Right. Not sure where these arguments are heading. Show me a non-top 50 true freshman at a developmental program like NU who is all big ten worthy when he steps foot on campus. Doesn’t mean they don’t have talent. Just means they need to develop it. Coaching is a part of it, as are factors like player desire and culture.
2025 Transfer Class
- Thread starter ThatkidfromHolland
- Start date
I gave two or maybe three reasons (not excuses) above. The reality is - have any objective third party look at our roster in person and compare it to a normal high-level D1 team; we look overmatched. We are in no way near the level of athlete other teams are, yet we still compete really well. Some of it is a base of talent and some of it is playing smarter (at least we would think we have that advantage), but that only gets you so far. Our coaches prepare these kids extremely well.
On paper, this roster isn’t at that level yet. That said, there are some high-ceiling additions, and Martinelli is serious, proven talent. Next year should be full of flashes and Martinelli pulling some magic out of nowhere to steal a few wins. The last two recruiting classes have brought in some potentially really good players, and a lot of the roster gaps were filled with transfers who have some upside themselves. Potential is just unrealized production and there’s a lot of it here.
The core of the last couple tournament teams has graduated, and now it’s time to retool. These last two recruiting classes, combined with the transfers, have added a lot to be excited about. It’s not really fair to expect a team this young to make a deep tournament run right away, but NU is clearly building toward that in the next 1–2 years. Missing almost completely on a class or two really makes it tough to string together tournament teams.
Obviously, glass half full: Martinelli is legit, and if KJ steps up , along with Page, Mullins, Gelo or someone else…. this team could make some noise. Add some varying depth from various underclassmen and you have your team. It’s just asking for a lot of things to break right.
NU hasn’t really ever had a top tier B1G talented roster top to bottom before. The closest I thought was upper third during 23-24 run. That team had a shot at sweet 16 pre-injuries. The rest have been middle of the pack or worse. There has been some seriously good coaching from this staff. There has been players who put in the work and bought in as well.
Last edited:
Fair, my phrasing was clumsy. I think coaching got Mart to unlock the ability that existed before he ever took a shot. Development is rarely linear and usually occurs in leaps and bounds rather than continuous incremental gains. The staff ensured his ability found the surface, and kudos to them. My point is that this team is not the Bad News Bears winning games on guile and scheme. We have good players all over the roster.
This is a strawman I don’t have much use for. “People are saying” we don’t have as much talent is not an angle of argument I can refute.
But this idea that we are nowhere near the athletic level of other teams is exactly the point I am disagreeing with. We lost two of our best all around guys, two heavy-minutes players (one of whom is one of the better athletes in the conference) and still beat a bunch of teams, still probably had a tournament team athletically if we hadn’t coughed it up against Washington and Nebraska.
You’re saying it is preparation and coaching bringing weaker athletes up. I am saying even with Brooks and Leach we had a B10 roster that could swing. Athletically. On talent.
We are heading to Nirvana: NU in the Final Four. We just disagree on what we see when we look out the window.
Fair points, and “nowhere near” was a bit of an overstatement on my part. But, I think your example of losing two excellent players and competing as well as we did (with the added hindrance of 1-2 notably weak recruiting classes due to Gragg) is direct support for why the coaches get relatively more out of our players than other coaches do with theirs. I do agree our athleticism and talent has improved; it’s not all due to coaches, of course - players play. Our coaches just do relatively more to allow our overall team to perform better as a whole vs. the sum of its parts.
Just my opinion, but I don’t see it at all. Outside of Martinelli I don’t think there’s anyone on the roster who would’ve started on a good big ten team (once Barnhizer was lost). I think good coaching covered a lot of flaws, but that was not a very athletic team compared to the rest of the conference. I don’t mean it as an insult, because it’s a compliment to the coaching staff doing an excellent work maximizing the potential. But at least by the eye test, Northwestern seemed nowhere near as athletic as a lot of the other teams in the league.
Bill carmody was a great coach (albeit unusual system) but poor recruiter overall. We won more on guile and system and luck.
Collin’s has brought in talent (yes Gragg screwed him a couple years) and we win on talent as much as his system. I don’t think he’d be recruiting top transfers if they didn’t think NU could win a lot. The level of talent overall (a few exceptions such as Crawford and Shurna and Vukusic) is much better now.
Collin’s has brought in talent (yes Gragg screwed him a couple years) and we win on talent as much as his system. I don’t think he’d be recruiting top transfers if they didn’t think NU could win a lot. The level of talent overall (a few exceptions such as Crawford and Shurna and Vukusic) is much better now.
Yes, the talent is much better under Collins than Carmody. That doesn’t make it top half of the B1G. Our top players can play in any big ten team, it’s the depth pieces than need to gradually get better.
Yeah, I’m personally not counting on any freshmen to be big contributors immediately but obviously that would be a big bonus
Was speaking more to longer-term development… could be a very effective Big with another couple years of experience and physical development.
Oh, our incoming class is super high upside and could easily be the next great tournament generation in three years, I'm still just very much focused on this being a tournament team next year. College basketball is mostly a year to year game now, you go out and reload your roster every year.
Agreed, but I think Collins’ moves are designed just as much for 26/27 as they are 25/26. I don’t think it’s at all a coincidence that all 3 incoming transfers have at least 2 years of eligibility.
Seems like the idea is to be a “feisty” as possible in 25/26 during Martinelli’s senior year, then have a 2- or 3-year window with a much more balanced and deeper roster. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we only signed 1 HS prospect to replace Mullins and Martinelli after 25/26 then one frontcourt transfer. Hopefully revenue sharing helps with roster retention, then bringing in another transfer to fill out the roster in what feels like it should be a multi-year competitive window.
