Great Osobor

BigCountryAG · Post by **BigCountryAG** » April 4th, 2024, 9:05 am

Agreed hick you aren’t wrong there .. let’s just hope he can keep pace with our league and I think he can . The whole Mtn west will be after the same recipe ofguys we can afford and hope to catch lightning in a bottle with like last year. Yesterday was depressing for sure and frustration sets in and I start saying stupid (I can't express myself without swearing) . Go Aggies

splintorb · Post by **splintorb** » April 4th, 2024, 9:09 am

Elkaggie wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 7:09 pm

BigCountryAG wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 6:56 pm

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 1:31 pm
So all that talk about Calhoun being chosen cause it’ll keep the team together was bull$hit. That he would keep Haslam and Brown on staff, also bull$hit. That the AD had addressed NIL concerns, bull$hit frosting on top of bull$hit.

I’ve lost all faith in college sports.
I think this pretty much sums everything t up for me as well .. right now I am feeling like we got sold a bill of goods ?
This plus Diana S saying top priority is the kids in the program and insinuating on several occasions that we could keep our players in tact.

Apparently the meeting with the new coach didn’t go well.. I know they put their names in before but the timing of all of this is strange.

This had nothing to do with how the conversation with the coach and everything with the conversation with the NIL collective and the current state of College Hoops.

ineptimusprime · Post by **ineptimusprime** » April 4th, 2024, 9:28 am

This is pretty simple. Get the guys you can reasonably afford to come back and play moneyball putting together a roster from the portal.

shoresy · Post by **shoresy** » April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am

I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.

ineptimusprime · Post by **ineptimusprime** » April 4th, 2024, 9:51 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am
I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.

I mean, it's both, right? You need both unregulated NIL + unlimited ability to transfer to = the pay-for-play system we have now. One of those things without the other would be manageable.

But in terms of timing/sequence of events, you are correct that it was getting rid of the one free transfer rule that really blew the lid off things.

I don't think either is ruining USU athletics per se. The transfer portal + NIL era has been pretty damn good to USU in terms of on-field performance. Where it is "ruining" anything is at the heart strings level/soul level. I can appreciate that it's pretty hard to get excited to root on the next band of mercenaries when it doesn't really feel like they are "Aggies." Best case scenario they are the "coach's guys" and worst case scenario they are just chasing the money. Neither of those scenarios feel like they are REALLY "Aggies."

NVAggie · Post by **NVAggie** » April 4th, 2024, 10:05 am

USU has always been a budget program that hits above its weight class. We've been very fortunate to have good coaches and good players come through the system and bring success. The new world is all about money. Everyone involved wants more and more. The reality is that USU will always be a budget program. Budget programs no longer have much of a path to succeed in today's collegiate athletics. I refuse to participate in this mess. There is a system out there that is mutually beneficial to fans, players, schools, and coaches. The pendulum took a wild swing to the other side which is pretty standard considering the circumstances. I hope that equilibrium can set in before it ruins our program.

josephconlin · Post by **josephconlin** » April 4th, 2024, 10:07 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am
I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.

Regarding the NCAA "feelings" on the matter, I believe they don't "feel like that is a good business model." That's why they had a rule against it. That rule was challenged in court and a judge said the NCAA can't enforce it, and that's how we ended up with unlimited free transfers.

OKAggie said it well in the post linked below, especially this part: "Every time it goes to court to restrict the rights of players, it loses."
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=71600&p=954022#p953993

shoresy · Post by **shoresy** » April 4th, 2024, 10:38 am

josephconlin wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 10:07 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am
I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.
Regarding the NCAA "feelings" on the matter, I believe they don't "feel like that is a good business model." That's why they had a rule against it. That rule was challenged in court and a judge said the NCAA can't enforce it, and that's how we ended up with unlimited free transfers.

OKAggie said it well in the post linked below, especially this part: "Every time it goes to court to restrict the rights of players, it loses."
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=71600&p=954022#p953993

Good point, you're definitely correct. Having guys regularly play at three or four schools in their four year careers just feels so incredibly unsustainable. And while I know courts are trying to "protect" player rights, it ends up hurting both players and fans.

NVAggie · Post by **NVAggie** » April 4th, 2024, 10:39 am

An important rule in investing, never let your emotions dictate your decisions.

shoresy · Post by **shoresy** » April 4th, 2024, 10:41 am

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:51 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am
I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.
I mean, it's both, right? You need both unregulated NIL + unlimited ability to transfer to = the pay-for-play system we have now. One of those things without the other would be manageable.

But in terms of timing/sequence of events, you are correct that it was getting rid of the one free transfer rule that really blew the lid off things.

I don't think either is ruining USU athletics per se. The transfer portal + NIL era has been pretty damn good to USU in terms of on-field performance. Where it is "ruining" anything is at the heart strings level/soul level. I can appreciate that it's pretty hard to get excited to root on the next band of mercenaries when it doesn't really feel like they are "Aggies." Best case scenario they are the "coach's guys" and worst case scenario they are just chasing the money. Neither of those scenarios feel like they are REALLY "Aggies."

That's fair. I just feel like before NIL, high end players were still getting paid. But before the free unlimited transfer rule, even the players at the top of the sport couldn't just go wherever they want whenever they want.

And I put "ruining college sports" in quotes because I don't truly believe that. I still thoroughly enjoy college sports, especially many of the smaller sports that have been largely unchanged by all of this. But I do understand those who are losing interest and growing apathetic.

cval · Post by **cval** » April 4th, 2024, 10:59 am

There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.

shoresy · Post by **shoresy** » April 4th, 2024, 11:14 am

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 10:59 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 10:44 pm

bigblue32 wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 10:02 pm

BigBlueAggie wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 9:46 pm

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 1:31 pm
So all that talk about Calhoun being chosen cause it’ll keep the team together was bull$hit. That he would keep Haslam and Brown on staff, also bull$hit. That the AD had addressed NIL concerns, bull$hit frosting on top of bull$hit.

I’ve lost all faith in college sports.
Man, that is depressing outlook. I recall awhile back we rebuilt a team with scraps and not much NIL that won a tourney game. I'm not giving up hope with the tweet of one player. Wake me up in the fall when this all comes back together.
This is the way my Aggie brother. We will be back in contention next year , just relax a little because nothing we do (worrying or otherwise) has literally 0 bearing on the outcome.

We are in SUCH a better place than we were 365 days ago from an overall standpoint. we are not only coming off our first outright mountain west conference title, but also an ncaa tournament win. We also have an awesome AD and president this go round, and an absolutely fantastic hire (coaching circles RAVE about this guy in public and behind the scenes, he is an absolute winner)

Look things move fast and things change even faster but it will all sort itself out and I promise it’s not going to be the end of the world that some of you are declaring.

Go Aggies!
I may be projecting, but it seems to me that the wailing and teeth gnashing comes more from a place of angst about having a lot of roster turnover this year (and thereby losing any personal connection or attachment to the team) than it is about our ability to get competitive again. And I totally get that and feel the same way.

It gets harder and harder to get excited about rallying around the next group of mercenaries that’s going to stay one year in Logan even if they accomplish something great next year.

We don’t know the players personally (at least most of us), and the thing we’re supposed to have in common with the players and that spurs us on to cheer for them and their successes is a shared bond and love for USU and its basketball tradition. When batch after batch of players just cast that aside after one year for a pile of money, I can’t fault them, but it makes it all feel rather hollow.

I’m sure I’ll find a way to get excited about the next batch of mercenaries and what they accomplish, but I will agree it stinks that the days of getting to watch a player grow and develop over four years at USU are probably over.
You put it perfectly. I also find it interesting after all the talk about last year being a once in a lifetime success story so many now think “we’ll just up and do it again”.

You have become significantly less fun over the years.

3rdGenAggie · Post by **3rdGenAggie** » April 4th, 2024, 11:31 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 10:38 am

josephconlin wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 10:07 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am
I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.
Regarding the NCAA "feelings" on the matter, I believe they don't "feel like that is a good business model." That's why they had a rule against it. That rule was challenged in court and a judge said the NCAA can't enforce it, and that's how we ended up with unlimited free transfers.

OKAggie said it well in the post linked below, especially this part: "Every time it goes to court to restrict the rights of players, it loses."
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=71600&p=954022#p953993
Good point, you're definitely correct. Having guys regularly play at three or four schools in their four year careers just feels so incredibly unsustainable. And while I know courts are trying to "protect" player rights, it ends up hurting both players and fans.

Thing is, I don't think most players, particularly those transferring multiple times, care one lick about the school part of playing college sports. From a basketball standpoint, there isn't really a problem with transferring every year. What is good for the school and fans isn't and likely never will be part of the consideration.

JonnyCienPesos · Post by **JonnyCienPesos** » April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.

It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JFW_AGGIES · Post by **JFW_AGGIES** » April 4th, 2024, 11:56 am

Do you guys really believe that we haven't been paying players in one form or another for a very very long time? wake up people this isn't new, its just out in the open now!! And now players can move at will, where in the past they couldn't.

Yossarian · Post by **Yossarian** » April 4th, 2024, 11:58 am

cval wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 10:59 am
There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.

I'll have to find some older college basketball/ football footage - but I ask myself the question: didn't they used to show the player's majors when they showed their stats and year in school in televised games? I know the announcers would mention it when talking about players. I don't hear or see that really any more on broadcasts.

Aggie in Boise · Post by **Aggie in Boise** » April 4th, 2024, 11:58 am

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Never important? Who pretended? The athletic department, the coaches, the players, and/or the fans?

Given that USU is an academic institution with student athletes if the student part of the equation is not important then perhaps the two should be separated?

Yossarian · Post by **Yossarian** » April 4th, 2024, 12:01 pm

ineptimusprime wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:51 am

shoresy wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 9:45 am
I don’t believe it’s the transfer portal or NIL that are “ruining college sports” (though I do have my issues with both). I believe it’s the free unlimited transfer rule. I was cool with allowing one free transfer. But most of these guys are doing their second or third transfer knowing they’ll be able to play immediately. I can not comprehend how the NCAA feels like that is a good business model.
I mean, it's both, right? You need both unregulated NIL + unlimited ability to transfer to = the pay-for-play system we have now. One of those things without the other would be manageable.

But in terms of timing/sequence of events, you are correct that it was getting rid of the one free transfer rule that really blew the lid off things.

I don't think either is ruining USU athletics per se. The transfer portal + NIL era has been pretty damn good to USU in terms of on-field performance. Where it is "ruining" anything is at the heart strings level/soul level. I can appreciate that it's pretty hard to get excited to root on the next band of mercenaries when it doesn't really feel like they are "Aggies." Best case scenario they are the "coach's guys" and worst case scenario they are just chasing the money. Neither of those scenarios feel like they are REALLY "Aggies."

The problem is - you can't have one without the other.

If you are going to allow kids to be paid to play ball as college athletes in an open and free market, you must allow them the ability to explore that free market freely. You can't limit their ability to make money. That genie is out of the bottle.

TrueAG · Post by **TrueAG** » April 4th, 2024, 12:03 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since when? I am pretty sure until recently it was people's dream to get a full ride scholarship and have your education paid for while you get a degree. In everything but Men's college basketball and football that is still the case.There are thousands of student athletes working there butts off just for scholarships.

cval · Post by **cval** » April 4th, 2024, 12:04 pm

Well, we used to track progress towards graduation and require the completion of at least 12 credits per semester.

Can you even do that if they here for one year, and it is their third of four schools?

TrueAG · Post by **TrueAG** » April 4th, 2024, 12:05 pm

cval wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:04 pm
Well, we used to track progress towards graduation and require the completion of at least 12 credits per semester.

Can you even do that if they here for one year, and it is their third of four schools?

Are those in the portal still going to class?

88USUAggie · Post by **88USUAggie** » April 4th, 2024, 12:36 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another perspective - when I was a student, I was envious of anyone on an athletic scholarship. I understood...as did every athlete, that their chance at making a living playing a game was extremely...extremely limited, but they were getting an opportunity to play a game AND have their education paid for.

Again, as a student paying my way, I understood, and saw first hand (I had a couple of football players as close friends) the sacrifices student athletes made and the work they had to do to juggle school and their sport. Fast forward to today, I don't know how I would feel knowing a "fellow student" was not only getting their education paid for...but was making more money playing a game for the same institution I was paying, than I could dream of making as a new graduate with a BS.

This tremendous inequity between students and paid student athletes is something that I do not see discussed at all, but will have to be rationalized at some point. Regardless of where the money comes from, how does the university justify paying some students hundreds of thousands of dollars, while others eat ramen every night? The term student athlete is truly dead. I suspect the courts will eventually be involved and any affiliation with the university will be required to be separated from these now professional sports teams.

cval · Post by **cval** » April 4th, 2024, 12:45 pm

88USUAggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:36 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another perspective - when I was a student, I was envious of anyone on an athletic scholarship. I understood...as did every athlete, that their chance at making a living playing a game was extremely...extremely limited, but they were getting an opportunity to play a game AND have their education paid for.

Again, as a student paying my way, I understood, and saw first hand (I had a couple of football players as close friends) the sacrifices student athletes made and the work they had to do to juggle school and their sport. Fast forward to today, I don't know how I would feel knowing a "fellow student" was not only getting their education paid for...but was making more money playing a game for the same institution I was paying, than I could dream of making as a new graduate with a BS.

This tremendous inequity between students and paid student athletes is something that I do not see discussed at all, but will have to be rationalized at some point. Regardless of where the money comes from, how does the university justify paying some students hundreds of thousands of dollars, while others eat ramen every night? The term student athlete is truly dead. I suspect the courts will eventually be involved and any affiliation with the university will be required to be separated from these now professional sports teams.

This is the complicating variable that has not yet been dealt with by the courts or the NCAA. The requirement that these guys be students, and all of the requirements that students must meet, are not really compatible with being a professional athlete.

Someone is going to have to consider that at some point.

3rdGenAggie · Post by **3rdGenAggie** » April 4th, 2024, 12:55 pm

Let's just hope that Calhoun is our Billy Beane.

NowhereLandAggie · Post by **NowhereLandAggie** » April 4th, 2024, 12:58 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.usu.edu/today/story/opinion ... ion%20rate.

I think a 90% graduation rate in this article by Betsy Cantwell and University of Utah President Taylor R. Randall begs to differ.

Heathen · Post by **Heathen** » April 4th, 2024, 1:01 pm

cval wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:45 pm

88USUAggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:36 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another perspective - when I was a student, I was envious of anyone on an athletic scholarship. I understood...as did every athlete, that their chance at making a living playing a game was extremely...extremely limited, but they were getting an opportunity to play a game AND have their education paid for.

Again, as a student paying my way, I understood, and saw first hand (I had a couple of football players as close friends) the sacrifices student athletes made and the work they had to do to juggle school and their sport. Fast forward to today, I don't know how I would feel knowing a "fellow student" was not only getting their education paid for...but was making more money playing a game for the same institution I was paying, than I could dream of making as a new graduate with a BS.

This tremendous inequity between students and paid student athletes is something that I do not see discussed at all, but will have to be rationalized at some point. Regardless of where the money comes from, how does the university justify paying some students hundreds of thousands of dollars, while others eat ramen every night? The term student athlete is truly dead. I suspect the courts will eventually be involved and any affiliation with the university will be required to be separated from these now professional sports teams.
This is the complicating variable that has not yet been dealt with by the courts or the NCAA. The requirement that these guys be students, and all of the requirements that students must meet, are not really compatible with being a professional athlete.

Someone is going to have to consider that at some point.

This is the big contradiction that nobody wants to acknowledge and that is hard to solve. It's easy to just say that the players are the product and deserve a piece of the pie - I can agree with that. The revenue model does not align with the player payout though because NIL exists outside of the NCAA revenue model of ticket sales and TV deals. Add in the fact that revenue producing sports prop up non-revenue sports and then factor in Title 9 - hard to find a good solution. As has been pointed out, athletes transferring schools 3-4 times and making hundreds of thousands playing ball removes the emphasis from being a student and makes it about impossible to get a meaningful degree/education. Seems inconsistent with the stated mission of most schools. Student athlete? Um, ok, not really. It's messy and with nobody really in charge, probably stays that way until the whole thing eats itself or fizzles out.

hickaggie · Post by **hickaggie** » April 4th, 2024, 1:50 pm

cval wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:45 pm

88USUAggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:36 pm

JonnyCienPesos wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 11:41 am

cval wrote:There was a time when the student part of the equation was really important. I miss that time.
It was never important. We just pretended like it was.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Another perspective - when I was a student, I was envious of anyone on an athletic scholarship. I understood...as did every athlete, that their chance at making a living playing a game was extremely...extremely limited, but they were getting an opportunity to play a game AND have their education paid for.

Again, as a student paying my way, I understood, and saw first hand (I had a couple of football players as close friends) the sacrifices student athletes made and the work they had to do to juggle school and their sport. Fast forward to today, I don't know how I would feel knowing a "fellow student" was not only getting their education paid for...but was making more money playing a game for the same institution I was paying, than I could dream of making as a new graduate with a BS.

This tremendous inequity between students and paid student athletes is something that I do not see discussed at all, but will have to be rationalized at some point. Regardless of where the money comes from, how does the university justify paying some students hundreds of thousands of dollars, while others eat ramen every night? The term student athlete is truly dead. I suspect the courts will eventually be involved and any affiliation with the university will be required to be separated from these now professional sports teams.
This is the complicating variable that has not yet been dealt with by the courts or the NCAA. The requirement that these guys be students, and all of the requirements that students must meet, are not really compatible with being a professional athlete.

Someone is going to have to consider that at some point.

Bingo. Right now they are technically being paid by independent NIL deals which probably can't be really be fully governed even with the best league, collective bargaining salary cap exc. However, non ROI NIL money would mostly dry up in Divisions with similarly situated teams in a real structured league in favor of donations to the school.

If they ever get to that point, Men's basketball and Football will either have to be an entity apart from the University that pays for the use of the facilities and name or separate entities owned by the Universities and managed similar to endowment investments. Otherwise Title 9 will make it unworkable. At that point what is the point of forcing them to enroll at all.

Until and unless that happens someday, if you don't want them paid donors have to stop contributing to the collectives which will never happen.

Alydar · Post by **Alydar** » April 4th, 2024, 2:50 pm

TrueAG wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:05 pm

cval wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 12:04 pm
Well, we used to track progress towards graduation and require the completion of at least 12 credits per semester.

Can you even do that if they here for one year, and it is their third of four schools?
Are those in the portal still going to class?

Yes. At least last year they did. I had a sports marketing class with Ashworth and Rylan Jones and they both came through the rest of the year while in the portal and after committing. I remember Ashworth speaking about the portal process and choosing Creighton after he committed since it was sports related class.

Coloraggie · Post by **Coloraggie** » April 4th, 2024, 3:43 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 4:36 pm
Honestly, the starting forwards before portal additions should be Johnson and Dallin Grant.
Dallin Grant was a shooter in HS.

So you think Templin is better than Osobor but he shouldn't be starting over Johnson or Grant? So both of them must be two steps ahead of Osobor, right? In that case we should go undefeated in the regular season, be a number 1 seed and reach the final four. I mean, that is if we have 3 post players better than Great Osobor.

Obviously, I don't think any of them are better than Osobor but hoping that they become very solid fundamental players that are key pieces to a MWC Championship team.

SLB · Post by **SLB** » April 4th, 2024, 3:54 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:43 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 4:36 pm
Honestly, the starting forwards before portal additions should be Johnson and Dallin Grant.
Dallin Grant was a shooter in HS.
So you think Templin is better than Osobor but he shouldn't be starting over Johnson or Grant? So both of them must be two steps ahead of Osobor, right? In that case we should go undefeated in the regular season, be a number 1 seed and reach the final four. I mean, that is if we have 3 post players better than Great Osobor.

Obviously, I don't think any of them are better than Osobor but hoping that they become very solid fundamental players that are key pieces to a MWC Championship team.

So many on this board said Templin was gone that I thought he was gone.

trevordude · Post by **trevordude** » April 4th, 2024, 5:55 pm

Osobor staying would be the biggest "recruit commitment" in USU history?

I know they don't get stars like high school kids, but they may as well

cval · Post by **cval** » April 4th, 2024, 5:57 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:54 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:43 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 4:36 pm
Honestly, the starting forwards before portal additions should be Johnson and Dallin Grant.
Dallin Grant was a shooter in HS.
So you think Templin is better than Osobor but he shouldn't be starting over Johnson or Grant? So both of them must be two steps ahead of Osobor, right? In that case we should go undefeated in the regular season, be a number 1 seed and reach the final four. I mean, that is if we have 3 post players better than Great Osobor.

Obviously, I don't think any of them are better than Osobor but hoping that they become very solid fundamental players that are key pieces to a MWC Championship team.
So many on this board said Templin was gone that I thought he was gone.

I don’t remember many saying Templin was gone. Seems like he has always been considered among the most likely to stay.

Post by **aggies22** » April 4th, 2024, 8:01 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:54 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:43 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 4:36 pm
Honestly, the starting forwards before portal additions should be Johnson and Dallin Grant.
Dallin Grant was a shooter in HS.
So you think Templin is better than Osobor but he shouldn't be starting over Johnson or Grant? So both of them must be two steps ahead of Osobor, right? In that case we should go undefeated in the regular season, be a number 1 seed and reach the final four. I mean, that is if we have 3 post players better than Great Osobor.

Obviously, I don't think any of them are better than Osobor but hoping that they become very solid fundamental players that are key pieces to a MWC Championship team.
So many on this board said Templin was gone that I thought he was gone.

I said he was staying.

bigblue32 · Post by **bigblue32** » April 4th, 2024, 8:05 pm

aggies22 wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 8:01 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:54 pm

Coloraggie wrote: ↑
April 4th, 2024, 3:43 pm

SLB wrote: ↑
April 3rd, 2024, 4:36 pm
Honestly, the starting forwards before portal additions should be Johnson and Dallin Grant.
Dallin Grant was a shooter in HS.
So you think Templin is better than Osobor but he shouldn't be starting over Johnson or Grant? So both of them must be two steps ahead of Osobor, right? In that case we should go undefeated in the regular season, be a number 1 seed and reach the final four. I mean, that is if we have 3 post players better than Great Osobor.

Obviously, I don't think any of them are better than Osobor but hoping that they become very solid fundamental players that are key pieces to a MWC Championship team.
So many on this board said Templin was gone that I thought he was gone.
I said he was staying.

He sure did

ineptimusprime · Post by **ineptimusprime** » April 4th, 2024, 8:44 pm

@aggies22 is sure right a lot for someone that’s wrong all the time.

Upcoming Events

Event Results

Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

Re: Great Osobor

USU Forums

MWC Forums

Upcoming/Past Opponents

Schedules

Upcoming Events

Event Results

Basketball

National Polls/Rankings

Stats

Football

National Polls/Rankings

Stats

Newspapers

Newsletters

Radio

Blogs

Podcasts

Websites

Donate