[BostonCard]

I think on the balance, this is probably a positive.  There's no question we are in a hole, and the transition from Shaw to Taylor did not go as smoothly as we would have wanted, at least from a recruiting perspective.  So, I think there is a lot of value in getting 2025 recruiting off to a strong start, which this commitment helps establish.  But the longer the lead time unitil a recruit enrolls, the greater the uncertainty of any evaluation (starting with whether they will even be in the final class).  I think Matt was wise to say "We should revisit this in a year as March of sophomore year is far too early to have meaningful rankings".  I would be interested in reading such an evaluation next spring.

I will take the positives from this: the staff is working hard on recruiting and seems to be putting a premium on identifying and recruiting talented players early.  Whether Hoitink specifically will pan out is much more of a question mark.

BC

[BostonCard]

I think on the balance, this is probably a positive.  There's no question we are in a hole, and the transition from Shaw to Taylor did not go as smoothly as we would have wanted, at least from a recruiting perspective.  So, I think there is a lot of value in getting 2025 recruiting off to a strong start, which this commitment helps establish.  But the longer the lead time unitil a recruit enrolls, the greater the uncertainty of any evaluation (starting with whether they will even be in the final class).  I think Matt was wise to say "We should revisit this in a year as March of sophomore year is far too early to have meaningful rankings".  I would be interested in reading such an evaluation next spring.

I will take the positives from this: the staff is working hard on recruiting and seems to be putting a premium on identifying and recruiting talented players early.  Whether Hoitink specifically will pan out is much more of a question mark.

BC