Jump to content

Top 144


Taj79

Recommended Posts

Mo State checks in at #91. I guess that makes State U. the # 3 program in the state. In the last 10 or so some big conference schools have been ranked, S Car, Wake, St John and of course our board's favorite the Tigers from ole Mizzou.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 274
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Mo State checks in at #91. I guess that makes State U. the # 3 program in the state. In the last 10 or so some big conference schools have been ranked, S Car, Wake, St John and of course our board's favorite the Tigers from ole Mizzou.

 

Did I miss something - have we appeared yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to say it, but I think they missed the boat on Mizzery.

Agree, they will be much better than # 104. 'Course, I hope Missouri loses every goddam game.

Missouri has very good talent and coach Anderson is superior to former coach Haith (culture, discipline, train, talent development, game preparation, in-game adjustments, etcetera) except for recruiting.

But I suspect there will be character issues on the team, and a player or three will blow up over the course of the year. Also, in the long run Anderson will not be a top recruiter, though he kept Haith's recruits; we shall see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been out of the country for a while. Count continues and still no us .....

#96 = Murray State .... #95 = Wyoming .... #94 = Wake Forest ..... #93 = Northeastern ........#92 = South Carolina .... #91 = Missouri State..... #90 = UC/Santa Barbara ...... #89 = Portland ...... #88 = Columbia ..... #87 = Geaorgia State ..... and #86 = Houston.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been out of the country for a while. Count continues and still no us .....

#96 = Murray State .... #95 = Wyoming .... #94 = Wake Forest ..... #93 = Northeastern ........#92 = South Carolina .... #91 = Missouri State..... #90 = UC/Santa Barbara ...... #89 = Portland ...... #88 = Columbia ..... #87 = Geaorgia State ..... and #86 = Houston.......

No A10 teams so don't see how that gives us any reason for optimism or pessimism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No A10 teams so don't see how that gives us any reason for optimism or pessimism

I think it means that the conference will be pretty strong. Eight teams in the top 85 teams in the country, at least according to this source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These guys must know something about our team that we don't. Or else we're not on this list. Haven't read all of the team reports, but a few of them at least have some starters back. We're kind of a big zero in that department.

Starting is for high school.

Glaze started for most of a season, just not last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These guys must know something about our team that we don't. Or else we're not on this list. Haven't read all of the team reports, but a few of them at least have some starters back. We're kind of a big zero in that department.

What they know is what we should know. We have 3 very talented SO coming back along with a really good transfer and some outstanding FR. If you don't think we are better than some of the teams already ranked from 86-100, then you don't have much confidence in our recent recruiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What they know is what we should know. We have 3 very talented SO coming back along with a really good transfer and some outstanding FR. If you don't think we are better than some of the teams already ranked from 86-100, then you don't have much confidence in our recent recruiting.

I hope you're right, Bauman, but FR will be FR. And we don't have anyone who's shown they can be a consistent point getter. I like what JC's done, but it's all on paper. Remember, you live in the Show Me state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you're right, Bauman, but FR will be FR. And we don't have anyone who's shown they can be a consistent point getter. I like what JC's done, but it's all on paper. Remember, you live in the Show Me state.

So does state u, but that hasn't panned out ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These guys must know something about our team that we don't. Or else we're not on this list. Haven't read all of the team reports, but a few of them at least have some starters back. We're kind of a big zero in that department.

Again, when you say "these guys" I just think we should all be aware that it is ONE GUY doing these rankings. And that one guy doesn't have some inside info about these teams.

The top 144 previews are pretty terrible previews in my opinion and his insight into where we will be ranked doesn't mean squat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not too worried about it.

This is not an entirely credible preview. At least we didn't get burned like Mizzou, worst case for us now is 85, not bad. But it isn't very meaningful.

No one can possibly know how good we will be... 5 new starters... some good recruits. So a ranking like this for us is not meaningful, to boot.

Other previews will be forthcoming, probably more credible, SI, ESPN, all of the major entities with full access to all data and information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree this list is probably slapped together w / duct tape and chicken wire. Still, it's the only interesting reading about college hoops we got. What's interesting is that the teams rated so far, at least for the one's I've read, most have lost a number of starters. But we'll be one of the 3 teams that lost the entire starting lineup. Hence, this guy must rate our returnees and incoming FR as being pretty solid, assuming we do get ranked. Just not sure if us fans are as confident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we do not make the list then it will be a big deal regardless of how poorly it is put together. Funny how the trashing of the list started as the count down has gotten belown 90. I have no idea if or where we will fall on the list but it will be a lively thread if we do not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It keeps getting curioser and curioser ...... if that's a word .....

#85 = Creighton ..... #84 = Wisconsin-Green Bay (I know, old term) .... #83 UTEP. Of note, these last three teams have all been picked to go to post season play in the NIT.

bauman ... with what tools do you evalute our returning players and say "very talented' for the three sophomores, "really good" for our lone transfer, and "some outstanding" freshmen? I'm with larry72 and hope you are right.

Less than two months to basketball season opening with practices and some Midnight Madness. Can't wait!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is saying five new starters from the frosh-what about TL, RA and MC our sophs. they will be crucial to any success.

No one is saying 5 new starters from the FROSH. You might want to read the posts a little slower for actual content. Clearly we will have 5 new starters and I suggest that no more than 1or possibly 2 will be FROSH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did people see that the A-10 had 11 teams in the top 144? Seems like that is being used by anyone assuming we are on the list.

Personally, I thought for sure we'd be on the list because below 144 is really bad, but I thought our name would have been called by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It keeps getting curioser and curioser ...... if that's a word .....

#85 = Creighton ..... #84 = Wisconsin-Green Bay (I know, old term) .... #83 UTEP. Of note, these last three teams have all been picked to go to post season play in the NIT.

bauman ... with what tools do you evalute our returning players and say "very talented' for the three sophomores, "really good" for our lone transfer, and "some outstanding" freshmen? I'm with larry72 and hope you are right.

Less than two months to basketball season opening with practices and some Midnight Madness. Can't wait!

Taj, obviously at this point my judgment is no better than most on this Board. However, (as Steven Smith would say) I base by evualation of the 3 SOPHs on what I saw them do, and be capable of doing, last year. I don't disagree with JC very much-I think he is doing a good job- but I do think he needed to play the 3 SOPH more last year so that they would be bringing more experience to the table this year. Can't fix that now and in fact when I expressed that thought last year, the majority of Board comments disagreed with me, but I still think my position then was correct.

My assessment of AY is purely based on his high school record as an outstanding player along with a few Board comments from some of you who have seen him in practice or pick-up games. Primarily I am relying on his reputation.

Regarding the 6 FR, I just like what I've seen on video regarding their skill sets, along with their reputations and honors from high school. One or more of them might turn out to be a Ruben Cotto, but I think this coaching staff had more time to scout and evaluate the incoming 6 than coach RM did when he was trying to quickly rebuild a broken roster.

Clearly, I am hoping for the best, but I think there is a basis for that hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...