- Jun 11, 2014
- 16,754
- 20,381
Founding Member
For all the griping about the walkons having to play, you think this would be a known idea.Which is worse, 3 star kids on the roster or holes in the roster? I know you want 4 and 5 stars filling those holes, but if they aren't available, or flip-able, or they can't qualify academically....what do you choose? Where do you think we'd rank in recruiting with a class of all 4-5 star kids but only a half dozen total kids for the class? How would next season play out? Or the year after that?
3 stars fill the holes and sustain the program until they get benched by better talent. That 3 star kid knows it and busts his ass not to lose his spot. And even if he's just barely getting by it's better, IMO, to have him out there than to be holding open tryouts midseason for no-star walkons in order to field a team. Maybe you think having 70 kids on the roster is the better choice?