Creighton banking on transfer Wes Enis as key piece in post-McDermott rebuild

Creighton’s transition from the Greg McDermott era is not just a coaching change, it is a roster reset aimed at turning the program back toward the level it reached during much of the last 16 seasons. McDermott’s retirement opened the door for new head coach Alan Huss to set a different approach, and the program’s transfer focus is beginning to crystallize. Among the incoming pieces being discussed in the buildup to 2026-27, Wes Enis is framed as the most important team-transfer factor for whether the Bluejays can return to Big East relevance quickly.

The stakes are clear because Creighton’s 2025-26 season fell short of its own postseason standard. The Bluejays finished 16-18, and while they made a semifinal run at the Crown, the overall result ended a streak of five consecutive trips to the NCAA Tournament. That combination, a losing record paired with an early end to the postseason pursuit relative to expectations, is the type of season that accelerates changes in staffing and personnel rather than allowing the program to “wait for next year.”

In that context, transfer additions carry more weight than they might on a team with a stable offseason. Creighton is trying to navigate the immediate adjustment period that often follows a coaching handoff, including new schemes, new expectations, and new roles for returning players. Bringing in a transfer like Enis becomes a way to add at least one proven building block that can fit Huss’s system sooner than a purely developmental plan.

Wes Enis is described as the central transfer piece in the 2026-27 outlook, which suggests Creighton views his presence as more than depth. In practical terms, the most “important” transfers are usually expected to do one or more of the following: provide reliable production, stabilize a specific on-court function (such as scoring, rim pressure, or perimeter creation), and offer continuity-like value during a year when the program is still learning what life looks like under the new head coach. In the most likely scenario, Enis is treated as a foundational option around which Huss can organize the rest of the rotation.

The background behind the Enis discussion also matters. Creighton has a long institutional history of building competitive teams in the Big East, and after missing the NCAA Tournament for the first time in five years, the pressure on the offseason is to move from “rebuilding” to “re-entering the race.” At the same time, there is a difference between adding talent and reshaping a team that was already short on results. Any transfer impact will ultimately be measured by how quickly the Bluejays turn their new pieces and coaching adjustments into consistent conference play.

What to watch next is whether Enis’s role matches Creighton’s stated need for immediate improvement. If the Bluejays are counting on him to be a core contributor rather than a rotational add, then preseason practices, early exhibition usage, and the way the rotation is structured in the first stretch of the schedule will all be major indicators. The Bluejays’ performance in Big East games, particularly how they handle late-game possessions and sustain effectiveness across the full 40 minutes, will also shape whether this offseason move becomes the kind of turning point Creighton needs.

Finally, the program’s coaching shift will remain the broader narrative thread. McDermott’s retirement ended a familiar coaching rhythm, and Huss’s assignment is not only to win, but to establish an on-court identity that can survive the inevitable growing pains of a roster transition. Enis being labeled as Creighton’s most important transfer for 2026-27 is a report that the staff believes the rebuild can be accelerated, not delayed, if the new foundation clicks early.