Jump to content

2021-22 Top 144, by College Sports Madness


Recommended Posts

On 6/30/2021 at 12:30 PM, wgstl said:

I dont think they'll be very high, Im going to guess 110.  People who are looking at this team on paper wont be too thrilled about this team.  So, I agree that they finish way better than early projections. 

I was wrong, darn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

So Dayton is sixth and Rhodey 7.  Figuring on the Bonnies at #1, Richmond at #2.  I'm guessing we'll be #3 and VCU in at #4.  So who is next at #5?  Davidson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

So Dayton is sixth and Rhodey 7.  Figuring on the Bonnies at #1, Richmond at #2.  I'm guessing we'll be #3 and VCU in at #4.  So who is next at #5?  Davidson?

Fordham

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Taj79 said:

So Dayton is sixth and Rhodey 7.  Figuring on the Bonnies at #1, Richmond at #2.  I'm guessing we'll be #3 and VCU in at #4.  So who is next at #5?  Davidson?

With all the unknowns about us. losing our top two players, and their replacements (Okoro and Jordan N. , my guess) somewhat unknown at the national level, I don't see us as #3.  Most likely #4 but possibly #5 in the Top 144 listing.  I think we will surprise fans and end up the season as a top 2 as long as we stay healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little surprised by ranking DU so quickly, but until this list gets to the top 25 or so it’s very hit and miss. I think the Flyers are going to surprise some folks this year. Strong FR class and some decent transfers. Plus Grant CAN coach. It will depend upon how quickly he can get the newbies to all come together. 
The two knowns in the A10 are StB’s and Richmond. After them 3 thru 6 is pretty much a crap shoot at this point. Although, I also think the top 2 can be had. StB’s bench is thin, and Richmond has failed to meet expectations in the past. Going to be interesting. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coaches that "can coach" seem to do so much better with either the talent or a team that buys in.  Two years ago, Grant had both.  Last year, with losing Toppin and the glue that was Mikesell and Landers, two fifth year players, he wasn't as great as the previous year so I am not sold on the fact that Grant "can coach."  Plus Watson was a fourth year junior and Crutcher was Crutcher two years ago and last year both were wildly inconsistent.  

This year will be key in that legacy.  The only guard on the roster is Weaver and he didn't impress much last year.  The next guy is Kobe Elvis, who was a nothing player on a 5 and 143 DePaul team.  The only other guard on the roster is Koby Brea who didn't impress much last year leaving the two freshmen as the only real subs.  Dayton's strength will lie in the fornt lien but can anyone get them the ball consistently enough?  We shall see.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taj, I have to agree with you about Grant's coaching ability.  A few years back in a game at the Fetz, Dayton was suffering at some point in the game and Grant let it continue even though he had timeouts available.  It was so bad that I remember it to this day

With regard to the Top 144 listing, the next two teams ranked higher than UD are TX-San Antonio and then Stony Brook.  I would take UD, minus 10 against either of those teams and I am not a UD fan... This calls into question the expertise of the owners of this site, but as I've said in the past, the site at least give us some real CBB to discuss

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bauman said:

This calls into question the expertise of the owners of this site, but as I've said in the past, the site at least give us some real CBB to discuss

i agree.   i've been saying for years this is worthless to follow.   and i agree they are pretty clueless.  good post.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grant is a very good mid-major coach.  He has a lifetime winning percentage of over 70% at this level.  McKillop had two former first-teamers on his squad two years ago and finished seventh.  Every coach has a season or two where nothing seems to go right.  That's why we judge coaches by their long-term record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three Star I have a bone to pick with you. You put everything into perceived categories. Major. Mid-Major etc. Grant is a good coach period not a good mid-major coach. You stick every recruit into your categories. Are you a good basketball analyst or a good 3 star analyst. I appreciate you knowledge  but think you overdo your slotting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, willie said:

Three Star I have a bone to pick with you. You put everything into perceived categories. Major. Mid-Major etc. Grant is a good coach period not a good mid-major coach. You stick every recruit into your categories. Are you a good basketball analyst or a good 3 star analyst. I appreciate you knowledge  but think you overdo your slotting. 

I think the problem is that our brains have been trained to see "mid" and think "middle" — "mediocre."  While that's what "mid" usually means, it's not supposed to mean that in the context of "mid-major."  It really only means "not in a conference that plays football in the FBS."  Being mid-major (actually, in a mid-major conference) doesn't mean a program can't be more successful than a so-called high-major (in a FBS conference) program, but there are hurdles to get over, as the FBS conference members have much more money to utilize.

So, if you read 3-Star's statement about Grant as, "He is a very good coach for a school that doesn't have FBS football," would you still pick that bone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 3star_recruit said:

Grant is a very good mid-major coach.  He has a lifetime winning percentage of over 70% at this level.  McKillop had two former first-teamers on his squad two years ago and finished seventh.  Every coach has a season or two where nothing seems to go right.  That's why we judge coaches by their long-term record.

 

36 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

I think the problem is that our brains have been trained to see "mid" and think "middle" — "mediocre."  While that's what "mid" usually means, it's not supposed to mean that in the context of "mid-major."  It really only means "not in a conference that plays football in the FBS."  Being mid-major (actually, in a mid-major conference) doesn't mean a program can't be more successful than a so-called high-major (in a FBS conference) program, but there are hurdles to get over, as the FBS conference members have much more money to utilize.

So, if you read 3-Star's statement about Grant as, "He is a very good coach for a school that doesn't have FBS football," would you still pick that bone?

I can be totally misreading Star but I don’t think that is how he is slotting his terms. I am sure he would not call Villanova a mid major. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, willie said:

 

I can be totally misreading Star but I don’t think that is how he is slotting his terms. I am sure he would not call Villanova a mid major. 

or the Jebbie's  squad from Spokane!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we saying Grant can't coach at a high major?  Grant is 154-66 at VCU and Dayton.  He's was a respectable 117- 85 at Alabama.  All three teams play cupcakes in the OOC season so having winning records at all isn't that hard to fathom.  Grant got six year in at Alabama, starting 17 and 15 but closing with 13 - 19 and 18 - 14 records.  His ten years prior to VCU were with Billy Donovan at Florida as were his last two year at Oklahoma City with Donovan again.  

I am of the opinion he can recruit, this year's class at Dayton seems to say so.  But his Dayton success hinged on guys Archie Miller brought in ... fifth year guys Mikesell and Landers along with kids in the cupboard like Crutcher and Toppin.  He did very well for sure, but now that stock id goner.  It was the reverse of what Ford had when he got here.  He had bonafide college players, Ford had few.  So I'm waiting on Grant before I say he's a great coach.  The challenge he will have this year will be great and hinge on two 18-year-olds in the backcourt, where college is a guard's game.    

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, willie said:

Three Star I have a bone to pick with you. You put everything into perceived categories. Major. Mid-Major etc. Grant is a good coach period not a good mid-major coach. You stick every recruit into your categories. Are you a good basketball analyst or a good 3 star analyst. I appreciate you knowledge  but think you overdo your slotting. 

Grant is an exceptional coach at the mid-major level.  He wasn't exceptional at Alabama.  Just because you're a top tier coach at one level doesn't mean you're  top tier at another level.  There's no shame in that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 3star_recruit said:

Grant is an exceptional coach at the mid-major level.  He wasn't exceptional at Alabama.  Just because you're a top tier coach at one level doesn't mean you're  top tier at another level.  There's no shame in that.

So is he an exceptional coach because he is at Dayton (mid-major) and not at Alabama. Not too many coaches have succeeded at a high level at the football powerhouses. If he were the coach at Kentucky or Louisville would he not be exceptional? The Zags are categorized as a mid-major. I guess Few could not be successful at a major program. Yes I know that is ridiculous but my “bone” is how you put everything in tiers and it’s not that simple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

Grant is an exceptional coach at the mid-major level.  He wasn't exceptional at Alabama.  Just because you're a top tier coach at one level doesn't mean you're  top tier at another level.  There's no shame in that.

The SLU-UD game I referred to had nothing to do with the level of D-1 basketball.  He blew the game no matter who was playing , high school. college or pro.  You can't be asleep at the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuinely curious because I’ve never been a coach: Are there times when it’s beneficial to let a team play through a struggle, maybe even lose a game, if it helps them overcome greater struggles and win even more games later in the season or in future seasons? Or would that just be stupid?

 

(Not saying that was the case with said UD game or even with said UD coach. I really don’t know.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, juniorbill76 said:

Genuinely curious because I’ve never been a coach: Are there times when it’s beneficial to let a team play through a struggle, maybe even lose a game, if it helps them overcome greater struggles and win even more games later in the season or in future seasons? Or would that just be stupid?

 

(Not saying that was the case with said UD game or even with said UD coach. I really don’t know.)

It's not stupid at all.  There have been some very successful coaches who have employed that strategy, from Nate Oats to Roy Williams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 3star_recruit said:

Grant is an exceptional coach at the mid-major level.  He wasn't exceptional at Alabama.  Just because you're a top tier coach at one level doesn't mean you're  top tier at another level.  There's no shame in that.

I agree the facts back up your opinion of levels such as mid major.

Had coach coach Grant in the 19/20 season made it to the final 4 I believe coach Grant would be a good coach at the highest level.  Unfortunately because of COVID we will never know.

Coach Ford has proven he is a good coach at the mid major level but struggled in the big 12.  To move up in coaching status both coaches need to be competing for first and second place every season in the A10 and get to the big dance consecutive seasons and make a deep run.

Both coaches are young and will get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the idea that some coaches are better suited for the mid major level and some are better suited for the power school level.  I don't think it simply comes down to good coaches are good coaches wherever they are.  Same reason why some guys are good in the NBA and some very good coaches are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...