NCAA seems challenged to keep good players. VCU had the culture to develop and build a team. MRs will develop young men into animals and give them a system. Bones Hyland is not a great example. That guy was just a talent. Justin Tillman stuck around through all types of sh$t and I feel could have been coached better. But, stuck around. VCU could have done better with him but he developed. Not as good has he could have. Now he is bouncing around. I think he could have been a freak on defense after he filled out and learned to be a basketball player with IQ. You can really see how Seniors even with less athletic abilities are able to outplay much more talented sophomores. Is there some type of if you don't like it get the F out? How does MR get the right mix of recruitment and culture to keep some of these guys? It just seems that players need to play together longer to really get the chemistry down to get that slight advantage to win more. Constantly recruiting role players from the transfer pool does not seem like a good long term solution. Switching teams and systems seems like going backwards. I mean, players have breakouts. Can't some be convinced to wait for that? I think that there is the balance with basketball IQ, natural shooting ability, and athleticism. I know that that MRs is really point guard focused with havoc mentality. One, thing you can say is that the BDC develops the players if they want to do the work. We could see that with MSS. Is there something lacking on the actual culture or development on IQ? Or, is this just why the NCAA is just a stepping stone for Euro ball or G league? It was pretty obvious that Shaka made a culture and everyone around him became better. The coaches and the players. You see that with winning Teams. Then you saw people like will Wade take the Duke approach and just bribe the best players. I don't think I will ever see what Shaka did again.