WakeForestRanger
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2011
- Messages
- 22,959
- Reaction score
- 1,169
I'm not down with a roster that churns every year and I hope we don't go that route once we get established.
I'm not down with a roster that churns every year and I hope we don't go that route once we get established.
I don't care one bit about churn. If you recruit at the top of the high school pool, you'll have churn. If you recruit the portal, you'll have churn. If Manning is your coach, you'll have churn. I like to win. If we can do things differently and dominate by a new set of rules, let's do it. Who cares where someone plays their first few years so long as they spend their best years as a Deac?
Is that still John Buck’s team?
I'm not down with a roster that churns every year and I hope we don't go that route once we get established.
We’ve had a roster that churned every year due to transfers due to transfers going out and having to hastily replace them. Getting grad transfers or players with two years of eligibility is much better.
But at the end, I don’t care. I just want to win. I don’t root for this group any less because I didn’t know who they were 9 months ago.
Yep, he has them rolling and in the national picture (again). He's also the head of school.
Plenty of other factors to consider. Besides some who subscribe to a blue haired idea about the "right way" to do things, I don't think it's a driving factor. Contributing maybe, but not responsible for the bulk of the decline. The fact of the matter is that there simply more things to do with one's time and attention span now than there was 10, 20, 30 years ago.I think yearly roster churn is one reason for declining interest in men’s college basketball.