(11-14-2013 09:37 AM)indycat Wrote:  So for those on here who follow recruiting closely, how will the experts rank this class?

A story @ Cincinnati.com this morning is quoting a recruiting expert who is saying X has the 4th ranked class. I don't put much stock in class rankings; especially since some recruits never qualify, become eligible or actually arrive.

Still, Mick needs to be getting top 25 classes most every year to take UC basketball back toward being a championship contender. Progress has been good but expectations rise with success too.

Don't put much stock in espn or scout, they judge quantity as much as quality. Rivals 247 which is the one, has X at 14 and UC at 40. If Morman and Strickland were recruits this year instead of redshirts, UC would probably be Top 15 .

A lot of the best players in this class haven't committed yet. Many are due to announce tomorrow. They will obviously end up at the blue bloods and Xavier's ranking is likely to fall into the mid-teens.

I dont really care too much about "class rankings" the guys we have gotten in this class fit the mold and the plan mick is trying to create here. We have almost all the pieces in place and these 3 are the final pieces. Give them a year of D1 ball and wow. Can you imagine this team when Shaq is a senior? they are going to be extremely deep at almost every position

(11-14-2013 02:16 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Cat-Man Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 09:37 AM)indycat Wrote:  So for those on here who follow recruiting closely, how will the experts rank this class?

A story @ Cincinnati.com this morning is quoting a recruiting expert who is saying X has the 4th ranked class. I don't put much stock in class rankings; especially since some recruits never qualify, become eligible or actually arrive.

Still, Mick needs to be getting top 25 classes most every year to take UC basketball back toward being a championship contender. Progress has been good but expectations rise with success too.

Unfortunately this is a ripple effect of the Big East/AAC fiasco. The Big East name still carries alot of weight with recruits. XU wouldn't have got some of those guys if they were still in the A-10.

This year may be the exception to the rule in the "who is better?" debate between the BE vs AAC, because of UofL. Next year may be a different story. Although, it does help that the BE does not carry the ESPN banner that kids prefer. So maybe the BE name will fizzle out a little more over the years.

I really hope recruiting does not suffer too much because of this crap conference.

I do not think this is the case for bball. Even without uofl for bball, the AAC has some pretty good bball teams, ie UC, uconn, memphis, temple. I would say no worse than the New BE. New BE has Marq and Georgetown as their tier 1. Nova as possible 2nd tier team. Maybe St Johns, however, they are extremely inconsistent every year.

Good point indycat about Mack being in on these kids for a few years. I didn't think about that.

Regarding the conference. No offense, but I get annoyed when people try and make Temple out to be some huge plus and storied program. Yes, they have had some success, but to what degree? They were barely one of the top teams in the A-10. If we are talking recent success, the NBE has had 5 teams within the past 10 years make at least the Elite 8. (Marq, G-Town, Vill, XU, Butler). The AAC will have 2 (UConn and Memphis). Losing UofL hurts, and what is replacing them hurts even more. Someone outside of Temple needs to step up their game. This conference will need to win a lot of OOC games early and make some noise in the Tourney sooner than later, to gain some respect and overcome the "Big East" stigma. For football, it's not quite as hard because the Big East name in football was not highly thought of.

(11-14-2013 02:47 PM)Lush Wrote:  so coreontae scores almost a point a minute in juco. many questions raised. is coreontae not the most cobbled together name ever?

No

(11-14-2013 02:16 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Cat-Man Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 09:37 AM)indycat Wrote:  So for those on here who follow recruiting closely, how will the experts rank this class?

A story @ Cincinnati.com this morning is quoting a recruiting expert who is saying X has the 4th ranked class. I don't put much stock in class rankings; especially since some recruits never qualify, become eligible or actually arrive.

Still, Mick needs to be getting top 25 classes most every year to take UC basketball back toward being a championship contender. Progress has been good but expectations rise with success too.

Unfortunately this is a ripple effect of the Big East/AAC fiasco. The Big East name still carries alot of weight with recruits. XU wouldn't have got some of those guys if they were still in the A-10.

This year may be the exception to the rule in the "who is better?" debate between the BE vs AAC, because of UofL. Next year may be a different story. Although, it does help that the BE does not carry the ESPN banner that kids prefer. So maybe the BE name will fizzle out a little more over the years.

I really hope recruiting does not suffer too much because of this crap conference.

I do not think this is the case for bball. Even without uofl for bball, the AAC has some pretty good bball teams, ie UC, uconn, memphis, temple. I would say no worse than the New BE. New BE has Marq and Georgetown as their tier 1. Nova as possible 2nd tier team. Maybe St Johns, however, they are extremely inconsistent every year.

Regrettably, Temple lost to Towson last night. How many saw that coming? Temple did not look very good in the loss. I think UCF or SMU will surprise some people this year, but since each has been so historically insignificant in basketball, it won't register much on the national meter. Most people will just say that the AAC sucks, and that it will such more when Louisville leaves. Memphis and UC and UCONN better be very good or we will be playing midnight games on Sunday nights.

undefined

(11-14-2013 05:36 PM)Cat-Man Wrote:  Regarding the conference. No offense, but I get annoyed when people try and make Temple out to be some huge plus and storied program. Yes, they have had some success, but to what degree? They were barely one of the top teams in the A-10. If we are talking recent success, the NBE has had 5 teams within the past 10 years make at least the Elite 8. (Marq, G-Town, Vill, XU, Butler). The AAC will have 2 (UConn and Memphis). Losing UofL hurts, and what is replacing them hurts even more. Someone outside of Temple needs to step up their game. This conference will need to win a lot of OOC games early and make some noise in the Tourney sooner than later, to gain some respect and overcome the "Big East" stigma. For football, it's not quite as hard because the Big East name in football was not highly thought of.

LOLwat?

We won the A10 in 2009 and 2011. Came in 2nd in 2007 and 2010. Since 2007, the worst we did was 4th. We've won as many A10 Tournaments as the team with the 2nd and 3rd most combined (9).

We are 6th all time in wins behind Kentucky, Kansas, UNC, Duke and Syracuse.

Over the last 5 years, we are the only program in the country to beat a top 10 team out of conference every year: #8 Tennessee, #3 Villanova, #9 Georgetown, #5 Duke, #3 Syracuse.

We are tied with Marquette for 11th most NCAA Tournament appearances, ahead of UConn, Illinois, Arizona, Georgetown, Michigan State, Cincy, Ohio State, Purdue, Pitt, etc.

If you want to talk Tournament success of late, you are certainly right, because we have struggled, but we are historically one of the top programs in college basketball. To say otherwise is completely ignorant.

(11-15-2013 07:55 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 02:16 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Cat-Man Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 09:37 AM)indycat Wrote:  So for those on here who follow recruiting closely, how will the experts rank this class?

A story @ Cincinnati.com this morning is quoting a recruiting expert who is saying X has the 4th ranked class. I don't put much stock in class rankings; especially since some recruits never qualify, become eligible or actually arrive.

Still, Mick needs to be getting top 25 classes most every year to take UC basketball back toward being a championship contender. Progress has been good but expectations rise with success too.

Unfortunately this is a ripple effect of the Big East/AAC fiasco. The Big East name still carries alot of weight with recruits. XU wouldn't have got some of those guys if they were still in the A-10.

This year may be the exception to the rule in the "who is better?" debate between the BE vs AAC, because of UofL. Next year may be a different story. Although, it does help that the BE does not carry the ESPN banner that kids prefer. So maybe the BE name will fizzle out a little more over the years.

I really hope recruiting does not suffer too much because of this crap conference.

I do not think this is the case for bball. Even without uofl for bball, the AAC has some pretty good bball teams, ie UC, uconn, memphis, temple. I would say no worse than the New BE. New BE has Marq and Georgetown as their tier 1. Nova as possible 2nd tier team. Maybe St Johns, however, they are extremely inconsistent every year.

Regrettably, Temple lost to Towson last night. How many saw that coming? Temple did not look very good in the loss. I think UCF or SMU will surprise some people this year, but since each has been so historically insignificant in basketball, it won't register much on the national meter. Most people will just say that the AAC sucks, and that it will such more when Louisville leaves. Memphis and UC and UCONN better be very good or we will be playing midnight games on Sunday nights.

Towson was favored. Their center will play in the NBA. He is one of the most underrated players in the country. He transferred from Georgetown. We didn't look good, but this is a rebuilding year for us.

(11-16-2013 08:20 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(11-15-2013 07:55 PM)vabearcat Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 02:16 PM)bearcatmill Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Cat-Man Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 09:37 AM)indycat Wrote:  So for those on here who follow recruiting closely, how will the experts rank this class?

A story @ Cincinnati.com this morning is quoting a recruiting expert who is saying X has the 4th ranked class. I don't put much stock in class rankings; especially since some recruits never qualify, become eligible or actually arrive.

Still, Mick needs to be getting top 25 classes most every year to take UC basketball back toward being a championship contender. Progress has been good but expectations rise with success too.

Unfortunately this is a ripple effect of the Big East/AAC fiasco. The Big East name still carries alot of weight with recruits. XU wouldn't have got some of those guys if they were still in the A-10.

This year may be the exception to the rule in the "who is better?" debate between the BE vs AAC, because of UofL. Next year may be a different story. Although, it does help that the BE does not carry the ESPN banner that kids prefer. So maybe the BE name will fizzle out a little more over the years.

I really hope recruiting does not suffer too much because of this crap conference.

I do not think this is the case for bball. Even without uofl for bball, the AAC has some pretty good bball teams, ie UC, uconn, memphis, temple. I would say no worse than the New BE. New BE has Marq and Georgetown as their tier 1. Nova as possible 2nd tier team. Maybe St Johns, however, they are extremely inconsistent every year.

Regrettably, Temple lost to Towson last night. How many saw that coming? Temple did not look very good in the loss. I think UCF or SMU will surprise some people this year, but since each has been so historically insignificant in basketball, it won't register much on the national meter. Most people will just say that the AAC sucks, and that it will such more when Louisville leaves. Memphis and UC and UCONN better be very good or we will be playing midnight games on Sunday nights.

Towson was favored. Their center will play in the NBA. He is one of the most underrated players in the country. He transferred from Georgetown. We didn't look good, but this is a rebuilding year for us.

How many national titles? Ps A10 was is and always will be a joke.

Oh and equally nice defense today in football against UCF. Great add to conference temple is.

Are you really talking ****?

Not hating on Temple historically but if you are an underdog to Towson, there is a problem.

Temple is a nice program historically. They add to the AAC, that's for sure. Not elite, but a nice program.

The football program on the other hand is a train wreck.

(11-16-2013 11:59 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  Are you really talking ****?

Looks like it.

Personally, I could give a damn about Temple. They have not been relevant since Cheney came after Cal, which was classic sports theatre. That said, under the right leadership Temple could be a really solid addition to our powerhouse conference.
If they can recruit Philly / NJ they ought to at least be competitive, I welcome them and look forward to playing them.

(11-17-2013 12:03 PM)beck Wrote:  Personally, I could give a damn about Temple. They have not been relevant since Cheney came after Cal, which was classic sports theatre. That said, under the right leadership Temple could be a really solid addition to our powerhouse conference.
If they can recruit Philly / NJ they ought to at least be competitive, I welcome them and look forward to playing them.

It's Chaney. Cheney was the VP. Doesn't make you very credible.

(11-17-2013 01:15 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(11-17-2013 12:03 PM)beck Wrote:  Personally, I could give a damn about Temple. They have not been relevant since Cheney came after Cal, which was classic sports theatre. That said, under the right leadership Temple could be a really solid addition to our powerhouse conference.
If they can recruit Philly / NJ they ought to at least be competitive, I welcome them and look forward to playing them.

It's Chaney. Cheney was the VP. Doesn't make you very credible.

But at least he is a bearcat on a bearcat board who doesn't give a shite how you spell that little raisin looking creep's name. He pissed off Cincinnati enough with his racist bullshite just before he quit the game.

That 'raisin looking creep' is a Hall of Famer.

Why do you feel the need to continually come by here? To argue?

Go play in traffic.

(11-17-2013 04:33 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Why do you feel the need to continually come by here? To argue?

Go play in traffic.

Speak for yourself. You're the one who does nothing but fight and talk **** on this board. You're a total troll.