The suggestion seems to be that a guy like Carter shouldn't be a take because of his offensive numbers and that, instead, LSU needs to take only "really good" transfers. I'm saying a guy like Carter can be a nice piece...if he's not supposed to be the offensive centerpiece of your backcourt. Perhaps we are saying the same thing...just in a different manner.

quote:
I mean this just seems like a cop out. Either you're good or you're not. We cant possibly still be blaming things on the now completely settled NCAA matter. McMahon went 9-9 this year in the conference which looks better than last year so it's not like he's trying to sell some bottom feeder. There are cases literally everywhere of teams getting turned around in year 1 and 2 with new coaches. We cant still be making excuses for McMahon in year 3, its just BS at that point.

I'm not blaming it on NCAA investigations or anything of the sort. I'm saying that LSU isn't a prized destination right now because of their futility in the last two seasons. With those other first year HC's they could sell optimism and their performance at a previous job (which was likely very good...and why they got the bigger job in the first place). It's why McMahon, on paper, didn't have a "bad" first year signing/transfer class. Now, however, he can't sell what he did at Murray St. He has a record at LSU. And it isn't very good. The transfer players who are considered to be "very good" today likely won't be considering LSU. So to expect he will get some of those guys is probably unwarranted. What he has to do is find some good pieces that maybe aren't quite in that top tier of prospects that outplay their "rankings" so to speak.

quote:
If he was better recruiting high school players, he wouldnt be in this position of having to take so many guys from the portal

While not top level, he hasn't been terrible in recruiting the HS ranks. He's going to have 5 top 100 players in 3 years. Wade had 6 in the same time frame. But the game has changed and coaches aren't relying on HS recruiting as much as they used to. Just look at Auburn. I think they've signed 5 HS players over the last 3 years. The reason is because the game has gotten "older". That is it is better to get multiple experienced 3, 4, 5 year players than HS freshman. One, because you can't teach experience, and two, because players move around, so you may not get much benefit from that HS signee if he only plays one season. I'm fine with the emphasis being more on transfers.

Ultimately, I'm more in the camp that the issue hasn't been as much one of a "lack of talent" as it is poor coaching. The running narrative is "good x's and o's coach" (Of course, no one can ever explain the basis for that opinion) but he just can't recruit. I disagree. I think his recruiting has been fine relative to teams like Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi St, A&M, etc. The coaching has been the bigger issue. I think McMahon will do a decent job bringing in players this offseason. I just have my doubts he'll actually be able to maximize their production.