: They explicitly state "Game times and television broadcast information will be released at a later date." which leads me to believe something is in the works. http://www.hoophall.com/news/torontos-scotiabank-arena-to-host-first-ever-james-naismith-classic-presented-by-citi-on-november-16/ -Scheduling, again: I'm sure they'd love to be playing good games at home, however that isn't realistic with where we're at, maxing our OOC schedule is our best shot at the program reaching it's potential, and it may cost some home games here and there.

1) I had no problem recruiting 4 friends, 3 of which are still in school. 2) Students sit baseline usually anyway and aren't typically known for spending up for nicer tickets anyways ($36 for 3 games is not bad). 3) It remains to be seen if there will be any free tickets available to them like there are for other big events.

I got mine for $36 USD + fees, I think it came out to $45. Edit: oops misread, mine are behind the baseline. I'm used to it, s/o True Blue haha

You're too hung up on the attendance number, and I won't continue to speculate on that point. Even if there are 5 fans in the stands (me and the group I'm bringing), and nobody else, we still get: -a neutral court game (NBA arena, like Cleveland and tourney) vs. a tourney team. -More material to point at when recruiting, "In the past 4 years we've been invited to events in Toronto, Dublin, Cayman Islands, Charleston, etc." -Some degree of brand recognition from any marketing/buzz around the event (whether the average Canadian knows or cares is besides the point, D1 caliber kids in the area will know/care). -Potentially a national TV game? Television info hasn't been released yet. To me that is worth giving up one middling weekend game, sucks for the people that wanted to see Dartmouth but they can 1) go to Toronto 2) watch it on TV 3) go to one of the 14 other home games this year.

The major difference between the New Jersey event you pointed out and this one is that New Jersey basketball fans can watch it any time they want. I know we're not Duke, but Duke was packing places with Canadian fans for exhibitions against D2 tier Canadian teams. I can't provide a realistic prediction at this point without knowing how much it's promoted in the city but that would be the majority of the attendance I'd imagine and why I'm not hung up on how many UB fans travel. If I'm wrong then so be it but I don't see how it could possibly be worse than a Saturday afternoon game against Dartmouth or whoever that would likely replace this game if we weren't to be invited to this event.

You completely missed the point, being associated with Harvard is good for the UB academic brand and playing in Toronto against anybody imo, but especially a team that may have a 25 next to their name is good for the basketball program. Toronto is a growing basketball fanbase with no clear rooting ties, you showed that the Buffalo brand is higher than the other 3 there, so why would we not want to play one game there to hopefully increase that even more? So we can get one worse game at home in front of the fans that already see them there 15 times per year? In that case you should probably ask Whitesell to cancel the Charleston Classic so us fans can watch us play Marist at home. Pros: -Increase UB academic brand. -Increase UB basketball brand to a booming basketball talent hotbed. -Get a good game vs. a potential top 25 team on a neutral (potentially pro-UB) floor. -Play in a large showcase event that will draw more fans than a single UB home game. Cons: -Two hour roadtrip (I see this as a plus because Toronto is a fun city and you get two more games with your ticket).

They're not a big name basketball school, but they've been on the rise recently, however in general they have to have one of the biggest University brands in the country [1]. Of course for us viewers it'd be nice to have it at home but getting a game against a top academic school and potentially a top 25 basketball team in another country is big for the university's brand academically and basketball wise. This game would be an ESPN+ game with a crowd of 5000 if this is played at Alumni. Buffalo instead gets to play in front of a city that is a growing local basketball hotbed (flip on the NBA finals lol), and now gets to say to recruits "look at the cool events we're being invited to play in". [1] https://www.educationdive.com/news/what-are-the-worlds-top-10-university-brands/107305/ Edit: Brand comparison per Google Trends in Canada in the last 5 years

Skogman and Nickelberry are our 4th and 5th highest rated recruits of all time per 247 behind Williams, Harris, and Segu. Our recruiting is fine. There's no imminent rush to sign anybody and I wouldn't be shocked to see us pocket one of the scholarships. Recruiting takes time and we're not going to get every single one of our targets. What they've done in the period of time they've had has been great and I don't think they're done yet. I'd rather they take their time finding impact recruits than sign the first dudes that wanna go to school for free for the sake of having 13 scholarships.

Meh rated lower than Skogman is. Only played 8% of mins on a team that would've been rated 3rd lowest in the MAC per KenPom last year.

I doubt he's on vacation with two open scholarships still. Maybe he's there for 6'8" F DeAndre Pinckney, averaged 18 and 9 in JUCO as a freshman, but I think he went under the radar because he committed to a D2 early. He since Decommited and has offers from FIU, New Mexico and Florida Gulf Coast.

There was a proposed rule change to this effect but I believe it was already shot down.

I noticed 3 coaches followed Eric Hamilton . He was an efficient reserve big man on a good UNC Greensboro team that decided to grad transfer. He'd be #1 on my list right now.