SMU had stud recruits coming in their last year of CUSA. ECU doesn't

Leavin this Link here for Still Jonesen (arguing)

http://zagsblog.com/articles/nba-scout-u...prospects/

(10-24-2014 12:55 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 11:07 AM)templefan1 Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 10:45 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 02:36 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 01:58 PM)tnzazz Wrote:  You can't really have a day off in the AAC. In CUSA you could take weeks off.

This^^^. In the c-usa you could rack up wins while players are in a funk. Different ball game here...StillJonesing will figure that out soon enough. Even the so called bottom of the league is full of players that had acc type offers. ECU might be much improved but they aren't going to compete with the top half and the bottom is no easy task either. Temple only had 9-10 players much of last year. Even teams like usf, ucf, tulsa, etc are going to have really talented players.

Only 9 or 10 players . Good god, how many do you think you need in basketball. I could give you plenty of examples of teams with only 7 man rotations that had massive success, final 4's, championships etc. Coach K usually plays his starters heavy minutes and doesn't go but to 8 with the starters heavy minutes. Just about every coach is down to 7 or 8 player rotations by the end of the year for chemistry purposes. the key is you need "good" players which apparently they didn't have, but they are suddenly going to lose 2 of their best from that bad team and get significantly better?

We've been in conferences with nearly everyone of your teams before and most of you just 2 years ago when we were 4th. I can't even believe you would put UCF, USF and Tulsa in the same sentence this year either. Obviously you know nothing about Tulsa if you are. You need to educate yourself bud.

Just stop...Temple during long stretches last year was playing a 7-8 man rotation with 2 freshman (one not highly recruited/not ready for college bb) and 2 walkons...

Temple will be much better this year...I say this from people who have already seen the team this year...night and day I am told from last year...

The Duke example is horrible by the way...you can afford to only use 8 deep when the lineup consisted of 3 five star recruits, 4 four stars, and 1 three star. They only had one freshman in the rotation...that was Jabari Parker....

I didn't even look up this years team, I was talking about past Duke teams, but as you see the greatest Coach there is keeps a pretty short bench. The teams I was referring to including the Latnener ones, which are regarded as the best college teams ever. It was just and example, I could give you examples from nearly any level of teams playing less players than Temple and having much better success.

That was last year's Duke team big guy and now you sound even crazier comparing a random college team (temple) to a Duke team (using 1992) specifically that had over 8 players drafted...

Ok, I'm waiting for you to tell me the teams that played with 2 freshman and 2 walk-ons in their rotations for long stretches of time when they only played 7, 8, 9 man rotations?

Just admit it...you look at some stats and try to blanket statement every team...

I don't have much confidence in Donovan anymore.

(10-23-2014 11:29 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 10:44 AM)First Family Forever Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 09:08 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-22-2014 10:37 AM)First Family Forever Wrote:  

(10-22-2014 08:29 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Since I was mentioned...and I've said 6th is likely our ceiling. I mean good god two spots. I think we finish between 6 to 9 as the floor and there likely isn't 2 craps difference in Temple and Houston. All are very mediocre looking. Tulane also returns 86% of their minutes and should be improved as well.

Temple has 3 transfers that will provide immediate help. Temple has much better overall talent that ECU and Tulane. The Owls should finish in the top 5.

So you really think Temple should be top 5, over a NCAA team/ Top 80 RPI Tulsa team from last year that returns everyone but their coach, who BTW probably added a better X&O coach (not recruiter though) that took Mizz to 30+ wins his first year there when he had others quality talent.

Temple was #178 and lost key contributors on top of that including a transfer to Ohio State but you think they look like a top 5 team on paper because of a 3 ppg guy from Texas is going to not only replace a bigger 14 and 9 guy they lost to Ohio State. Not only replace but improve them 100 spots.

Not to mention the 18ppg and 5rpg, 2.5apg guy they lost in Pepper on top of that from an already stinky 9-22 team. So who replaces him? Those are major losses from a team that already stunk but people are picking them to be an NCAA team, on what other than name I really don't know. Nothing in their loss and additions makes me think they are better than Tulsa.

Tulsa is a team full of 2 star recruits . Temple has a higher overall talent level than Tulsa , ECU , Tulane , UCF and USF . The AAC is a 3 and 4 star player conference. Teams will not finish in the top half of the AAC with CuSA level players. Remember Tulsa won a CUSA without Memphis . You have to forget about what happened in CUSA , it just does not matter.

Temple also has one of the top bench coaches in the NCAA . They should be back in the NCAA .

Tulsa is a team full of 2* really?

Rashad Smith (Rivals 3*)
shaquille Harrison (Rivals 3*)
James Woodard (Rivals 3*)
D'Andre Wright (Rivals 3*)
Emmanuel Ezechionso (big E) (Rivals 3*)
^This could likely be our starting 5 all RIVALS 3*, i mention rivals because I think they are the most accurate at evaluating talent. A lot of these guys were recruited by OU, OSU, and other local schools that are in the top 25.

By the way both of our freshman recruits, Micah Little John and Keondre Dew are Rivals 3* who had offers from OU, Houston, Texas Tech, UCONN, OSU, MEMPHIS, K-State, and more.

Really Woodard and Wright could have been ranked as low level 4 stars they both have the ability to dominate their position (though Wright had a sophomore slump)

The Freshman Dew probably would have been a high 3 low 4 level guy as well but he was late qualifying so we got him as a steal.

(10-23-2014 11:29 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 10:44 AM)First Family Forever Wrote:  

(10-23-2014 09:08 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-22-2014 10:37 AM)First Family Forever Wrote:  

(10-22-2014 08:29 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Since I was mentioned...and I've said 6th is likely our ceiling. I mean good god two spots. I think we finish between 6 to 9 as the floor and there likely isn't 2 craps difference in Temple and Houston. All are very mediocre looking. Tulane also returns 86% of their minutes and should be improved as well.

Temple has 3 transfers that will provide immediate help. Temple has much better overall talent that ECU and Tulane. The Owls should finish in the top 5.

So you really think Temple should be top 5, over a NCAA team/ Top 80 RPI Tulsa team from last year that returns everyone but their coach, who BTW probably added a better X&O coach (not recruiter though) that took Mizz to 30+ wins his first year there when he had others quality talent.

Temple was #178 and lost key contributors on top of that including a transfer to Ohio State but you think they look like a top 5 team on paper because of a 3 ppg guy from Texas is going to not only replace a bigger 14 and 9 guy they lost to Ohio State. Not only replace but improve them 100 spots.

Not to mention the 18ppg and 5rpg, 2.5apg guy they lost in Pepper on top of that from an already stinky 9-22 team. So who replaces him? Those are major losses from a team that already stunk but people are picking them to be an NCAA team, on what other than name I really don't know. Nothing in their loss and additions makes me think they are better than Tulsa.

Tulsa is a team full of 2 star recruits . Temple has a higher overall talent level than Tulsa , ECU , Tulane , UCF and USF . The AAC is a 3 and 4 star player conference. Teams will not finish in the top half of the AAC with CuSA level players. Remember Tulsa won a CUSA without Memphis . You have to forget about what happened in CUSA , it just does not matter.

Temple also has one of the top bench coaches in the NCAA . They should be back in the NCAA .

Tulsa is a team full of 2* really?

Rashad Smith (Rivals 3*)
shaquille Harrison (Rivals 3*)
James Woodard (Rivals 3*)
D'Andre Wright (Rivals 3*)
Emmanuel Ezechionso (big E) (Rivals 3*)
^This could likely be our starting 5 all RIVALS 3*, i mention rivals because I think they are the most accurate at evaluating talent. A lot of these guys were recruited by OU, OSU, and other local schools that are in the top 25.

By the way both of our freshman recruits, Micah Little John and Keondre Dew are Rivals 3* who had offers from OU, Houston, Texas Tech, UCONN, OSU, MEMPHIS, K-State, and more.

Really Woodard and Wright could have been ranked as low level 4 stars they both have the ability to dominate their position (though Wright had a sophomore slump)

The Freshman Dew probably would have been a high 3 low 4 level guy as well but he was late qualifying so we got him as a steal.

(10-21-2014 09:31 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  This is a not a long article, but there was some decent research by the writer on teams that are expected to finish in the bottom of the AAC basketball standings.

11. USF
10. UCF
9. Tulane
8. ECU
7. Houston

http://www.theuconnblog.com/2014/10/20/7...na-Houston

(10-24-2014 02:25 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  SMU had stud recruits coming in their last year of CUSA. ECU doesn't

Actually Nik Moore the point guard transfer from Illinois State was the biggest difference for SMU. It remains to be seen if Whisnant can provide that same difference for ECU.

(10-24-2014 09:12 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(10-24-2014 02:25 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  SMU had stud recruits coming in their last year of CUSA. ECU doesn't

Actually Nik Moore the point guard transfer from Illinois State was the biggest difference for SMU. It remains to be seen if Whisnant can provide that same difference for ECU.

He may have been the player that had the most impact, but SMU had probably 5 new players who contributed a lot last year; they were either sitting out a year or had been signed that fall during their last year of C-USA. It wasn't a surprise that SMU was 500% better last year than they were the year before. That was expected by most outlets.

(10-22-2014 11:10 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I have to agree with SJ I think we finish somewhere between 6th and 9th. Any better would be a smashing success, and worse would be a failure.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I agree also. I do think however we might win a game or two at home in which we are underdogs. Minges can have a very good HCA with a packed house. I will be interested to see how season ticket sales and attendance pans out. I remember the old CUSA days and how crazy the fans got. That can happen again if we put a decent product on the floor.