2014 roster

Donate To GopherHole
G

GopherNation

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
419
Reaction score
1
Points
18
I have been out of the loop all summer in terms of roster additions, curious what our roster is looking like for this year?
 


Andre Hollins
Austin Hollins
Malik Smith
Joey King/Charles Buggs
Elliot Elliason

I think King starts if he is ruled eligible, but Buggs will get plenty of playing time. Our backups look like this:

G Dre Mathieu
G Mav Ahanmisi
G Wally Ellenson
G Daquein McNeil
G Kendal Shell
F Oto Osenieks
C Mo Walker

As you can see we have plenty of depth at guard and our frontcourt leaves alot to be desired.
 

Ha. I haven't been able to find a roster anywhere, so if anyone has access to anything they can share, thanks in advance.
 

Joey King being elligible to play this season becomes more questionable every day!! Feels like we're getting hung out to dry by the NCAA. Joey is the one that will suffer the most. The NCAA will probably determine that hs is inelligibile about four weeks after the Gophs start practice so that Minn doesn't know how to prepare for the upcoming season.

NCAA = !@@#$#$#@^@%$##%^&#$*&*&^%^((*))(*&_*(789*&_&*(-*(&-_(*&789987^&8^&6%^54$43%#%2435$#%43%3$@%34%3%#%34%%!!!!!! :banghead: :banghead:

I loathe the MFin pompus bureaucrats of this world who have no concern about the people affected by their thoughtless decisions.

Just sayin!!
 




WolfontheProwl said:
Why would King be eligible?
Click to expand...

From the time he was looking at coming here it was thought he'd get a hardship waiver because of his brother. I would guess that's one reason the coaching staff took him (remember, for a while there was a question of whether we'd give him a scholarship or only take him as a walk on).

Now that was 4-5 months ago. If his brother was getting treatment then, but the disease later goes into remission while the NCAA is piddling around with the waiver request, does the NCAA now get to say, well, it's not a hardship waiver because the family member no longer needs treatment? That would be RIDICULOUS ... but of course par for the course with everything else the F'ing NCAA has done lately.

I'm getting nervous about this situation. No Buckles + no King turns us from an NCAA team to a borderline NIT team in my opinion.
 

It seems strange to me that a decision hasn't been made about King yet. I know the Gophers didn't request a waiver right away, but does anyone even know where it's at? Have the Gophers requested a waiver yet for sure?

Too bad Hageman is so good at football. Can you imagine him under the glass?
 



Wally will definitely get his chance this year at the three if he can rebound. I see no combination at the 4 and 5 that will rebound well enough without a solid 3 rebounder?
 

BballJones said:
It seems strange to me that a decision hasn't been made about King yet. I know the Gophers didn't request a waiver right away, but does anyone even know where it's at? Have the Gophers requested a waiver yet for sure? Too bad Hageman is so good at football. Can you imagine him under the glass?
Click to expand...

The waiver has definitely been filed.
 

king is on record saying he would attend an out of state University if the gophs did not offer a scholly...does not help his case. King is not nearly good enough to make the difference between NIT and NCAA ...get real
 

Jim Cramer said:
king is on record saying he would attend an out of state University if the gophs did not offer a scholly...does not help his case. King is not nearly good enough to make the difference between NIT and NCAA ...get real
Click to expand...
Well lucky for the Gophers, the NCAA doesn't base it's decisions on your thoughts about one interview question. THE SCOUT!
 



Jim Cramer said:
king is on record saying he would attend an out of state University if the gophs did not offer a scholly...does not help his case. King is not nearly good enough to make the difference between NIT and NCAA ...get real
Click to expand...

Whoa, nobody said that Scout ... and if the NCAA is looking at Gopherhole interviews for their "record" then they're in even worse shape than I thought. Some reporter's second-hand transcription of King's response to a specific question, in a context that may not be apparent to anyone, should be irrelevant.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom