Last year;
10 pts/game
64% from the field
41% from 3
63% FT
3 rebounds/game
Not much of a contributor his junior year, only averaged 8 mins/game
Walk on?
PWO - preferred walk on
UPDATED: 8.9.26 with return of Antwone Woolfolk
2026-27 Miami Basketball Scholarship Players (14)
5th SR (2): (F) 6-9 Antwone Woolfolk*, (F) 6-7 Rich Rolf
SR (3) : (G) 5-10 Evan Ipsaro, (F) 6-9 Jackson Kotecki, (F) 6-8 Almar Atlason,
JR (1): (G) 6-2 Luke Skaljac,
SO (6): : (F) 6-7 Kyle Waltz, (C/PF) 6-10 Tyler Robbins, (G) 6-4 Justin Kirby, (G), 6-3 Stevie Elam, (F) 6-9 Preston Copeland, (G) 6-5 Leshawn Stowers**
FR (2)(F) 6-9 Alan Horton, (G) 6-4 Anthony Fresh
[8] Forwards/Bigs: Antwone Woolfolk (6-9), Rich Rolf (6-7), Jackson Kotecki (6-9), Almar Atlason (6-8), Kyle Waltz (6-7), Tyler Robbins (6-10), Preston Copeland (6-9), Alan Horton (6-9)
[6] Guards: Evan Ipsaro, Luke Skaljac, Justin Kirby, Stevie Elam, Leshawn Stowers, Anthony Fresh
*Based upon NCAA June 23, 2026 rule change, it now permits student-athletes up to five-for-five eligibility model.
** Because, Stowers redshirted his freshman year and under the NCAA’s new age-based “five-for-five” eligibility model, traditional redshirts are effectively eliminated. For players who redshirted last season, like Stowers, compliance staff will evaluate his file under a transition provision, applying whichever framework (the old four-seasons-in-five rule or the new five-seasons-in-five rule) that gives him the most favorable outcome. However, I’ve placed him as a SO, as this table utilizes 5-for-5.
Just an FYI…Rich Rolf has only played two years…has a redshirt year at Charlotte. This season is his third year…he will be eligible next season, as well!
That is debatable.
Under the old rules perhaps. He could have potentially gotten a 6th year hardship waiver for injury.
However, if the new rules apply the clock started ticking when he entered UNC-Charlotte in the Fall of 2022. This will be his 5th and final year unless those new rules don’t hold up.
My understanding is that he might still be able to apply for the medical waiver for a 6th year as he is allowed to take the most beneficial rule in his favor having been caught in the transition.
Contrast that with Ipsaro who should automatically get a 5th year without having to apply for a medical waiver that he might not have gotten due to the number of games played last year.
Rolf will be grandfathered in…he will not be penalized and only allowed to play three seasons, while others in his class play five.
Our depth is insane. The competition at practice is going to be amazing.
2 Likes
Ipsaro is eligible for 5th year no matter what. This is only his 4th year. Last year counted as his full 3rd year.
As for Rolf, he is likely done after this season due to the following per NCAA:
Old rule: four seasons of competition within five years
New rule: continuous five-year age/enrollment-based eligibility period
The athlete receives whichever rule produces the more favorable result.
But in Rolf’s example, both rules appear to reach the same result:
- Old rule: 2022-23 through 2026-27 = five-year clock; four seasons played.
- New rule: 2022-23 through 2026-27 = five-year eligibility period; the athlete can compete throughout that period.
- 2027-28 would be year six after initial enrollment.
Therefore, absent a very specific exception, 2026-27 is Rolf’s final year.
I believe the old rule was actually six years for four seasons of eligibility. Plenty of players redshirted and then had a medical redshirt and still played four seasons. We shall see? Most important thing is one day at a time…one game at a time.
Some players even got seven years counting redshirt, medical redshirt and Covid year!
Go Redhawks! 
This roster has insane versatility!!
1 Like
We need to see big crowds from game 1.
4 Likes
Exactly what I said.
Rolf has to rely on getting a medical waiver for the injury he had in the 23-24 season when he only played in 3 games due to a season ending injury.
He does not automatically get another year as this will be his fifth year of eligibility.
Under new rules he would be out of luck. Could benefit due to the transition in rules and get a waiver exception.
Meanwhile, Facebook memories are reminding me of what things were like ten years ago. What a world of difference.
5 Likes
I’m sure Coop wanted to win here (because who would want to sabotage their career), but man he checked out that last season. What a difference a decade makes.
3 Likes
I’m curious whether the bball success will carry over to student crowds for football this season.
2 Likes
Great question, I hope so.
1 Like
For the first time in probably 25+ years, you should have an incoming freshman class that has a lot of kids that are excitedly anticipating going to basketball games. Obviously not 100% of them, but also not 2% of them. Pair that with last years students that should have had a blast at games, and I would think basketball is poised for nice crowds to start the year. Would be amazing if it carried over to football as well.
1 Like
I think students (and older fans) will be there for the home opener (assuming the schedule makes sense). Basketball became a thing to do last year, and as long as they keep winning, I think they continue. Just like hockey in the late 2000s and into the 2010s. If we have some early losses and look to be less relevant, the bandwagon will topple for sure, but Miami students are always good at filling up a rolling bandwagon.
1 Like
I think football’s attendance will rely on winning in nonconference. If we go 2-2 or worse/don’t beat UC, crowds will be the same as usual
2 Likes