Shannon Shorter - To aTm - CC

[rjl]

There's no way we know what was told to the recruit the whole time, or even if the Texas Hoops report is 100% correct.

Maybe Turg was waiting to hear from Hatch, and told Shannon that throughout the process?

Shannon had hoped that the Hatch deal wouldn't go through, so planned his recruiting accordingly.

[huskerblue]

Kid said Trugeon told him he was "twice as good" as the kid they commited to two years ago but his word is his word. Good for Turgeon, "honor before victory" is usually just coach-speak until something better shows up.

That said, I can't see Barnes being signed in the fall once a story like this comes out as you guys simply don't have an open schollie.

My Bluejays also have a guy they REALLY want but with promises made, there are no schollies open in the fall. If they can somehow convince the kid not tho sign in the fall, who knows how things will shake out by next spring.

Nebraska has 2 open schollies and they have 4 verbals. If they don't think that's going to used against them until the cows come home, they are delusional.

[DUShock]

We're seeing the double edge of improved recruiting, I guess we (WSU, CU, SIU, etc.) should be thankful that it's a good problem to have.

Go Valley!!

Go Shocks!!!!

[BostonWu]

I called it on 10/9/06. http://www.shockernet.net/sn/viewtop...er=asc&start=0

Make no mistake about the moral fabric of our fearless leader. Believe me even if Shorter is 2x the player of Hatch, this move will pay dividends for MT.

[WSUwatcher]

Hatch

Maybe Hatch should go to prep school for a year to readjust to basketball (although I assume at some point you get old enough that even prep schools won't take you).

[RoyalShock]

If it's true that from the coach's perspective we have no open schollies, I'm surprised that Barnes has not dropped us from his list. I do think MT is a man of his word, but I can't help but think something could change if Barnes wants to come to WSU. I don't know what that means other than breaking his word to Hatch or Bowles, or pushing someone out after the season.

I guess I'd feel better if either A) Barnes dropped us from his list, or B) MT has made it clear that things change and what was promised two years ago can't always be honored today.

I guess I'm just uneasy about still being on Barnes list and the stories of MT keeping his word to Hatch.

[pinstripers]

If we get Barnes, someone will leave; count on it. Pretty standard stuff. I imagine there will be a player or two leaving even if we do NOT get Barnes. Some of these guys actually want to PLAY, and lots of them are not going to get any minutes. It happens all the time.

[BigTimeShox]

Ryan Bradley seems most likely as he is not going to get much playing time. Some have said that King is better or about as good as he is and he is a walk-on with 4 years. It goes back that RBradley should have "red shirted".

[ShockRef]

Trust me, if Barnes commits, room will become available. 8)

[SubGod22]

No doubt. And after what I read today, we're still very much in the mix

[pinstripers]

I'm not sure where Shorter would fit in, if he is not actually at least 6'4" and cannot play the 3. Perhaps he is listed that tall, but he certainly didn't appear to be that tall the other night. He's stout, though.

[wsu789]

Royal:

I think MT is a man of his word and the difference in the two situations is that in the Shorter/Hatch situation you have recruit 1 and recruit 2 each seeking the same scholarship, but you have given your word to recruit 1 that he will receive one for a year.

In the Barnes situation, you are likely looking at recruit versus current roster player. It has been noted before that scholarships are one year deals that may or may not be renewed. We have seen, obviously, players leave the program when it became apparent their pt would be limited or non-existent (i.e. Walls, Bangle.) They may or may not have been "asked" to leave; I don't know.

I guess my point is, the level of commitment to an incoming player you have promised an opportunity to but whom has not stepped foot on campus (i.e. Hatch, Bowles) may be different and higher than the player who is in the program but has not performed at the necessary level to retain a scholarship (i.e. Fill in the Blank). Of course, the disconcerting thing is that if you "oversign" by a player, you are now in a position where you must make that decision to lose an existing scholarship player.

[RoyalShock]

I can buy that explanation, 789. Thanks.

[WuDrWu]

You can also be a man of your word and still tell others something to be polite and or politically correct.

I can see MT telling SS that he can't offer him a scholly because of Hatch when he doesn't really want to tell him, "Young man, you are a nice ballplayer but if the choice is you or CB I'm taking CB every day and twice on Sunday, no hard feelings."

I'm not saying that's what happened, only that I don't think using that kind of tactic, in the world of recruiting where everyone is told they are the best in the world, does not go against the values we know our coach to possess.

:goshocks: :posterwu: :posterwsu:


We will have room for CB if he chooses WSU.

[The Mad Hatter]

From what I have heard, I have reason to think that Barnes is not coming.

On the other hand, I have heard that Bowles is a more polished player than Barnes, even if Barnes has the huge upside.