Story Poster
Photo by On3.com
Cal Basketball

After Official Visit to Cal, '22 PG Milos Uzan Ready For Decision

October 12, 2021
9,974

Trying to get on the board with their 2022 recruiting class, Cal hosted 6-4/185 Dream City Christian (Glendale, Arizona) High School point guard Milos Uzan‍ on an official visit.

The 4 star PG and his family had an impressive visit to Berkeley leading into his decision day this week.

“Coach Fox is a great guy who has been upfront and honest with me from the very beginning, said Uzan of his Cal recruitment.

To continue reading, you must be a Bear Insider Premium subscriber.
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial
Discussion from...

After Official Visit to Cal, '22 PG Milos Uzan Ready For Decision

8,522 Views | 40 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by socaltownie
parentswerebears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I see absolutely no reason for any elite player to come to Cal at this time unless someone is paying them to do so.
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Right? I mean might as well write an article that titled "Cal's men's basketball team has chance to the win NCAA championship."

Yeah, not holding my breath.
bearchamp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lots of "elite" athletes come to Cal for the education. A four-star basketball player might just have his eye on the ball and choose Cal as he is not an obvious candidate for professional basketball.
parentswerebears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My only pause is that 247 has no crystal ball for him. And Cal isn't even on his list on that site. I have mixed feelings. Would I love to have him here? Yes. Would that mean more Fox? Probably. Want him, don't want Fox.
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
parentswerebears said:

... I have mixed feelings. Would I love to have him here? Yes. Would that mean more Fox? Probably. Want him, don't want Fox.
I think the coach has a far greater impact on the program than any one player. A case could be made for a player like Jason Kidd but I can't see any reason why that player would stay at Cal more than one year, even enroll at Cal, or for that matter enroll at any college.
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't consider 4-star ratings to mean that is an elite player. Elite in terms of rankings means a composite or consensus top 20 (approximately) ranked player. Those are the players for whom the rankings are the most accurate. Rankings below 20 or so in general are not that accurate. The accuracy of the ranking declines with the distance below on the ladder from the top 20. Some ranked players exceed their rankings, and some fail to warrant their ranking.

The elite player is not likely to stay in school more than a year, and he is also not always likely to dominate or play at an elite level against college players, most whom are older and more experienced than him. He may have been ranked in the top 20 because of his pro potential. Our most recent examples, Jaylen Brown and Ivan Rabb, were elite players by my definition, and played well at Cal, but neither dominated or was really outstanding in college. Jaylen has proved so far to have had much more potential for the pros than Ivan, and yet Ivan performed much more like I expected him to perform at the college level than I felt Brown did. You could see the potential in both of them when they played for us. I think Ivan would have become a very dominant big man in the PAC12 even if he did not improve a lot in year 2. Jaylen, too, would have become a very dominant player in the PAC12, had he stayed, and he would have done that earlier than Ivan, IMO.

I think the 4-stars and high 3 stars are what Cal should target, because if we want success soon, we don't have the luxury of gambling on one-and-dones. We need Alan Crabbes, or Matt Bradleys, 4-stars who are ready to play as freshmen, and will stay 3-4 years. We need Jerome Randles or Harper Kamps, 3-stars who might not be ready to play until they are sophs or juniors, and will stay 4 years. And we need a lot of these types, not just 2 or 3 per team. If we are going to gamble, I'd rather it be on the low ranked 3 stars, or the unranked Jorges, than on the elite players.

Think about how good Hawaii was, with 3 stars, 2 stars, and unranked players. Boy, you add two or three 4-stars to that mix, keeping the same coach, then you have the potential to be a really fine team, don't you?
SFCityBear
HoopDreams
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SFCityBear said:

Think about how good Hawaii was, with 3 stars, 2 stars, and unranked players. Boy, you add two or three 4-stars to that mix, keeping the same coach, then you have the potential to be a really fine team, don't you?
I know this is not your point, but you brought up the NCAA game vs Hawaii

...That hawaii team was solid, because they had a bunch of veteran solid players + 1 strong player (their overseas stretch 4)

but besides their 4, they were undersized at every position.

but those undersized guards were the worst matchup for us as they were quick and aggressive defenders, and we didn't have our starting PG.

Instead we had Singer, who played well that game but spent a lot of time on the bench, and a make-shift backup PG position from Chanca (who got thrashed) and Jaylen (who wasn't a PG, and couldn't drive on those quicker guards)

Basically a bad matchup

We also didn't have Bird, but Tyrone was the key missing player for us

It still really bothers me that we lost to that team. We were so much better than them a week before that game, and I think we would have advanced to the Sweet Sixteen. After that, who knows as a lot would have depended on matchups

calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

SFCityBear said:

Think about how good Hawaii was, with 3 stars, 2 stars, and unranked players. Boy, you add two or three 4-stars to that mix, keeping the same coach, then you have the potential to be a really fine team, don't you?
I know this is not your point, but you brought up the NCAA game vs Hawaii

...That hawaii team was solid, because they had a bunch of veteran solid players + 1 strong player (their overseas stretch 4)

but besides their 4, they were undersized at every position.

but those undersized guards were the worst matchup for us as they were quick and aggressive defenders, and we didn't have our starting PG.

Instead we had Singer, who played well that game but spent a lot of time on the bench, and a make-shift backup PG position from Chanca (who got thrashed) and Jaylen (who wasn't a PG, and couldn't drive on those quicker guards)

Basically a bad matchup

We also didn't have Bird, but Tyrone was the key missing player for us

It still really bothers me that we lost to that team. We were so much better than them a week before that game, and I think we would have advanced to the Sweet Sixteen. After that, who knows as a lot would have depended on matchups




We still finished the season ranked.

That Hawaii team was 28-6. They almost knocked off #3 Oklahoma (lost by 3) and beat 6 seed Texas Tech and beat Auburn by 12. It was a team of mostly juniors and seniors, international backgrounds, JC players assembled under Gib Arnold who was dismissed pending NCAA sanctions. First year HC Eran Ganot, Randy Bennet's chief assistant at St. Mary's and was the acting HC the previous while Bennet served a 5 game suspension for rules violations.

It was a classic case of a guy taking over a program and getting the players to play better defense. KenPom had Hawaii as #35 in defensive efficiency. Moreover, earlier that season Cal had beaten St. Mary's and Bennet helped his friend and former assistant with a scouting report.

BC Calfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
parentswerebears said:

My only pause is that 247 has no crystal ball for him. And Cal isn't even on his list on that site. I have mixed feelings. Would I love to have him here? Yes. Would that mean more Fox? Probably. Want him, don't want Fox.


Looks like you don't have to worry about the Uzan-Fox Predicament. This is embarrassing.
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?


I think the 4-stars and high 3 stars are what Cal should target, because if we want success soon, we don't have the luxury of gambling on one-and-dones. We need Alan Crabbes, or Matt Bradleys, 4-stars who are ready to play as freshmen, and will stay 3-4 years. We need Jerome Randles or Harper Kamps, 3-stars who might not be ready to play until they are sophs or juniors, and will stay 4 years. And we need a lot of these types, not just 2 or 3 per team. If we are going to gamble, I'd rather it be on the low ranked 3 stars, or the unranked Jorges, than on the elite players."


I just will never understand your point here which you have made a LOT of times in a LOT of posts (Ditto the whole Hawaii thing forgetting that Bird and Wallace were BOTH out that game and the team was clearly rattled by the whole Yani thing).. Would you really give a scholarship to an low ranked 3 rather than Ivan Rabb? "Sorry Ms. Rabb, I know your son is a dominant player but we want to pass on him to give it to this guy from Chico that will work really hard on his two hand jumper?"

To compete to get to the second weekend in the current environment you MUST have kids that at least can SMELL the next level. They might not make it (Bird, Wallace, Rabb, Jorge, Jerome ) but they need to have the skills to get there. It is important to know that only Jorge flew under the radar here - frankly form some very very unique circumstances. The rest where 4* (I believe that is true of Jerome but he might have been a 3 because of height) or a low 5 (Ivan).

What is the case is that we are so far from smelling even low 4s that it is funny. We can not replace Fox with someone who can actually recruit fast enough.




bearmanpg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Amen brother Socal....can only coach'em up so far.....the picket fence ain't working at P5 level anymore....
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:



I think the 4-stars and high 3 stars are what Cal should target, because if we want success soon, we don't have the luxury of gambling on one-and-dones. We need Alan Crabbes, or Matt Bradleys, 4-stars who are ready to play as freshmen, and will stay 3-4 years. We need Jerome Randles or Harper Kamps, 3-stars who might not be ready to play until they are sophs or juniors, and will stay 4 years. And we need a lot of these types, not just 2 or 3 per team. If we are going to gamble, I'd rather it be on the low ranked 3 stars, or the unranked Jorges, than on the elite players."


I just will never understand your point here which you have made a LOT of times in a LOT of posts (Ditto the whole Hawaii thing forgetting that Bird and Wallace were BOTH out that game and the team was clearly rattled by the whole Yani thing).. Would you really give a scholarship to an low ranked 3 rather than Ivan Rabb? "Sorry Ms. Rabb, I know your son is a dominant player but we want to pass on him to give it to this guy from Chico that will work really hard on his two hand jumper?"

To compete to get to the second weekend in the current environment you MUST have kids that at least can SMELL the next level. They might not make it (Bird, Wallace, Rabb, Jorge, Jerome ) but they need to have the skills to get there. It is important to know that only Jorge flew under the radar here - frankly form some very very unique circumstances. The rest where 4* (I believe that is true of Jerome but he might have been a 3 because of height) or a low 5 (Ivan).

What is the case is that we are so far from smelling even low 4s that it is funny. We can not replace Fox with someone who can actually recruit fast enough.




I did not think Wyking Jones was a good recruiter, yet he was light years ahead of Fox. Our best players under Fox continue to be Jones' recruits, and that was after most of the starters transferred out.

I do not think Fox is going to leave a lot of talent for his replacement. They are Bears, seem like great guys, and I will absolutely root for them, but there will definitely need to be a rebuild after Fox finishes demolishing the program.
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

socaltownie said:



I think the 4-stars and high 3 stars are what Cal should target, because if we want success soon, we don't have the luxury of gambling on one-and-dones. We need Alan Crabbes, or Matt Bradleys, 4-stars who are ready to play as freshmen, and will stay 3-4 years. We need Jerome Randles or Harper Kamps, 3-stars who might not be ready to play until they are sophs or juniors, and will stay 4 years. And we need a lot of these types, not just 2 or 3 per team. If we are going to gamble, I'd rather it be on the low ranked 3 stars, or the unranked Jorges, than on the elite players."


I just will never understand your point here which you have made a LOT of times in a LOT of posts (Ditto the whole Hawaii thing forgetting that Bird and Wallace were BOTH out that game and the team was clearly rattled by the whole Yani thing).. Would you really give a scholarship to an low ranked 3 rather than Ivan Rabb? "Sorry Ms. Rabb, I know your son is a dominant player but we want to pass on him to give it to this guy from Chico that will work really hard on his two hand jumper?"

To compete to get to the second weekend in the current environment you MUST have kids that at least can SMELL the next level. They might not make it (Bird, Wallace, Rabb, Jorge, Jerome ) but they need to have the skills to get there. It is important to know that only Jorge flew under the radar here - frankly form some very very unique circumstances. The rest where 4* (I believe that is true of Jerome but he might have been a 3 because of height) or a low 5 (Ivan).

What is the case is that we are so far from smelling even low 4s that it is funny. We can not replace Fox with someone who can actually recruit fast enough.




I did not think Wyking Jones was a good recruiter, yet he was light years ahead of Fox. Our best players under Fox continue to be Jones' recruits, and that was after most of the starters transferred out.

I do not think Fox is going to leave a lot of talent for his replacement. They are Bears, seem like great guys, and I will absolutely root for them, but there will definitely need to be a rebuild after Fox finishes demolishing the program.
That's why the sooner they end the Fox experiment, the better off the program will be.
puget sound cal fan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
...and why do you think Knowlton will get a better replacement this time?
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
puget sound cal fan said:

...and why do you think Knowlton will get a better replacement this time?
He won't be dumb enough to use the search firm that pushed Fox on him.
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philbert said:

puget sound cal fan said:

...and why do you think Knowlton will get a better replacement this time?
He won't be dumb enough to use the search firm that pushed Fox on him.


You're giving him way too much credit here.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Isn't decision day today? Any news?
Civil Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

Isn't decision day today? Any news?
No news is good news? Seems to work for Cal most of the time...
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
tune in....if you like getting kicked in the you know what


philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
icymi


stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From 247:

"It was the coaching staff, the style of play and they showed me that they will need a point guard," Uzan told 247Sports. "I feel like I can fit in perfectly with that group and Coach Porter Moser is a good coach and a good dude, I really like the staff.
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

From 247:

"It was the coaching staff, the style of play and they showed me that they will need a point guard," Uzan told 247Sports. "I feel like I can fit in perfectly with that group and Coach Porter Moser is a good coach and a good dude, I really like the staff.



On a positive note, at least we have one of those three traits covered for any recruit seeking the same.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Raise your hand if you were getting a little extra adrenaline in the lead-up to Uzon's announcement and are now surprised...

I see no hands. I can't even see my own hands right now. Sigh.
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fox is now 0 for 48 on the recruiting trail. Slight exaggeration, but you get the point. Fox did not get the point. Or the center. Or the PF.. or the SF. In on e year from now, the Ad will say, "I will be doing my due diligence."
'due diligence" isn't worth a damn if you don't hire the right guy. Knowing Cal, it will probably be the left guy.
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HoopDreams said:

SFCityBear said:

Think about how good Hawaii was, with 3 stars, 2 stars, and unranked players. Boy, you add two or three 4-stars to that mix, keeping the same coach, then you have the potential to be a really fine team, don't you?
I know this is not your point, but you brought up the NCAA game vs Hawaii

...That hawaii team was solid, because they had a bunch of veteran solid players + 1 strong player (their overseas stretch 4)

but besides their 4, they were undersized at every position.

but those undersized guards were the worst matchup for us as they were quick and aggressive defenders, and we didn't have our starting PG.

Instead we had Singer, who played well that game but spent a lot of time on the bench, and a make-shift backup PG position from Chanca (who got thrashed) and Jaylen (who wasn't a PG, and couldn't drive on those quicker guards)

Basically a bad matchup

We also didn't have Bird, but Tyrone was the key missing player for us

It still really bothers me that we lost to that team. We were so much better than them a week before that game, and I think we would have advanced to the Sweet Sixteen. After that, who knows as a lot would have depended on matchups


I agree with most of your post, except that I did NOT bring up Cal's NCAA game with Hawaii.

I only brought up the team of Hawaii. I said nothing at all about Cal in my post. I mentioned Hawaii because Hawaii had a very solid record in that entire season before they ever saw Cal. So it should have been clear even before Hawaii's game with Cal that Hawaii had a formidable team, and whoever gave low recruit rankings or no ranking to their players really missed the boat. Either that, or Hawaii had a terrific coach, for that whole season.

Hawaii was 28-6 overall, and was the Big West regular season champion. They also won the Big West Conference tournament.
They beat a 24-14 team, Nevada, coached by Eric Musselman
They lost to 19-13 Texas Tech, coached by Tubby Smith, by 8.
They beat 23-13 Northern Iowa.
They barely lost to a 29-8 team, #3 Oklahoma, by 3 points.
They beat Auburn, coached by Bruce Pearl, by 12 points
They lost to a 29-9 team, #18 Maryland, by 13 points in the NCAA tournament


As to Jalen Brown, he can play point guard, and play it well. Remember when Tyrone Wallace got hurt in mid January, 2016? He was out until the Oregon game, Feb. 11. Cal played #7 Arizona on Jan 23 without Wallace. Sam Singer played the point in the first half, and played OK, but not great. In the 2nd half, Martin started Jaylen Brown at point guard, and he penetrated at will, dishing off 7 assists in only one half of playing the point. I don't remember who guarded him for Arizona. Alonzo Trier did not play in that game, but all of the Arizona guards who did play, Kadeem Allen, Gabe York, and Parker Jackson-Cartwright are really outstanding defenders, and if they could not stop Jaylen's penetrations that day, I can't imagine that Bobbitt or Smith were better matchups. Looking at defensive win shares and defensive box plus minus, the Hawaii guards and those Arizona guards were very comparable. I just think Jalen was ill, or just had a bad day, and we'll never know the reason. Had Jaylen Brown not had such an off night, Cal wins that game with Hawaii. I also think that depending on matchups, Jalen could play any of the 5 positions, and give a good accounting of himself.



SFCityBear
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

HoopDreams said:

SFCityBear said:

Think about how good Hawaii was, with 3 stars, 2 stars, and unranked players. Boy, you add two or three 4-stars to that mix, keeping the same coach, then you have the potential to be a really fine team, don't you?
I know this is not your point, but you brought up the NCAA game vs Hawaii

...That hawaii team was solid, because they had a bunch of veteran solid players + 1 strong player (their overseas stretch 4)

but besides their 4, they were undersized at every position.

but those undersized guards were the worst matchup for us as they were quick and aggressive defenders, and we didn't have our starting PG.

Instead we had Singer, who played well that game but spent a lot of time on the bench, and a make-shift backup PG position from Chanca (who got thrashed) and Jaylen (who wasn't a PG, and couldn't drive on those quicker guards)

Basically a bad matchup

We also didn't have Bird, but Tyrone was the key missing player for us

It still really bothers me that we lost to that team. We were so much better than them a week before that game, and I think we would have advanced to the Sweet Sixteen. After that, who knows as a lot would have depended on matchups




We still finished the season ranked.

That Hawaii team was 28-6. They almost knocked off #3 Oklahoma (lost by 3) and beat 6 seed Texas Tech and beat Auburn by 12. It was a team of mostly juniors and seniors, international backgrounds, JC players assembled under Gib Arnold who was dismissed pending NCAA sanctions. First year HC Eran Ganot, Randy Bennet's chief assistant at St. Mary's and was the acting HC the previous while Bennet served a 5 game suspension for rules violations.

It was a classic case of a guy taking over a program and getting the players to play better defense. KenPom had Hawaii as #35 in defensive efficiency. Moreover, earlier that season Cal had beaten St. Mary's and Bennet helped his friend and former assistant with a scouting report.


According to Sports Reference, Hawaii did not beat Texas Tech, they lost to them, 82-74.
SFCityBear
SFCityBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:



I think the 4-stars and high 3 stars are what Cal should target, because if we want success soon, we don't have the luxury of gambling on one-and-dones. We need Alan Crabbes, or Matt Bradleys, 4-stars who are ready to play as freshmen, and will stay 3-4 years. We need Jerome Randles or Harper Kamps, 3-stars who might not be ready to play until they are sophs or juniors, and will stay 4 years. And we need a lot of these types, not just 2 or 3 per team. If we are going to gamble, I'd rather it be on the low ranked 3 stars, or the unranked Jorges, than on the elite players."


I just will never understand your point here which you have made a LOT of times in a LOT of posts (Ditto the whole Hawaii thing forgetting that Bird and Wallace were BOTH out that game and the team was clearly rattled by the whole Yani thing).. Would you really give a scholarship to an low ranked 3 rather than Ivan Rabb? "Sorry Ms. Rabb, I know your son is a dominant player but we want to pass on him to give it to this guy from Chico that will work really hard on his two hand jumper?"

To compete to get to the second weekend in the current environment you MUST have kids that at least can SMELL the next level. They might not make it (Bird, Wallace, Rabb, Jorge, Jerome ) but they need to have the skills to get there. It is important to know that only Jorge flew under the radar here - frankly form some very very unique circumstances. The rest where 4* (I believe that is true of Jerome but he might have been a 3 because of height) or a low 5 (Ivan).

What is the case is that we are so far from smelling even low 4s that it is funny. We can not replace Fox with someone who can actually recruit fast enough.




Once again, I did NOT bring up the Cal Hawaii game in the post you reference. I brought the Hawaii team up because Hawaii was a very good team all season long. Whoever decided to give Hawaii recruits such low rankings just missed on several players, that's all.

Look, there is nothing wrong with your approach of getting elite players, including some who leave early. I can remember Cal lost in the Elite 8 to Seattle in 1958. Seattle had two elite players, Elgin Baylor and Charlie Brown. Baylor was the best player in the country, and would have left school early if he had the chance. Brown would have been a low 5 or high 4 star. As it turned out Baylor got hurt in the semi-final, played hurt the final, and did not play well, and Seattle lost to Kentucky. Newell was really disappointed, because he felt Cal had a better team than Kentucky, even with no elite players at all, and Cal could have won their first NCAA. After that, I began following the NCAA every year, and in most years to get to a Final Four,I saw you needed to have 2 elite players. You might not win it all, but that was what was needed to get to the 4. It is still true today, I think.

The problem with your approach today is that you need a steady stream of 4 and 5-star players, because so much is based on recruit rankings, which is often inaccurate. The other big problem is injuries. You need the steady stream of elite players because so many get injured today. The final problem is they keep leaving after a year or two, and you have to keep replacing them, year by year. Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, UNC, UConn all follow your approach and still don't make it to the Final Four in some years. My point is that Cal even its best years can't recruit with the teams above. Cal flopped after that chance in 2016, because he could not immediately bring in elite replacements to replace those who left. You have to keep your foot on the accelerator year after year, and never let up, or you are not going to keep up with Arizona, UCLA, UW, USC, and not ever get get close to Duke or Kentucky. In the modern game, I think Cal should try for the Virginia model. They get plenty of top 100 players, but not many of the elite one-and-dones, if any. And they are usually in or sniffing the Final Four. I hope now you understand what I'm for.

I would have given a scholarship to Rabb over almost any recruit whatever his ranking. Cal desperately needed a good big man who could play right away. But more than that, we knew his mother was a strong influence in where he would go, and I felt there was a good chance he would have stayed 2 and even 3 years. What we need are good players who will stay at Cal at least 3 years. The same goes for Jabari Bird. Bird had family ties to Cal, and I felt he would need to build up his body to have a chance to leave Cal early. As it was the poor guy kept getting injured, and stayed all 4 years. He did manage to learn the three point shot while at Cal, so he had a good chance to make it in the NBA.

If you rephrase the question to ask me if the elite player was not Rabb, but Jaylen Brown, I suppose if there were a talented under the radar 3-star player, I might take him instead of offering Brown. There was no way Brown was going to play more than one season at Cal. It was fun to see him play here, but the team result was not what was hoped for, even with all the talent around him. Injuries are a fact in modern basketball. As low-ranked under the radar 3-stars, I remember seeing high school mixtapes of Jerome Randle, which looked very exciting. I would have offered him, and I said so. It took him two years to develop, but his last two years were sensational. I could give you a list of 3-stars who made good in college.

BTW, Jaylen Brown was ranked #3 in the RSCI consensus top 100, Ivan Rabb #5 in 2015, a very high 5-star. Jerome Randle was a low-ranked 3-star, and not in the top 100 in 2006.







SFCityBear
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:


Raise your hand if you were getting a little extra adrenaline in the lead-up to Uzon's announcement and are now surprised...

I see no hands. I can't even see my own hands right now. Sigh.
I find it hard to get worked up over recruits who aren't clearly five-stars. For the rest I'll wait till they sign, then wait till I see them.

So far I'm disappointed by the lack of any commitments in this cycle. But I can't complain too much just yet. Fox's first three recruits were last-minute emergency additions, I haven't seen much of his next three (except I like what I've seen of Celestine), and I haven't seen his last three at all. I'm not counting Brown and Thorpe because they committed before Fox arrived and I'm not counting grad transfers because I don't think you can build a team with one-year players.

What does worry me is though nine players have come in the last three years six others have gone. If we don't get a few decent players in this cycle we're going to have a numbers problem soon.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

From 247:

"It was the coaching staff, the style of play and they showed me that they will need a point guard," Uzan told 247Sports. "I feel like I can fit in perfectly with that group and Coach Porter Moser is a good coach and a good dude, I really like the staff.



Oklahoma with Porter Moser coming over from Loyola-Chicago to succeed Lon Kruger will be interesting to follow. Loyola-Chicago was super fun to watch the last four years, but a lot of that was their center Kutwig. Kudos to the way Moser used him, I love to see that kind of creativity in a coach, but Moser's record the 13 years before Kutwig is weak (one post season appearance, though CBI Champs). He's been a hot coach since 2018 when he went to the Final Four on his first NCAA appearance.
calbearinamaze
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

Fox is now 0 for 48 on the recruiting trail. Slight exaggeration, but you get the point. Fox did not get the point. Or the center. Or the PF.. or the SF. In on e year from now, the Ad will say, "I will be doing my due diligence."
'due diligence" isn't worth a damn if you don't hire the right guy. Knowing Cal, it will probably be the left guy.
HTH1,

Really clever post.
(even if very pessimistic).*******

So, Fox still has shot at an SG????




*******unfortunately, there's some non-zero probability that your scenario will actually play-out


GO BEARS!!!
stu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

'due diligence" isn't worth a damn if you don't hire the right guy. Knowing Cal, it will probably be the left guy.
I don't know about that. Fox doesn't strike me as a "left guy".
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
stu said:

Big C said:


Raise your hand if you were getting a little extra adrenaline in the lead-up to Uzon's announcement and are now surprised...

I see no hands. I can't even see my own hands right now. Sigh.
I find it hard to get worked up over recruits who aren't clearly five-stars. For the rest I'll wait till they sign, then wait till I see them.

So far I'm disappointed by the lack of any commitments in this cycle. But I can't complain too much just yet. Fox's first three recruits were last-minute emergency additions, I haven't seen much of his next three (except I like what I've seen of Celestine), and I haven't seen his last three at all. I'm not counting Brown and Thorpe because they committed before Fox arrived and I'm not counting grad transfers because I don't think you can build a team with one-year players.

What does worry me is though nine players have come in the last three years six others have gone. If we don't get a few decent players in this cycle we're going to have a numbers problem soon.


Fox's first class was 2019.
Joel Brown, DJ Thorpe and Charles Smith signed LOIs the year before with Jones. After Jones was fired and Fox was named, Brown and Thorpe still came but Smith left.

After meeting Fox multiple players entered the transfer portal.
Fox then brought in Kuany Kuany, Dimitrios Klonaras and Lars Thiemann (plus grad transfer South). They could be considered "last minute" recruits.

Bowser, Celestine and Hyder (plus grad transfers Betley and Foreman) are his second class.

Kelly and Anticevich are the only remaining players who played for Jones three years ago. That means 14 (?) players on the
roster are Fox recruits, 12 if you exclude Brown and Thorpe.
helltopay1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bearup...Don't understand the personal ad hominem attack. College grads should be able to post an opinion without being called an ******* for their personal opinion. Very poor form as the British would say.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philbert said:

icymi



Haha Oklahoma v. Cal. Hmm where should I go for hoops?
calbearinamaze
How long do you want to ignore this user?
helltopay1 said:

Bearup...Don't understand the personal ad hominem attack. College grads should be able to post an opinion without being called an ******* for their personal opinion. Very poor form as the British would say.
Yikes!!!

Please change the ******* to the usual * and you will find that I complemented you twice in
one post......The other time being where I say your post is "clever".... I took it as a wonderful use of humor
to make a valid, uh, point.

Why did I use ******* instead of *? I haven't posted in in a looong time.....my fingers are sticking to the keeeeys.


PEACE and LOV
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.