I think I have some eligibility left, if they're looking for a no-shoot, no-rebound, no-D point guard.
ha! can vander blue play PG? I say let's bank it..don't just sign someone for the sake of signing someone. we all new this was going to be a rebuilding year and now we can all stop hearing how Mo isn't a Big East PG
Also: Mo isn't a Big East point guard.
STG - we're approaching july here, so no there aren't any good PG's out there. Unless something shakes out from the latest coaching changes, ie. potential transfers, but even then they'll have to sit a year. I believe Lance Stephenson is the only good recruit left, and that's because nobody will touch the guy....not even Tim Floyd wanted him. I would rather bank the scholarship until next year anyways. We have so many new players coming in (3-4 guards plus Coobie), so I think it's better to allow them to get settled and experienced this year and use that scholy to strengthen next year's class which isn't all that strong at this point (although A.Bowen has improved his stock dramatically last year). Buzz has stated a # of times, likely due to Crean's inadequacies, that he needs to bring a talented and deep class EVERY year so giving him this xtra scholy next year should help balance his first 2 classes.I think Vander can play the point. He may not be a true point, but his ball handling is good enough to run the show. However, I would foresee him playing more alongside Cadougan who is more of a distributor. In spite of our depth at SG for '10, I think Vander could come in and get a lot of playing time from the get go so PT shouldn't be a factor. I think that we have a very good shot at landing Vander. We need Maymon to be successful and really enjoy his first year at MU so he can promote us.
I don't know the situation, but methinks 1 of 3 things is going on:1) Buzz just shoved Acker out the door2) Acker fucked up and there's a cover-up afoot3) Acker really wants to focus on his studies.No fucking way #3 is real, particularly with how Buzz phrased it with "we." If it's #2, ok, but why the cloak and dagger approach? My bet is on #1. If that's the case, I don't like it one bit and I begin to get very suspicious of Buzz. That would mean both Hazel and Acker have been pushed out of the program. Pretty fucking shitty if you ask me.
i'd bet #2. why would buzz shove him out the door and leave himself with only 1 true PG...a freshman. Acker and Caudugan could have shared time in the back court and it would be have been fairly successful. this is like in diener's senior year and Marcus Jackson had to bring the ball up because we had only one PG who was injured. hell that's why we go acker in the first place. I'm going with #2.
I would also guess number 2. That was my first thought when I heard about all this going down.
I agree with STG - while Acker isn't a stud Big East pg, he is definitely serviceable. Acker can at least run the offense and hit an open jumper, so it doesn't make sense just to push him out the door without another player coming in to replace him.Further, from all of the interviews from Buzz that we've heard or read, does anyone really see Buzz as the type of guy to push guys out the door. At worst, the Hazel transfer was 50/50. Hazel knew he wasn't going to get any playing time with Lazar, and 2 top 100 recruits coming in. So in that case, parting ways was the best for both parties.
Post a Comment