This damn mag is expensive. So for the cheap folks:

1. USM - Good news: 3 returning starteres and strong newcomer crop gives USM a solid roster. Bad news: 2 main losses were stalwarts last , especially Dwayne Davis. Our call: Eagles need new faces to contribute, but are still class of reconfigured C-USA.

2. UAB - Good news: Jordan Swing and Rod Rucker lead 4 returning starters. Bad news: Blazers lack a PG to run the show. Our call: If the PG spot settles, UAB could take the league title.

3. UTEP - Good news: Miners have been building toward contention and have several experienced pieces. Bad news: Highly touted Fr. Issac Hamilton's decision to leave hurts scoring pop. Our call: UTEP has talent, but not enough to take the brass ring.

4. La Tech - Good news: 4 returning starters make the transition from the WAC a lot smoother. Bad news: There's no guarantee the Bulldogs will be able to make the step up in competition. Our call: This is definitely a first division club with the talent and depth to challenge.

5. Charlotte - Good news: Last year's NIT participant has 4 returning starters, led by Willie Clayton. Bad news: The 49ers struggled offensively last year and didn't import any real firepower. Our call: Solid team, but a step below the league's better squad.

6. Tulsa - Good news: Didn't lose much at all from last year's solid debut season for new coach Danny Manning. Bad news: There's depth, but it's a young team that will fight to be consistent. Our call: Will have nights where it will look good, but not enough of them for contention.

7. Marshall - Good news: A strong recruiting class should replenish the talent bank. Bad news: The loss of 4 starters, including reliable scorer DeAndre Kane, will hurt. Our call: Coach Tom Herrion will need thime to blend all of the new faces into a winning unit.

8. MTSU - Good news: The Blue Raiders learned how to win during last year's big 28-victory campaign. Bad news: Most of the key contributors from that team are gone. Our call: Contention is elusive as 8 fresh faces try to get comfortable.

9. FIU - Good news: The Panthers return first-team Sun Belt standout Tynell Murphy and welcome some high profile transfers. Bad news: Losing 3 starters won't help with FIU's step up in competition. Our call: This is an interesting team that could make trouble some nights and struggle others.

10. ECU - Good news: The Pirates return 6 players with plenty of experience. Bad news: The losses of Maurice Kemp and Miguel Paul will be quite painful. Our call: Even in a watered-down CUSA, the Pirates will struggle.

11. North Texas - Good news:Tony Mitchell is gone, but strong collection of newcomers arriving. Bad news: Even with Mitchell, UNT was 12-20. Our call: Don't expect this bunch to be close to contention this season.

12. Tulane - Good news: Coach Ed Conroy's system can make trouble for opponents. Bad news: Transfer wounds will make this a long season for the Green Wave. Our call: Tulane would have been a first-division club with Josh Davis, but will sag without him.

13. FAU - Good news: 3 returning starters and a good crop of newcomers make for a solid roster. Bad news: The Owls still don't have enough talent to compete with better CUSA clubs. Our call: The buidling process proceeds slowly, but there won't bee too much excitement.

14. Rice - Good news: There can't be any other players on the roster who will transfer, can there? Bad news: It's unlikely anybody else would want those who remain. Our call: The Owls have a long way to go to reach respectability, much less contention.

15. UTSA - Good news: Jeromie Hill and a collection of transfers should help the Roadrunners make the transition. Bad news: Its one year in the WAC wasn't exactly promising. Our call: UTSA is delighted to be in a better neighborhood, but won't be one of the marquee names for a while.

16. ODU - Good news: 3 starters are back, and new coach Jeff Jones bas won before. Bad news: Last year's team was 5-25 in the CAA, which is not exactly the Big Ten. Our call: The Monarchs will spend the year looking way up the crowded league.

First Team All-Conference

Kenneth Smith - La Tech
Neil Watson - USM
Raheem Appleby - La Tech
Rod Rucker - UAB
Rashad Smith - Tulsa

Second Team

Jordan Swing - UAB
Elijah Pittman - Marshall
Julian Washburn - UTEP
Jeromie Hill - UTSA
Tymell Murphy - FIU

Third Team

Akeem Richmond - ECU
Jerrold Brooks USM
Willie Clayton - Charlotte
Jordan Williams - North Texas
Joh Bohannon - UTEP

POY - Rod Rucker/UAB
Newcomer of the Year - Colin Voss/North Texas
Top Shooter - Neil Watson/USM
Top Rebounder - Rod Rucker/UAB
Top Defender - Neil Watson/USM
Top Playmaker - Neil Watson/USM
Most Versatile - Rod Rucker/UAB
Top NBA Prospect - Rod Rucker/UAB
Most Entertaining - Neil Watson/USM

(09-12-2013 11:26 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  First Team All-Conference

Kenneth Smith - La Tech
Neil Watson - USM
Raheem Appleby - La Tech
Rod Rucker - UAB
Rashad Smith - Tulsa

I'm interested to see how my Dawgs adjust - I think they have us pegged about right a top 4 team - the question is which slot they finish in...

This will be a junior laden team so the best is still yet to come -

But the two they have listed as first team is not the best/most talented player on the squad -

Alex Hamilton is going to be the star and he is just a sophomore

In before a Jonesing reply full of decimal points.

(09-12-2013 11:42 AM)ARandomHerdFan Wrote:  In before a Jonesing reply full of decimal points.

Ikr....lol

Voss signed with UNT but we'll take him if he can play sg and UNT will grant his release. (Listed as newcomer of the year)

I'm shocked they are so high on Rucker. I love him as a player, but he is an undersized 4 really. I guess if he can step out and start hitting some 3's I could see him as an NBA prospect, but otherwise, I can't really see it.

There is so much stupid in this preview that they actually make the College Madness dudes sound "in the know".

Oh do tell SJ. We can't wait to hear how all 5 players on the first team should be from ECU.

A 6-5 Power Forward that shot 57% from the FT line and hit 0 three's on the season on a losing team as the best NBA prospect is just the cherry on top of the stupid cake they have made. You pretty much admited the absurdity of that.

(09-12-2013 12:41 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  A 6-4 Power Forward that shot 57% from the FT line and hit 0 three's on the season on a losing team as the best NBA prospect is just the tip of the iceberg. You pretty much admited the absurdity of that.

What about rebounding and second chance points? He'll give you a lot of double-doubles. He outworks everyone else in the paint despite his size.

I disagree with any ranking that doesn't have us in last place

(09-12-2013 12:55 PM)BlazeNBham Wrote:  What about rebounding and second chance points? He'll give you a lot of double-doubles. He outworks everyone else in the paint despite his size.

I'm fine with saying he's a good CUSA player, but they said he was the "best NBA prospect' in the league. That's probably one the most outrageous statement I have ever seen, and all you really need to read to know that there opinions and talent evaluations are a piles of $hit.

It's like there is no logic in place. They say we have an all conference player and "with 6 players with plenty of experience (actually 7 with two year starter Straughn back from redshirt) that we will struggle". Yeah that makes a lot of sense to put us behing Marshall who was a 200+ RPI team and lost 4 starters and Kane.

Everyone in this conference had major losses but La Tech and UAB.....and UAB was a losing team, yet we are the only one that struggles even with plenty of "experience returning" and an all conference player. Give me break.

I take the best NBA prospect pick as CUSA really doesn't have any good NBA prospects.

There is also a more in-depth capsule of each program but I am not to post all of that information.

(09-12-2013 12:55 PM)BlazeNBham Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 12:41 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  A 6-4 Power Forward that shot 57% from the FT line and hit 0 three's on the season on a losing team as the best NBA prospect is just the tip of the iceberg. You pretty much admited the absurdity of that.

What about rebounding and second chance points? He'll give you a lot of double-doubles. He outworks everyone else in the paint despite his size.

The couple of times that I saw him play; he was pulling a Moses Malone. He missed some point blank shots and rebounded his own misses, which padded his stats a lot.

Define a lot. I'll give it to you that Rucker was not superb at finishing around the rim, but I don't think his stats were padded "a lot" by missing and grabbing rebounds off of his own shots.

(09-12-2013 01:14 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  The couple of times that I saw him play; he was pulling a Moses Malone. He missed some point blank shots and rebounded his own misses, which padded his stats a lot.

Really? I mean you are being serious right? So he intentionally misses his own shots to give himself to opportunity to rebound his own miss so he could pad his stats?

Nothing to do with the fact he is undersize which makes his shots contestable which means he has to adjust his shot while going in with the big boys so that it doesn't get block. Then he has to be in position to get his rebound in the event he misses his shot and tussle with men 3 to 4 inches taller than him. Yeah....ok!

Is there anybody returning that has more than 14.5 ppg 8.2 rpg in C-USA? Rucker is supposed to be a guard. Earned his spot down low because he hustles.

(09-12-2013 01:18 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(09-12-2013 01:14 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  The couple of times that I saw him play; he was pulling a Moses Malone. He missed some point blank shots and rebounded his own misses, which padded his stats a lot.

Really? I mean you are being serious right? So he intentionally miss his own shots to give himself to opportunity to rebound his own miss so he could pad his stats?

Nothing to do with the fact he is undersize which makes his shots contestable which means he has to adjust his shot while going in with the big boys so that it doesn't get block. Then he has to be in position to get his rebound in the event he misses his shot and tussle with men 3 to 4 inches taller than him. Yeah....ok!

Where did you read intentional? I am pretty sure that Moses Malone did not intentionally miss shots from 5 feet away, but let's be real; Moses was not the best shooter in the World. If a guy can't shoot from outside of 15 feet then then there are going to be a lot of shots that that he takes that he will know where the ball is coming off the rim. I have literally seen him shoot and then run towards the rim, because he must have know that it was going to be off line.