PDA

View Full Version : Signing Period Over?

OldBay
06-20-2007, 08:20 AM
I was just curious whether Mick is done signing recruits for this period, or if there is still a chance of landing one or two more (for '08 of course). What are the dates each year for the signing periods anyway? Just wanted to know if things have died down for the summer as far as signing goes, or whether to anticipate any more activity. Thanks for any insight.
IKnowMoreThanYou
06-20-2007, 09:44 AM
I was just curious whether Mick is done signing recruits for this period, or if there is still a chance of landing one or two more (for '08 of course). What are the dates each year for the signing periods anyway? Just wanted to know if things have died down for the summer as far as signing goes, or whether to anticipate any more activity. Thanks for any insight.

Technically the signing period has ended but recruits still can be added. They just have to make it through a school's admissions office, get through the NCAA Clearinghouse and sign scholarship papers at a school. So teams who had late departures, like say JameSon Curry declaring for the NBA Draft at the last minute leaves Ok. State with an opening, though it's probably too late to add a quality player to take his scholarship. They will likely hold it and use it for next year.
columbus_bearcat
06-20-2007, 09:45 AM
I am far from an expert, but I believe the '08 recruits can't sign until early signing period of senior year (or this fall).
Oldtimer_UC_fan
06-20-2007, 10:13 AM
I am far from an expert, but I believe the '08 recruits can't sign until early signing period of senior year (or this fall).


I believe that's correct. I think the early signing period is sometime in November, is it not?
Oldtimer_UC_fan
06-20-2007, 10:15 AM
It looks like our friends at Xavier have secured a nice class for '08.
Bearcat Revival
06-20-2007, 10:44 AM
Not as nice as the one coming to Clifton for the fall of '08.
IKnowMoreThanYou
06-20-2007, 12:04 PM
Previous poster in this thread is correct, the early signing period is for one week in November, though sometimes they are faxed up to a week or two after the period technically ends so long as they are post dated. Remember how late Belton was added to last year's class?
Oldtimer_UC_fan
06-20-2007, 12:06 PM
Not as nice as the one coming to Clifton for the fall of '08.


I really hope you're right. do you know something the rest of us don't? Right now, I'd rank Xavier's class as better than ours.
Bearcat Revival
06-20-2007, 12:49 PM
Yes, but I can't talk or I'll get fired...and I'd like to keep my job. Does that count as a "tease"?
Oldtimer_UC_fan
06-20-2007, 01:34 PM
Not as nice as the one coming to Clifton for the fall of '08.

Yes, but I can't talk or I'll get fired...and I'd like to keep my job. Does that count as a "tease"?

What is your job? Perhaps others here know, but, I'm curious.
Bearcat Revival
06-20-2007, 01:45 PM
No one knows and no one really needs to know. I'm sorry I never should have said anything. Back to the point...UC has a better class coming in this year (15th by Rivals) and they have two four-star recruits already for next year...with the potential for more. Don't get fooled by seeing X has three in the top 150. UC will get more and the overall quality will be better too.
waterhead
06-20-2007, 02:21 PM
No one knows and no one really needs to know. I'm sorry I never should have said anything. Back to the point...UC has a better class coming in this year (15th by Rivals) and they have two four-star recruits already for next year...with the potential for more. Don't get fooled by seeing X has three in the top 150. UC will get more and the overall quality will be better too.

I have a guess as to who you are but I won't. It's not a big stretch for you to say that UC will end up with a better class than Xavier. How about some info we don't know. Anything...just a little morsel???
Bearcat Revival
06-20-2007, 02:34 PM
I'm already in over my head. Never should have opened my mouth. I can't disclose anything I know...all I was doing was trying to be optimistic about the '08 class being better than X. Sorry to get anyone worked up.
Oldtimer_UC_fan
06-20-2007, 02:51 PM
I'm already in over my head. Never should have opened my mouth. I can't disclose anything I know...all I was doing was trying to be optimistic about the '08 class being better than X. Sorry to get anyone worked up.

We appreciate your position. I would never ask anyone to do something that would in any way jeopardize your job. I appreciate just hearing your optimism......whether accurate or not. We're all fans of UC, here. As far as being in over your head....nahh.....you're good.
waterhead
06-20-2007, 03:06 PM
I'm already in over my head. Never should have opened my mouth. I can't disclose anything I know...all I was doing was trying to be optimistic about the '08 class being better than X. Sorry to get anyone worked up.

I tried. I will take it for granted that you know good things about UC future and that's good enough for me.
Bearcat Revival
06-20-2007, 03:51 PM
Good things are always going to be in the works for UC as long as Mick Cronin and Brian Kelly are around.
The real Bearcat Fan
06-20-2007, 07:19 PM
Good things are always going to be in the works for UC as long as Mick Cronin and Brian Kelly are around.

I agree Bearcat Revival the key to UC recruiting success is having Mick Cronin and Brian Kelly as coaches. As long as they are the coaches UC will have recruiting success.
Bearcat Fan Since 1958
06-20-2007, 09:46 PM
I agree Bearcat Revival the key to UC recruiting success is having Mick Cronin and Brian Kelly as coaches. As long as they are the coaches UC will have recruiting success.

Maybe so. UC basketballl was very successful from 1990 through 2006 (420 W, 140 L, 75%), with and without Mick Cronin.
Aaron
06-21-2007, 09:50 AM
Mick has done a good job of recruiting so far, but there is know way to tell yet if UC has a better recruiting class than Xavier for 08. Mick will be fine recruiting but his coaching will be the main thing he needs to concentrate on. Last year he got a pass, due to numerous circumstances, but hopefully in the next couple of years we can get it done on the court to keep up the winning tradition of UC Basketball.

Aaron 96
Bearcat Revival
06-21-2007, 03:33 PM
I will give Huggs his due...BUT C-USA success is different from Big East and NCAA Tournament success. Even if Mick's winning percentage is down from Huggs' (and it will), Mick will be judged on his Tournament successes/failures...IMO
Bearcat Fan Since 1958
06-21-2007, 08:43 PM
I will give Huggs his due...BUT C-USA success is different from Big East and NCAA Tournament success. Even if Mick's winning percentage is down from Huggs' (and it will), Mick will be judged on his Tournament successes/failures...IMO

UC was Metro in 1990 and 91. Great Midwest in 1992, 93, 94, and 95. Then C-USA from 96 on.

Schools like Louisville, Memphis, DePaul, and Marquette were part of those leagues.

Mick is 0-2 in NCAA tournament games for his career.
SLMadiCat
06-21-2007, 10:01 PM
UC was Metro in 1990 and 91. Great Midwest in 1992, 93, 94, and 95. Then C-USA from 96 on.

Schools like Louisville, Memphis, DePaul, and Marquette were part of those leagues.

Mick is 0-2 in NCAA tournament games for his career.

Those leagues were still far inferior to the new Big East. Louisville, Memphis, DePaul, and Marquette were down for quite a few years in those leagues.

I will judge Mick's tournament success within the next two to five years at UC, not what he did at Murray St. If everyone is eligible this year, they have an outside shot at the dance, 2009 is when I will really expect a good showing.
Bearcat Fan Since 1958
06-21-2007, 10:18 PM
Those leagues were still far inferior to the new Big East. Louisville, Memphis, DePaul, and Marquette were down for quite a few years in those leagues.

I will judge Mick's tournament success within the next two to five years at UC, not what he did at Murray St. If everyone is eligible this year, they have an outside shot at the dance, 2009 is when I will really expect a good showing.

Most leagues are inferior to the current BEast. But the Great Midwest had some very strong teams in the early 1990's - perhaps you forgot. And the Metro was pretty good, too. Louisville didn't drop off until the late 1990's and early 2000's.
SLMadiCat
06-21-2007, 10:26 PM
Most leagues are inferior to the current BEast. But the Great Midwest had some very strong teams in the early 1990's - perhaps you forgot. And the Metro was pretty good, too. Louisville didn't drop off until the late 1990's and early 2000's.

I didn't forget, I just don't think those leagues were that good. They were just OKAY, imo. Much, much easier to win in those leagues than in the BEast.
james jr
06-22-2007, 07:29 PM
I really hope you're right. do you know something the rest of us don't? Right now, I'd rank Xavier's class as better than ours.

According to most of the recruitng rankings, Kenny Frease is the only X recruit in the same class as Yancy or Wilks. Yancey just had monster reviews for his recent games and Wilks has been steadily climbing the ranks. X has more quantity than we do right now but if our quality stays consistent we will have garnered a far better class.