I don't know if it's a good idea to recruit NBA prospects. I presume all of them are interested in showing off their skills and earning money doing so but some are less interested in winning college games and almost none are interested in earning a degree.

I also wonder how if we pay the going rate for just one NBA prospect we could afford any decent players to go with him. I think it would be better to spread the available funds more evenly.

The logical deduction is that we should recruit guys that have no chance in the NBA and if they possibly do, dont recruit them and recruit their less talented team mate?
Seriously, every guy over 6 feet thinks hes an NBA prospect and wants to go to the NBA.

I think you probably need to restate your suggestion as we need to join the Ivy league and recruit 4.5 GPA guys in a lesser league as no respected league would let us in.

Iamhere2help said:

---

The logical deduction is that we should recruit guys that have no chance in the NBA and if they possibly do, dont recruit them and recruit their less talented team mate?
Seriously, every guy over 6 feet thinks hes an NBA prospect and wants to go to the NBA.

I think you probably need to restate your suggestion as we need to join the Ivy league and recruit 4.5 GPA guys in a lesser league as no respected league would let us in.

---

FWIW I respect the Ivy League.

Yup. As long as team #stayrlevent has the keys we exist in a league where our competitors have players who aspire to make money with their basketball skills. To compete over 40 games we must have players who have similar skills. Over at team #drop down we have concluded that our ad supports at the level of ucsd and observes a lot of those kids are coming to ucsd for a foreign student visa or a premed. Degree. That said...they also got hurt hard by the portal this year as bag were waved for them to go be the 9th guy on a p4 roster.

socaltownie said:

---

Yup. As long as team #stayrlevent has the keys we exist in a league where our competitors have players who aspire to make money with their basketball skills. To compete over 40 games we must have players who have similar skills. Over at team #drop down we have concluded that our ad supports at the level of ucsd and observes a lot of those kids are coming to ucsd for a foreign student visa or a premed. Degree. That said...they also got hurt hard by the portal this year as bag were waved for them to go be the 9th guy on a p4 roster.

---

UCSD went 30-5 this year and should have knocked off Michigan in the NCAA Tournament. Academics and visa's for foreign students who want degrees should be in our wheelhouse.

Madsen's "NBA style" strategy needs to be adjusted to reflect that the NBA is all about the ability to hit the 3 and defend the 3 as well as take it to the hoop and defend the hoop. Last year Cal was #311 in 3 pt % (.315) and #356 in 3 pt % defense (.376). The year before we were #192 in 3 pt % (.338) and #314 in 3 pt % defense (.357). It appears we will be better at shooting the 3 this year and hopefully will be better at defending it as well.

My own take is that over a 30 plus game season ucsd would be exposed as teams broke down film and had time to game plan. But if we dropped down it could absolutely work

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

It is a great question. Though not sure it is that different....are not most impact foreign players spending at least a year at us prep schools?

75bear said:

---

I'm under the impression foreign recruits are not allowed to accept NIL $, so cash challenged programs like ours would seem extra incentivized to recruit internationally.

---

Here is an article on the top U18 Asia players
https://www.fiba.basketball/en/events/fiba-u18-asiacup-2024/news/9-players-to-watch-at-the-fiba-u18-asia-cup-2024

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

HearstMining said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

---

I would argue that saint Mary's and usf are not the right benchmarks. As I have argued before the problem is while that talent level might "steal" a tournament game or two over the course of a 35 game p4 season it will not work.

Instead, compare our int recruiting again other p4s. I am not sure it is that different (but haven't done a really deep dive so could be wrong) I know Zona recruited well int well initially but I think they also have nil pivoted over the past few.

Good summary. Feels like we are not good (multiple coaches) at DEVELOPING the raw foreign players. Either that or we are bad at judging their potential.

Philippine heritage celebrations will always be a feather in conzo's cap.

Any news on the last recruits? I assume we still have the money we were going to pay Andre. Maybe I missed it.

HearstMining said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

---

Agree 100%

Braun was probably our best, but that was before the explosion of basketball worldwide. Nowitsky was part of that. Huge "almost was."

The key is to recognize our comparative advantages and really focus on developing them. International players is clearly one of them.

I think Cal football and basketball is only recruiting at a fraction of our potential and that is a huge factor in our decades, with rare exception, of underachieving, declining attendance and near relegation.

HearstMining said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

---

The lack of recent international players (recruited directly from overseas) is not a coaching staff failure - it is yet another "Cal/university" created obstacle. Literally my understanding (very limited) is that just Ucla and Cal have imposed the restrictions- university counsel has weighed in and is not allowing Cal hoops to currently recruit/NIL packages to potential overseas recruits. Perhaps Bear Greg can weigh in and give greater context etc. This stance has greatly hampered our recruiting efforts. Stanford just got admitted a promising 6'10' Belgium 19 year old player who has two years of professional playing experience.

Wow, I wonder what the rationale is.

It isn't Cal. International student-athletes are generally restricted from directly benefiting from NIL deals within the United States due to immigration law restrictions on their ability to "work" while on an F-1 student visa. The best they get is a free education, which would make you think that Cal should be more competitive in recruiting these players.

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

---

The lack of recent international players (recruited directly from overseas) is not a coaching staff failure - it is yet another "Cal/university" created obstacle. Literally my understanding (very limited) is that just Ucla and Cal have imposed the restrictions- university counsel has weighed in and is not allowing Cal hoops to currently recruit/NIL packages to potential overseas recruits. Perhaps Bear Greg can weigh in and give greater context etc. This stance has greatly hampered our recruiting efforts. Stanford just got admitted a promising 6'10' Belgium 19 year old player who has two years of professional playing experience.

---

UCLA recruited a number of players directly from overseas, including Lara, who will be an all-american next year. I think inept coaches are selling you BS.

sluggo said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

---

The lack of recent international players (recruited directly from overseas) is not a coaching staff failure - it is yet another "Cal/university" created obstacle. Literally my understanding (very limited) is that just Ucla and Cal have imposed the restrictions- university counsel has weighed in and is not allowing Cal hoops to currently recruit/NIL packages to potential overseas recruits. Perhaps Bear Greg can weigh in and give greater context etc. This stance has greatly hampered our recruiting efforts. Stanford just got admitted a promising 6'10' Belgium 19 year old player who has two years of professional playing experience.

---

UCLA recruited a number of players directly from overseas, including Lara, who will be an all-american next year. I think inept coaches are selling you BS.

---

It is a great question for ad. " are there any restrictuons on ibtenatuonal recruiting for cal compared to the rest of the acc"

These (possible) barriers have to be identified and removed if cal is ever going to compete. If they can not be...well youu lnow my tired refrain.

sluggo said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

I've wondered why Cal doesn't recruit more from overseas. While "Cal" may not be known worldwide, "Berkeley" is - they certainly have more name recognition than Gonzaga, St Marys, or USF. Does anybody know the hurdles here? Lack of recruiting budget (maybe trade an assistant coach position for more $$)? Difficulty getting overseas kids from accepted? Inquiring minds want to know!

---

Bozeman brought in Marks. Braun brought in guys like Elson, Gordon, Tamir, Geli, Kuzminskas, Knezevic, Zhang and almost Nowitsky. Monty brought in Bak Bak, Moute a Bidias and guys like Amoke and Gutierrez who were from outside the US but played high school ball in the US. Martin brought in Okoroh. Jones brought in Anticevich. Fox brought in Thiemann, Klonaras, Brown, Kuany, South, Alajiki, Anyanwu, and Okafor. Madsen has brought in Aimaq, Pavlovic, and Sissoko so far.

I do think we can do better, both in quantity and quality of our international recruiting. Better domestic recruiting too.

---

Every foreign player Madsen has brought in was already playing in the US. A foreign recruiting strategy would bring in players directly from overseas. Madsen seems not to have a strategy to do this, or much else, for that matter.

---

My complaint was poorly phrased. What was percolating in my brain was an amalgamation of:

• Why doesn't Madsen recruit more from overseas?
• Why hasn't Cal recruited more impact players from overseas for the last 30 years?

Here's my modest definition of "impact": makes a all-conference honorable mention team. By that definition, I think Gutierrez is the only one but I'll be happy to lower the bar and include Tamir and maybe Sissoko. So, yes, we've brought in some bodies, but if not for Calumnus' encyclopedic knowledge, who would remember most of them?

This has stuck in my craw since I watched some USF (as in San Francisco) games on TV a couple of years back and realized that they had more good overseas players than Cal and I wondered why. Anyway, your follow-on comments indicate I'm preaching to the choir with my concern. I could excuse Madsen in Year-1, but he should have an overseas strategy by now because we're not attracting many top domestic candidates. Really, where could a more welcoming atmosphere be for an overseas student than Berkeley?

---

The lack of recent international players (recruited directly from overseas) is not a coaching staff failure - it is yet another "Cal/university" created obstacle. Literally my understanding (very limited) is that just Ucla and Cal have imposed the restrictions- university counsel has weighed in and is not allowing Cal hoops to currently recruit/NIL packages to potential overseas recruits. Perhaps Bear Greg can weigh in and give greater context etc. This stance has greatly hampered our recruiting efforts. Stanford just got admitted a promising 6'10' Belgium 19 year old player who has two years of professional playing experience.

---

UCLA recruited a number of players directly from overseas, including Lara, who will be an all-american next year. I think inept coaches are selling you BS.

---

Yes, UCLA is a great counter example.

The UC San Diego team that won 30 games and should have knocked off Michigan in the Tournament had 4 international players. Their best player was from New Zealand (by way of Hawaii-Hilo).

UC Santa Barbara had 5 international players. Their best player was from Belgium. Their second best player was from Sweden.

UC Irvine's best player was a 7' center from Germany.

Mark Fox's last Cal team that won 3 games had 5 international players. Arguably Lars was our best player.

So the issue is not getting international players into the UCs, the issue is why can't Cal get better international players like UCLA , UCSD and UCSB?

BearGreg said:

---

The UCs have taken a position on paying international student athletes NIL from the University that no other schools including Stanford are taking. Net net, Cal, UCLA and the other UCs have a major competitive disadvantage. More on this on the premium board - Haas Pavilion.

---

Are you talking about NIL payments under the House settlement? Because the university doesn't currently pay NIL.

What thread?