Technically, no one is on scholarship for next year. Scholarships are renewed year to year and the kids being given one for next year sometimes don't actually sign the papers until the summer. I am not sure, but I would think that the person who is leaving, being dropped or not getting a schollie knows by now.
I like Tinkle as much as the next guy, but I am not prepared to say he is infallible. The criticism of Emerson seems to come from the fact that Tinks has not really played him yet. For me, it is going to take more than that to convince myself that my own eyes are deceiving me. I have a hard time saying that Emerson could not shoot 18% from the floor and grab 1 rebound every 20 minutes of game time, both of which would literally be an improvement over the production we got from Gfeller after Thanksgiving. I have not seen anything to this point from Gfeller, Lopez or even Bradshaw that would make me think they are more worthy of a scholarship than Emerson. Even good coaches fall in love with players or schemes that are not the best option.
Of the coaches we have lost in the past few years I think losing Andy Hill has hurt us the most. He was great as the head recruiter and he has an excellent eye for talent. Since he left we have signed Martin, Kovacivic, Wiley, Coleman, Kemp, Gfeller, Lopez and Dunn. Other than Dunn there is not one of those guys that makes me have alot of faith in our recruiting.
I guess my angst on this subject comes from that fact. When we signed Lopez late in the spring last year he was heralded as the next Jamar. We were told he was going to be an understudy for a year then he would be the man. Well, a year later we are trying to sign the next, next Jamar. I have a hard time thinking we are going to shaft one of the in-state guys in order to bring in the next, next Jamar.
We seem to be sitting pretty good in the backcourt. We return all three starters. Two of them were all-conference (Gregory and Deshields) and the other might be our next star (Dunn). Bradshaw, Emerson and Gfeller will be solid bench guys. So I guess the question I would have is, where does the next, next Jamar even fit?
I like Tinkle as much as the next guy, but I am not prepared to say he is infallible. The criticism of Emerson seems to come from the fact that Tinks has not really played him yet. For me, it is going to take more than that to convince myself that my own eyes are deceiving me. I have a hard time saying that Emerson could not shoot 18% from the floor and grab 1 rebound every 20 minutes of game time, both of which would literally be an improvement over the production we got from Gfeller after Thanksgiving. I have not seen anything to this point from Gfeller, Lopez or even Bradshaw that would make me think they are more worthy of a scholarship than Emerson. Even good coaches fall in love with players or schemes that are not the best option.
Of the coaches we have lost in the past few years I think losing Andy Hill has hurt us the most. He was great as the head recruiter and he has an excellent eye for talent. Since he left we have signed Martin, Kovacivic, Wiley, Coleman, Kemp, Gfeller, Lopez and Dunn. Other than Dunn there is not one of those guys that makes me have alot of faith in our recruiting.
I guess my angst on this subject comes from that fact. When we signed Lopez late in the spring last year he was heralded as the next Jamar. We were told he was going to be an understudy for a year then he would be the man. Well, a year later we are trying to sign the next, next Jamar. I have a hard time thinking we are going to shaft one of the in-state guys in order to bring in the next, next Jamar.
We seem to be sitting pretty good in the backcourt. We return all three starters. Two of them were all-conference (Gregory and Deshields) and the other might be our next star (Dunn). Bradshaw, Emerson and Gfeller will be solid bench guys. So I guess the question I would have is, where does the next, next Jamar even fit?