forums

Angel Rodriguez commits

Advertisement
Consigliere said:
CanEs4life04 said:
Notsince1985 said:
According to Barry Jackson in the Herald today, UM isn't optimistic he will be gantred the waiver to play next year.
Click to expand...

Honestly, this is better for the program in the long run. 2014 seems to be the year.
Click to expand...

Huh?
Click to expand...

I think he meant the 2014-2015 might be our best year to make a run in the NCAA... This year (2013-2014) we are going to take our lumps, especially with 3 Freshman PGs (Burnett, Lecomte, and Corn) and the additions of 'Cuse and Pitt to the conference.
 
Last edited:
LUcanesfan said:
Consigliere said:
CanEs4life04 said:
Notsince1985 said:
According to Barry Jackson in the Herald today, UM isn't optimistic he will be gantred the waiver to play next year.
Click to expand...

Honestly, this is better for the program in the long run. 2014 seems to be the year.
Click to expand...

Huh?
Click to expand...

I think he meant the 2014-2015 might be our best year to make a run in the NCAA... This year (2013-2014) we are going to take our lumps, especially with 3 Freshman PGs (Burnett, Lecomte, and Corn) and the additions of 'Cuse and Pitt to the conference.
Click to expand...

I assume that too. It's more common to refer to the end of the season if you're going to reduce it to one.

I'm of two minds about this. On one hand, 2014-15 and 2015-16 would give us an experienced, deep team - upperclassmen in Rodriguez, McClellan, Jekiri, Kelly (for one season) and most likely a grad transfer or JUCO to help sort out scholarships, plus experienced sophomores/juniors in Reed, Burnett, Lecomte and maybe the football guys (all of whom are, by reputation, more talented than some of the players we have now), and hopefully some ready to play freshman/sophomores in the 2014 class beyond Henriquez. That 2015-16 team, if everyone stays, should have four upperclassmen starting.

The second one is, of course, that with no experienced point guard and a still thin frontcourt (none of those guys has played really meaningful minutes in the ACC), we might be very bad this year and could lose a lot of the momentum that we had as a program. If we throw Rodriguez in there to help steady the team, and get some productivity out of the front court (there's no reason we shouldn't expect to), then we can be better than expected and keep it going, hopefully.
 
I am probably missing something here:Why would it be better to have a player sit out a year of eligibility rather than playing that year?Is the answer because he will be so good that he will likely be 1 and done here and the following year we will be in a better spot than the upcoming year?
 
Advertisement
Angry Ibis said:
I am probably missing something here:Why would it be better to have a player sit out a year of eligibility rather than playing that year?Is the answer because he will be so good that he will likely be 1 and done here and the following year we will be in a better spot than the upcoming year?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't. That is why I said "huh?"
 
Consigliere said:
Angry Ibis said:
I am probably missing something here:Why would it be better to have a player sit out a year of eligibility rather than playing that year?Is the answer because he will be so good that he will likely be 1 and done here and the following year we will be in a better spot than the upcoming year?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't. That is why I said "huh?"
Click to expand...

I should have concurred:

[video=youtube;i5j1wWY-qus]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5j1wWY-qus[/video]
 
Consigliere said:
Angry Ibis said:
I am probably missing something here:Why would it be better to have a player sit out a year of eligibility rather than playing that year?Is the answer because he will be so good that he will likely be 1 and done here and the following year we will be in a better spot than the upcoming year?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't. That is why I said "huh?"
Click to expand...

Well, he doesn't lose a year of eligibility either way, if that's what you're implying. Assuming you get two years out of him, some people are viewing it as advantageous to have him sit out and become eligible at the time that McClellan is eligible, when Jekiri, Burnett, and others who have limited to no experience currently have hopefully grown and developed as well on a deeper team that should have 10+ legitimate ACC-caliber players. You would have a two year window with Rodriguez leading that group, rather than spending on year on a team with a thin frontcourt and limited depth.

The arguments for getting the waiver are that it can help keep momentum going from last year (we would likely not be a tournament team, but not a bottom feeder either) and that it may help the younger players to develop next to an experienced point guard.
 
joshdacane said:
Consigliere said:
Angry Ibis said:
I am probably missing something here:Why would it be better to have a player sit out a year of eligibility rather than playing that year?Is the answer because he will be so good that he will likely be 1 and done here and the following year we will be in a better spot than the upcoming year?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't. That is why I said "huh?"
Click to expand...

Well, he doesn't lose a year of eligibility either way, if that's what you're implying. Assuming you get two years out of him, some people are viewing it as advantageous to have him sit out and become eligible at the time that McClellan is eligible, when Jekiri, Burnett, and others who have limited to no experience currently have hopefully grown and developed as well on a deeper team that should have 10+ legitimate ACC-caliber players. You would have a two year window with Rodriguez leading that group, rather than spending on year on a team with a thin frontcourt and limited depth.

The arguments for getting the waiver are that it can help keep momentum going from last year (we would likely not be a tournament team, but not a bottom feeder either) and that it may help the younger players to develop next to an experienced point guard.
Click to expand...

This sucks, that is the bottom line. It doesn't matter about eligibility, it matters about next season. We could have used him because he can contribute NOW and put up good numbers at the spot.

He sits, he only gets to practice. This sucks bottom line.
 
Advertisement
People are saying next year is a throwaway year, even with him. Less of a throwaway year, but one regardless. Like 10 wins without him, but 15 with win or something. Under .500 or hovering around .500 (maybe) without him, NIT with him. Also, the argument of momentum has been thrown out there, and that's important for the program, especially recruiting and attendance (buzz). In all honesty, our attendance is going to be bad unless we have a year like last year, play Duke or UNC (or a top 15 team) or have 4-5 straight NCAA years. 2 years ago when we were a bubble team we didn't have consistently good attendance for ACC games, so even having Rodriguez and going 16-14, 8-10 next year, instead of 11-19, 5-13 or whatever, really won't change attendance too much.

I see the arguments on both sides, but as of now, I guess it looks like we'll have to wait until '14-15.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top