Well, whether both are one-bid leagues or not my original point is there will be a step up in competition when you come over. That point is mutually exclusive to how many bids one conference got over the other. It's actually a moot point with respect to what you can expect and how you'll finish. It (# of bids) means nothing in that context.

It's like saying the SWAC and Sun Belt are equally as good from a competition standpoint because they both only got one bid. It's a meaningless analogy.

(05-30-2014 10:11 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Well, whether both are one-bid leagues or not my original point is there will be a step up in competition when you come over. That point is mutually exclusive to how many bids one conference got over the other. It's actually a moot point with respect to what you can expect and how you'll finish. It (# of bids) means nothing in that context.

No one can label any "conf." as a one bid league....Even the SUn Belt has had at large bids to NCAA.....If a team takes care of business than a "conf." can have more than one bid....The selection comm. does not look at conf. and automatically says CUSA is a one bid league! It comes down to the individual teams and with the A-10 getting 5 in this past season, no reason to think with the right schedule and quality wins individual teams and as a whole CUSA can get more than 1 team in to the dance....

I agree 518. That's why I've been on here talking about or hoping the league will get together and figure out the scheduling issue.

But all I keep hearing is how coaches continue to say they can't get teams to play us. I've heard it from Kermit, La Tech, USM, UAB, etc. About half the conference's coaches have said something about problems sheduling in the past year.

(05-30-2014 10:01 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 09:42 AM)Nugget49er Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:41 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:28 PM)MT FAN Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:52 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  If Western finishes out of the top 3 there will be a lot of angry Topper fans

You guys loss 6 conference games last year in a crappy conference. That many losses would have put you at 6 place in CUSA last year. Of course, you guys would have lost many more in a much better CUSA. I see you guys finishing in the 6 to 8 range this year.

All I know is the 2nd (WKU) and 3rd (UL-L) place SBC beat the top 2 CUSA teams, Georgia State beat CUSA 6th place team and TXST be CUSA's 7th place team with 3 out of the 4 being road games for the SBC and CUSA won a few against the SBC top and bottom teams mostly at home...

so being better in what way? RPI? The RPI is all about winning OOC games and CUSA played a bunch of weak OOC teams and won while most SBC schools took a check for a loss. That is the difference in the RPI.

But let me ask you a question. Since the MUTS loss 3 conference games last year and replacing 10 of your 13 players where would you rank your school?

So you were against WKU moving conferences? Interesting.

not to answer for him but kinda answering for him....no we weren't against moving conferences. after 30+ years in the belt that was enough for a change in scenery.

we do believe it is a step up in hoops. i personally believe the way the sunbelt is setup in football it will be a better 'on the field' product for a few years. not always and there's not a huge gap or anything. not putting my new conference down. just telling it the way i see it.

we are thrilled to be in a conference where there can be a 5 page thread on hoops in the month of june (practically june). sunbelt doesn't care about hoops. their fans don't and their administrations don't.

c-usa schools do.

but here's where i differ. i don't see another ONE-BID conference on par with the NBA Western Conference and that's the way some of the middle fans and some of our OWN fans are acting.

a step up. a move we wanted to make. my knees aren't knocking. and as long as middle keeps kermit the choker we'll never have to worry about them come tourney time.

And as long as Ray's coaching WKU, you'll kill the conference with an RPI above 120 and will be a dead fish until the tournament starts.

(05-30-2014 09:24 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  And you just said the very same thing I was pointing out.

I guess you're a ass also?

Just in case you don't know what we said to make us asses...

not one of us knows what we will get out of a freshman, some take to the college game quickly, some take years to adjust and grow into the college game, and some never do.

So replacing 4 Sr's who started or at least played starers minutes for just about every game since they came to UAB with all freshman isn't your usual way to go from 8th to 3rd.

As for this former starter at VT....
in your eyes Jordan Swing became less of a player because he shot 37%
Robert Brown has yet to shoot over 36% and shot 33.1%, 23.5%, 63.8% his last year at VT. With a offensive rating of 92.5 his fr year and 78.8 his last year at VT.

Even with Jordan Swing's dropped production his offensive rating was 105

Now if a UAB fans want to call me a ass for pointing that out...

that's OK with me.

The thing about our seniors is they pretty much sucked as a collective group last year. Rucker had the heart of a champion, but he was 6'5" and a PF playing SF. He couldn't consistently make a 14 footer, and he got a ton of rebounds because we missed every shot we took last year. Swing was a smart player, but he lost his shot. Rob Williams was a glue guy. He did all the little things, but when everybody else struggled, he couldn't put the team on his back. Faz is about the only guy I'd want back, he was consistent and he had good size.

As far as Robert Brown goes, he played, and started in the ACC. I don't expect him to be the best player on our team, but I expect him to be very good. His sophomore season, he had 8 very good games, and then fell into a funk for whatever reason. I'm hoping we can get that guy back. I expect our starting lineup will be:
Frazier
Brown
Watts
Washington
Mehinti

All of those guys have played significant D-1 minutes. We are relying on freshmen and 1 sophomore for depth. Like I've said, I don't expect them all to pan out, but I do expect at least a couple to. If we can get a solid 8-9 man rotation going, UAB will be tough, because that starting group should be about as good as any in the conference.

(05-30-2014 10:23 AM)theboro Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 10:01 AM)dahbeed Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 09:42 AM)Nugget49er Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:41 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:28 PM)MT FAN Wrote:  You guys loss 6 conference games last year in a crappy conference. That many losses would have put you at 6 place in CUSA last year. Of course, you guys would have lost many more in a much better CUSA. I see you guys finishing in the 6 to 8 range this year.

All I know is the 2nd (WKU) and 3rd (UL-L) place SBC beat the top 2 CUSA teams, Georgia State beat CUSA 6th place team and TXST be CUSA's 7th place team with 3 out of the 4 being road games for the SBC and CUSA won a few against the SBC top and bottom teams mostly at home...

so being better in what way? RPI? The RPI is all about winning OOC games and CUSA played a bunch of weak OOC teams and won while most SBC schools took a check for a loss. That is the difference in the RPI.

But let me ask you a question. Since the MUTS loss 3 conference games last year and replacing 10 of your 13 players where would you rank your school?

So you were against WKU moving conferences? Interesting.

not to answer for him but kinda answering for him....no we weren't against moving conferences. after 30+ years in the belt that was enough for a change in scenery.

we do believe it is a step up in hoops. i personally believe the way the sunbelt is setup in football it will be a better 'on the field' product for a few years. not always and there's not a huge gap or anything. not putting my new conference down. just telling it the way i see it.

we are thrilled to be in a conference where there can be a 5 page thread on hoops in the month of june (practically june). sunbelt doesn't care about hoops. their fans don't and their administrations don't.

c-usa schools do.

but here's where i differ. i don't see another ONE-BID conference on par with the NBA Western Conference and that's the way some of the middle fans and some of our OWN fans are acting.

a step up. a move we wanted to make. my knees aren't knocking. and as long as middle keeps kermit the choker we'll never have to worry about them come tourney time.

And as long as Ray's coaching WKU, you'll kill the conference with an RPI above 120 and will be a dead fish until the tournament starts.

borracho.....ray took over western hoops at its lowest point in the last 15 years. ken pol pot mcdummy mcdonald did his personal best at destroying a program.

you know very little about football and even less about hoops. i'd tell you to stick to something you know but i don't have a clue what you do know.

ray couldn't go full juco like your boy kermit is doing every year because pol pot mcdummy had us on the fringe of apr problems. in 2 1/2 years he's had us in 2 ncaa tourneys. he's finally turned the roster over somewhat and brought in a little athleticism which was our weakest point.

when i read statements like you just made i remember you said bobby rainey wasn't a legit d-1 running back.

it's like when they asked bobby knight if he was worried in a game....he said no....he looked down at the other bench and coach xxxxx was still on the sidelines.

that's kinda how i treat your read on sports.

con amor siempre,

your buddy dahbeed.

(05-30-2014 09:42 AM)Nugget49er Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:41 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:28 PM)MT FAN Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 03:52 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  If Western finishes out of the top 3 there will be a lot of angry Topper fans

You guys loss 6 conference games last year in a crappy conference. That many losses would have put you at 6 place in CUSA last year. Of course, you guys would have lost many more in a much better CUSA. I see you guys finishing in the 6 to 8 range this year.

All I know is the 2nd (WKU) and 3rd (UL-L) place SBC beat the top 2 CUSA teams, Georgia State beat CUSA 6th place team and TXST be CUSA's 7th place team with 3 out of the 4 being road games for the SBC and CUSA won a few against the SBC top and bottom teams mostly at home...

so being better in what way? RPI? The RPI is all about winning OOC games and CUSA played a bunch of weak OOC teams and won while most SBC schools took a check for a loss. That is the difference in the RPI.

But let me ask you a question. Since the MUTS loss 3 conference games last year and replacing 10 of your 13 players where would you rank your school?

So you were against WKU moving conferences? Interesting.

Of course not CUSA is a better basketball conference with way more potential. But the facts of last year are just that. But when it comes to the RPI I think I know more than the average person on the ins and out....

since I use to do my own RPI back around 2000 when there were only 2 others. I only did it for our fans but I was able to run models where I could add a win against a 250 RPI team and take a loss to a top 50 RPI out of the mix for all conference schools and show how the affect benefited the conference more than each school got from playing that top 50 team.

Now don't take that to mean I want everyone to schedule bad teams OOC...

nope, schedule to your abilities. If you are suppose to have a decent team with the chance of a at large. Schedule that way. If you are in a down period...schedule hat way. The OOC wins over poor teams are better for the conference that getting beat by Duke.

Playing for a check and taking the loss was the way 80% of the SBC scheduled OOC games. That why before the conference season began the SBC was 13th or 14th. That's also why the conference dropped to 20th.

poor OOC w/l% will do that no matter who each individual school plays.

CUSA played a weaker OOC schedule and won more games Before the conference season started CUSA was 19th or 20th. SBC fans were taking that to mean..the SBC was better and why they should play top teams and take the loss. As I pointed out that will change once conference play starts...

it did. So my point was you can't only go by the RPI to say which conference is better when both conferences took a different approach during OOC. The same thing goes for Western's RPI.

One extra OOC win by every school can made the difference between 20th and 14th. Or a team ranked 120th or 80th...or similar

I hate not being a part of this conversation, but it will be at least a year or two before, we even get to the mediocre stage, I fear.

Sounds like the WKU fans are setting themselves up for massive disappointment this coming season.

(05-30-2014 11:29 AM)wh49er Wrote:  Sounds like the WKU fans are setting themselves up for massive disappointment this coming season.

No, they are setting us up for all the excuses we'll have to hear.

You probably don't know this but wkcc has never lost a basketball game because the other team was better. There's always an extenuating circumstance that prohibited them from winning.

I would offer the stirring the pot emoticon but western fans have already done that in this thread. So...

(05-30-2014 08:52 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 12:05 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 09:50 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:41 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:28 PM)MT FAN Wrote:  You guys loss 6 conference games last year in a crappy conference. That many losses would have put you at 6 place in CUSA last year. Of course, you guys would have lost many more in a much better CUSA. I see you guys finishing in the 6 to 8 range this year.

All I know is the 2nd (WKU) and 3rd (UL-L) place SBC beat the top 2 CUSA teams, Georgia State beat CUSA 6th place team and TXST be CUSA's 7th place team with 3 out of the 4 being road games for the SBC and CUSA won a few against the SBC top and bottom teams mostly at home...

so being better in what way? RPI? The RPI is all about winning OOC games and CUSA played a bunch of weak OOC teams and won while most SBC schools took a check for a loss. That is the difference in the RPI.

But let me ask you a question. Since the MUTS loss 3 conference games last year and replacing 10 of your 13 players where would you rank your school?

The selection committee did not give C-USA its due this season. I was completely blown away with how much better C-USA is in basketball than the Sun Belt. Even with Memphis leaving this league is a beast. Bigger, more physical players. Better athletes. Better shooters. I wasn't expecting that. I consider us very lucky that we were able to tie for the league title. I believe you guys will also be pleased with how much better the brand of basketball is.

That said, we do lose a lot but also return some core guys that were major contributors last year. And Kermit seems to be signing better players every year. I can't answer how we'll be, because with so many new faces it's difficult to know how well they will come together. I suspect we will be somewhere in the middle of the pack next season. Probably a top 100 program but not good enough to make the dance. As I've said before basketball is going to be where C-USA 3.0 leaves it mark. It will indeed be fun.

I guess it would be a surprise to you if I told you last year the SBC was the better shooting conference...all around. Not only that but the SBC avg more 6'8-up players in the top 7 for each school. 1.4 players 6'8 or up to 1.3 for CUSA

SBC on top CUSA on bottom (avg's for each conference)
FG%
43.2
42.9

efg%
49.4
48.5

ft%
69.4
66.3

3FG%
34.2
33.1

BPG
3.4
3.3

Below is based on the top 7 players by avg mins played. Some schools I went to the 8th player because of a injury and a player didn't play but a few games..I left out the player that played less than half even if he was in the top 7 in avg mins played

I said bigger and more physical. For starters, bigger doesn't necessarily imply just height and not coincidentally the more physical nature of playing in this league will take its toll more so than some of the 6'9" stick figures and tree stumps that play in the Belt.

The number of players over 6'8" is irrelevant. The ability of those players to step outside and shoot a 17 footer or back you down or block shots has nothing to do with which conference has more players taller than 6'8".

Like I said I was surprised at how much bigger, stronger and athletic this league was compared to the Sun Belt. Believe it or don't. Doesn't matter to me. Good luck if you don't prepare yourself that on any given night just about any team in this league is going to be capable of taking you down.

You Western fans are funny still living in the deep past with statements like if MT can win a share of the league then it translates into something you will do next year magically forgetting that it's been a long time since you guys have even beaten Middle Tennessee aside from that one game a couple of years ago. What is it something like 1-7 or 1-8 over the past four or five years?? What happened with us last year has nothing to do with how well WKCC will compete next season.

Whether you like it or not the truth is Middle Tennessee has been very good in basketball over the past few years. Will we still be that good next year? I have no idea. But these statements are hilarious and certainly par for the course for the red blob to the north.

So now you want me to go back and list them by weight? For a conference that was so big and strong answer me one thing...

why did 3 of the smallest teams finish at the top of the conference? For such strong, big, players, that bang you, back you down, or step outside to hit 18 fters why were there only 3 players listed 6'8 or over that made the All Conference 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team?

I'm sure there are some stud big guys in CUSA but as I pointed out above....

it's a little man's conference

(05-30-2014 11:36 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:29 AM)wh49er Wrote:  Sounds like the WKU fans are setting themselves up for massive disappointment this coming season.

No, they are setting us up for all the excuses we'll have to hear.

You probably don't know this but wkcc has never lost a basketball game because the other team was better. There's always an extenuating circumstance that prohibited them from winning.

I would offer the stirring the pot emoticon but western fans have already done that in this thread. So...

Let me answer this by saying...

in one of our worse periods in our history

Western has more NCAA win over those 5 years than the rest of CUSA combine. So yes we expect to win, go to the NCAA tourney, even in our bad years...

which we are coming out of.

(05-30-2014 11:52 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:36 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:29 AM)wh49er Wrote:  Sounds like the WKU fans are setting themselves up for massive disappointment this coming season.

No, they are setting us up for all the excuses we'll have to hear.

You probably don't know this but wkcc has never lost a basketball game because the other team was better. There's always an extenuating circumstance that prohibited them from winning.

I would offer the stirring the pot emoticon but western fans have already done that in this thread. So...

Let me answer this by saying...

in one of our worse periods in our history

Western has more NCAA win over those 5 years than the rest of CUSA combine. So yes we expect to win, go to the NCAA tourney, even in our bad years...

which we are coming out of.

So is Charlotte. In fact, the last 6-8 years has been our worst stretch in ~30 years. BTW, how many "at-large" bids has WKU gotten over the last 20-25 years? Serious question.

(05-30-2014 11:39 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 08:52 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 12:05 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 09:50 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 06:41 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  All I know is the 2nd (WKU) and 3rd (UL-L) place SBC beat the top 2 CUSA teams, Georgia State beat CUSA 6th place team and TXST be CUSA's 7th place team with 3 out of the 4 being road games for the SBC and CUSA won a few against the SBC top and bottom teams mostly at home...

so being better in what way? RPI? The RPI is all about winning OOC games and CUSA played a bunch of weak OOC teams and won while most SBC schools took a check for a loss. That is the difference in the RPI.

But let me ask you a question. Since the MUTS loss 3 conference games last year and replacing 10 of your 13 players where would you rank your school?

The selection committee did not give C-USA its due this season. I was completely blown away with how much better C-USA is in basketball than the Sun Belt. Even with Memphis leaving this league is a beast. Bigger, more physical players. Better athletes. Better shooters. I wasn't expecting that. I consider us very lucky that we were able to tie for the league title. I believe you guys will also be pleased with how much better the brand of basketball is.

That said, we do lose a lot but also return some core guys that were major contributors last year. And Kermit seems to be signing better players every year. I can't answer how we'll be, because with so many new faces it's difficult to know how well they will come together. I suspect we will be somewhere in the middle of the pack next season. Probably a top 100 program but not good enough to make the dance. As I've said before basketball is going to be where C-USA 3.0 leaves it mark. It will indeed be fun.

I guess it would be a surprise to you if I told you last year the SBC was the better shooting conference...all around. Not only that but the SBC avg more 6'8-up players in the top 7 for each school. 1.4 players 6'8 or up to 1.3 for CUSA

SBC on top CUSA on bottom (avg's for each conference)
FG%
43.2
42.9

efg%
49.4
48.5

ft%
69.4
66.3

3FG%
34.2
33.1

BPG
3.4
3.3

Below is based on the top 7 players by avg mins played. Some schools I went to the 8th player because of a injury and a player didn't play but a few games..I left out the player that played less than half even if he was in the top 7 in avg mins played

I said bigger and more physical. For starters, bigger doesn't necessarily imply just height and not coincidentally the more physical nature of playing in this league will take its toll more so than some of the 6'9" stick figures and tree stumps that play in the Belt.

The number of players over 6'8" is irrelevant. The ability of those players to step outside and shoot a 17 footer or back you down or block shots has nothing to do with which conference has more players taller than 6'8".

Like I said I was surprised at how much bigger, stronger and athletic this league was compared to the Sun Belt. Believe it or don't. Doesn't matter to me. Good luck if you don't prepare yourself that on any given night just about any team in this league is going to be capable of taking you down.

You Western fans are funny still living in the deep past with statements like if MT can win a share of the league then it translates into something you will do next year magically forgetting that it's been a long time since you guys have even beaten Middle Tennessee aside from that one game a couple of years ago. What is it something like 1-7 or 1-8 over the past four or five years?? What happened with us last year has nothing to do with how well WKCC will compete next season.

Whether you like it or not the truth is Middle Tennessee has been very good in basketball over the past few years. Will we still be that good next year? I have no idea. But these statements are hilarious and certainly par for the course for the red blob to the north.

So now you want me to go back and list them by weight? For a conference that was so big and strong answer me one thing...

why did 3 of the smallest teams finish at the top of the conference? For such strong, big, players, that bang you, back you down, or step outside to hit 18 fters why were there only 3 players listed 6'8 or over that made the All Conference 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team?

I'm sure there are some stud big guys in CUSA but as I pointed out above....

it's a little man's conference

I can't believe I'm having to explain this particuarly for someone who should probably know more about hoops than I do.

The guards are bigger too. There are quite a few 6'6 and 6'7 guys playing on the perimeter. College basketball has defintiely become a guards game. Most teams are playing with three and four guards so you're going to see more guards make all conference. Heck even for us where we weren't necessarily the biggest team we usually went with a line-up that was 6-8, 6-7, 6-7, 6-6 and a point guard.

I wouldn't say three of the four are small. Of the five teams at the top of the league, USM and La Tech were a bit smaller than the rest of the league, which is true but UTEP, Tulsa and MT had big guys that were extremely influential in their runs to the top positions in the league. Our guy, Shawn Jones, was the conference player of the year. It's also why schools like Charlotte and UAB were able to not only play with but beat schools like Michigan and North Carolina, respectively.

(05-30-2014 10:17 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  I agree 518. That's why I've been on here talking about or hoping the league will get together and figure out the scheduling issue.

But all I keep hearing is how coaches continue to say they can't get teams to play us. I've heard it from Kermit, La Tech, USM, UAB, etc. About half the conference's coaches have said something about problems sheduling in the past year.

Agree with both of you. CUSA does not have to be regulated to being a one-bid conference. With the proper scheduling and teams taking advantage of opportunities to beat teams from the power conferences it can be done.

(05-30-2014 12:08 PM)919R Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:52 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:36 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:29 AM)wh49er Wrote:  Sounds like the WKU fans are setting themselves up for massive disappointment this coming season.

No, they are setting us up for all the excuses we'll have to hear.

You probably don't know this but wkcc has never lost a basketball game because the other team was better. There's always an extenuating circumstance that prohibited them from winning.

I would offer the stirring the pot emoticon but western fans have already done that in this thread. So...

Let me answer this by saying...

in one of our worse periods in our history

Western has more NCAA win over those 5 years than the rest of CUSA combine. So yes we expect to win, go to the NCAA tourney, even in our bad years...

which we are coming out of.

So is Charlotte. In fact, the last 6-8 years has been our worst stretch in ~30 years. BTW, how many "at-large" bids has WKU gotten over the last 20-25 years? Serious question.

Young Guns can answer this exactly, but I know at least 3 or 4 times past 15 years we would have gotten an at large bid if we did not win the conf. tournament.... just so happens unlike our brothers from MTSU our best teams won the conf. tournament so we did not have to have an at large bid....I don't see why taking care of business in a conf. tournament is such a bad thing? Now do I expect to win CUSA tournament every season? No I do not, but I would hope (and I am sure most WKU Fans hope) WKU is at least heading toward being what we are historically and that is a TOP 50 program MOST SEASONs(not all but most)....If we are not heading towards this and finish every season outside Top 100 RPI, our Head Coach will be fired unlike MTSU and Kermit who they kept on for years until he finally found that JUCOs is only way he could recruit....

(05-30-2014 11:36 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 11:29 AM)wh49er Wrote:  Sounds like the WKU fans are setting themselves up for massive disappointment this coming season.

No, they are setting us up for all the excuses we'll have to hear.

You probably don't know this but wkcc has never lost a basketball game because the other team was better. There's always an extenuating circumstance that prohibited them from winning.

I would offer the stirring the pot emoticon but western fans have already done that in this thread. So...

Should be a fun season.

(05-30-2014 12:22 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  unlike MTSU and Kermit who they kept on for years until he finally found that JUCOs is only way he could recruit....

That's not necessarily true and again typical wkcc fans to come on and start attacking MT fans, its coaches and its programs. Go back and look where the first comments came from. As usual from western. Never understood why western feels the need to try to tear down MT in every thread they comment in to build themselves up. I guess that's what little brothers do.

Back to the comments, Kermit has found some good players in juco ranks that want to be here. We're not going to turn away good basketball players. I hardly doubt western would either but we're having a lot more success recruiting high school kids now than we've ever had before.

One of our key contributors was a true freshman last year. The guy that's going to replace Sean Jones was a true freshman last year. Of the new guys coming in this year only half of the 10 are jucos, which probably isn't bad considering how many people we're having to sign this year. Probably lucky its not eight. Four are high schoolers including the top signee of the class and one is the Miss State transfer. Just in case you really do like the facts.

Who cares where your players come from if they help you win games?

(05-30-2014 12:41 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  Who cares where your players come from if they help you win games?

The reason I don't like over-relying on JUCOs is because they usually had issues with classwork in the past, glaring holes in their games that limited D1 interest, or in rarer cases, they had behavioral or legal issues that pushed them out of their initial schools.

Throw in that they only get 2 years to play together and they don't get the same kind of time to gel together as a team and become comfortable in the system as four year guys.

Some JUCO players are very good and can be huge assets, I just don't like building a team with them. I prefer to plug holes and build depth with them, not have half or more of the scholarships tied up with them.