(09-28-2017 09:02 AM)Tigx Wrote:  Fran Fraschilla just tweeted what Stammers just said:

Fran Fraschilla‏ Verified account @franfraschilla 30m30 minutes ago

So many high major programs winning with non-Top 50 guys. Takes good coaching, high character kids who develop. Don't WANT Top 25 headaches.

What is Fran talking about? "So many?"

Like whom?

Last year's S16:

Kansas
Gonzaga
UNC
UCLA
Kentucky
Arizona
South Carolina
Florida
Purdue
^^^^^
All had at least one 5* on their roster

The rest:
Oregon: Nine 4* including four top 60
Xavier: Six 4+ including one top 40 player
Michigan: Seven 4* including two top 50
Butler: Three 4* including a top 50
WVU: Four 4* including two to 65
Baylor: Four 4* including a couple top 100's
Wisconsin: Three 4*

So, Wisky is the only school that made the S16 last year without at top 100 player. Still had three 4* though. And we can all admit they are an outlier due to their style of play.

Otherwise over half of the S16 teams had at least one 5* and the rest were comprised of multiple top 100 players.

Just tweeting thru his hat.

(09-28-2017 10:24 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:02 AM)Tigx Wrote:  Fran Fraschilla just tweeted what Stammers just said:

Fran Fraschilla‏ Verified account @franfraschilla 30m30 minutes ago

So many high major programs winning with non-Top 50 guys. Takes good coaching, high character kids who develop. Don't WANT Top 25 headaches.

What is Fran talking about? "So many?"

Like whom?

Last year's S16:

Kansas
Gonzaga
UNC
UCLA
Kentucky
Arizona
South Carolina
Florida
Purdue
^^^^^
All had at least one 5* on their roster

The rest:
Oregon: Nine 4* including four top 60
Xavier: Six 4+ including one top 40 player
Michigan: Seven 4* including two top 50
Butler: Three 4* including a top 50
WVU: Four 4* including two to 65
Baylor: Four 4* including a couple top 100's
Wisconsin: Three 4*

So, Wisky is the only school that made the S16 last year without at top 100 player. Still had three 4* though. And we can all admit they are an outlier due to their style of play.

Otherwise over half of the S16 teams had at least one 5* and the rest were comprised of multiple top 100 players.

The above post should be required reading for those thinking talent - as measured by ratings - is not essential for the high level of success obtainable at Memphis

People don't absorb what doesn't fit their narrative.

Heck, we don't even see what's in front of our very eyes sometimes if we have no prior idea of its existence.

(09-28-2017 11:26 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:24 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:02 AM)Tigx Wrote:  Fran Fraschilla just tweeted what Stammers just said:

Fran Fraschilla‏ Verified account @franfraschilla 30m30 minutes ago

So many high major programs winning with non-Top 50 guys. Takes good coaching, high character kids who develop. Don't WANT Top 25 headaches.

What is Fran talking about? "So many?"

Like whom?

Last year's S16:

Kansas
Gonzaga
UNC
UCLA
Kentucky
Arizona
South Carolina
Florida
Purdue
^^^^^
All had at least one 5* on their roster

The rest:
Oregon: Nine 4* including four top 60
Xavier: Six 4+ including one top 40 player
Michigan: Seven 4* including two top 50
Butler: Three 4* including a top 50
WVU: Four 4* including two to 65
Baylor: Four 4* including a couple top 100's
Wisconsin: Three 4*

So, Wisky is the only school that made the S16 last year without at top 100 player. Still had three 4* though. And we can all admit they are an outlier due to their style of play.

Otherwise over half of the S16 teams had at least one 5* and the rest were comprised of multiple top 100 players.

The above post should be required reading for those thinking talent - as measured by ratings - is not essential for the high level of success obtainable at Memphis

And that is only for S16...the fair expectation for Memphis.

If you look then to the Elite 8--seven of those schools (except Oregon) had at least one 5*.

(09-28-2017 10:24 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:02 AM)Tigx Wrote:  Fran Fraschilla just tweeted what Stammers just said:

Fran Fraschilla‏ Verified account @franfraschilla 30m30 minutes ago

So many high major programs winning with non-Top 50 guys. Takes good coaching, high character kids who develop. Don't WANT Top 25 headaches.

What is Fran talking about? "So many?"

Like whom?

Last year's S16:

Kansas
Gonzaga
UNC
UCLA
Kentucky
Arizona
South Carolina
Florida
Purdue
^^^^^
All had at least one 5* on their roster

The rest:
Oregon: Nine 4* including four top 60
Xavier: Six 4+ including one top 40 player
Michigan: Seven 4* including two top 50
Butler: Three 4* including a top 50
WVU: Four 4* including two to 65
Baylor: Four 4* including a couple top 100's
Wisconsin: Three 4*

So, Wisky is the only school that made the S16 last year without at top 100 player. Still had three 4* though. And we can all admit they are an outlier due to their style of play.

Otherwise over half of the S16 teams had at least one 5* and the rest were comprised of multiple top 100 players.

I'm not defending the tweet but you at least have to make your comparisons to what he said. Tweet said "top 50". I would guess most of the players you have listed are not "top 50".

(09-28-2017 12:43 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 10:24 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:02 AM)Tigx Wrote:  Fran Fraschilla just tweeted what Stammers just said:

Fran Fraschilla‏ Verified account @franfraschilla 30m30 minutes ago

So many high major programs winning with non-Top 50 guys. Takes good coaching, high character kids who develop. Don't WANT Top 25 headaches.

What is Fran talking about? "So many?"

Like whom?

Last year's S16:

Kansas
Gonzaga
UNC
UCLA
Kentucky
Arizona
South Carolina
Florida
Purdue
^^^^^
All had at least one 5* on their roster

The rest:
Oregon: Nine 4* including four top 60
Xavier: Six 4+ including one top 40 player
Michigan: Seven 4* including two top 50
Butler: Three 4* including a top 50
WVU: Four 4* including two to 65
Baylor: Four 4* including a couple top 100's
Wisconsin: Three 4*

So, Wisky is the only school that made the S16 last year without at top 100 player. Still had three 4* though. And we can all admit they are an outlier due to their style of play.

Otherwise over half of the S16 teams had at least one 5* and the rest were comprised of multiple top 100 players.

I'm not defending the tweet but you at least have to make your comparisons to what he said. Tweet said "top 50". I would guess most of the players you have listed are not "top 50".

Every 5* is top 25.

So, again, 7 of the 8 teams in the E8 had at least one top 25 guy on their squad.

At least four other S16 schools had at least one top 50.

Oregon had a top 35 kid (4*) along with three other T50 kids and five more 4*.

So basically EVERY E8 team had at least a top 35 player on their roster.

Mark Few has had some pretty good teams.

(09-28-2017 02:20 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  Mark Few has had some pretty good teams.

Yep. Gonzaga had four top 70 players including a 5* Collins, top 35 Goss and top 45 JW3.

What a coincidence that Few finally makes it to the Final Four when he has a 5*, a 35th, 45th, and 68th ranked players along with three other 4*.

#coachemup

(09-28-2017 02:28 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 02:20 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  Mark Few has had some pretty good teams.

Yep. Gonzaga had four top 70 players including a 5* Collins, top 35 Goss and top 45 JW3.

What a coincidence that Few finally makes it to the Final Four when he has a 5*, a 35th, 45th, and 68th ranked players along with three other 4*.

#coachemup

If we could get the type of guys Gonzaga gets, I'd be happy with that.

(09-28-2017 02:40 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 02:28 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 02:20 PM)cscottl1981 Wrote:  Mark Few has had some pretty good teams.

Yep. Gonzaga had four top 70 players including a 5* Collins, top 35 Goss and top 45 JW3.

What a coincidence that Few finally makes it to the Final Four when he has a 5*, a 35th, 45th, and 68th ranked players along with three other 4*.

#coachemup

If we could get the type of guys Gonzaga gets, I'd be happy with that.

Yeah, if Tubby can convince top 40 guys to transfer and sit out a year, that would be something.

Word on the street, Tubby on a lot of list
I hope he leaves and we get Cal back, that Dude can recruit

(09-28-2017 10:24 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 09:02 AM)Tigx Wrote:  Fran Fraschilla just tweeted what Stammers just said:

Fran Fraschilla‏ Verified account @franfraschilla 30m30 minutes ago

So many high major programs winning with non-Top 50 guys. Takes good coaching, high character kids who develop. Don't WANT Top 25 headaches.

What is Fran talking about? "So many?"

Like whom?

Last year's S16:

Kansas
Gonzaga
UNC
UCLA
Kentucky
Arizona
South Carolina
Florida
Purdue
^^^^^
All had at least one 5* on their roster

The rest:
Oregon: Nine 4* including four top 60
Xavier: Six 4+ including one top 40 player
Michigan: Seven 4* including two top 50
Butler: Three 4* including a top 50
WVU: Four 4* including two to 65
Baylor: Four 4* including a couple top 100's
Wisconsin: Three 4*

So, Wisky is the only school that made the S16 last year without at top 100 player. Still had three 4* though. And we can all admit they are an outlier due to their style of play.

Otherwise over half of the S16 teams had at least one 5* and the rest were comprised of multiple top 100 players.

Did he say without any top 50 guys

(09-27-2017 12:53 PM)Oman Wrote:  

(09-27-2017 10:57 AM)Tiger57 Wrote:  I doubt it. Those players shouldn't be allowed to play in college. Hopefully the NBA gets rid of the one and done rule now that every franchise has a farm team.

that's a harsh penalty for a 17 year old kid don't you think? maybe freshman ineligible would be more appropriate?

Enough with the 17 year old kid bull****. These kids and their families have been playing the recruiting game since jr High. Their parents are shopping them around HIGH SCHOOLS in order to get them the most exposure. They are active participants. Their hands are out.

THEY ARE NOT INNOCENT VICTIMS.

So YES if they get caught doing something illegal then they deserve the punishment that comes with the action.