(06-07-2019 06:20 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:54 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:47 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:49 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 06:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  It is certainly possible but couple things...Brooks was decent, not great. But the bigger point I want to make is, basketball isn't football. Yes a new coach with new schemes but its not nearly as complicated as with football that has three units (Offense, Defense, and ST) and a ton more guys, positions, philosophy's within position groups (which also change because the new head coach usually has new coordinators, etc.). Compared to that, basketball is easy peasy...10-12 players, basic offense and defense and philosophy change but its not as complicated.
Further, based on what we are hearing out of basketball practice, Brannen is going to be a giant step forward from Mick. Ex players that have watched the team the past week were blown away by what they were seeing and hearing. I think we will see players 'come out of their shells' that Mick had beaten them into and guys will actually have fun, the team should score a ton more, be more exciting, and ultimately better.
That's my take.

"Decent". You under value Brooks by a mile.

AAC Ranks
12th Player Efficiency Rating
5th Total Rebound Percentage
3rd Block Percentage
8th Defensive Rating
5th Win Shares per 40 minutes
8th Box Plus minus (2nd defensive plus minus)

6-11, 240lb players with 20+ PER's and that were as good as he was defensively aren't easily replaced.

Brooks is a stiff....

With out a pin this.....just sounds hollow and lacks conviction

Go to the UC board...I said it all last year, openly in that board. (With the exception of the last five games or so...then I took it back).

But a handful of games is too small a sample set for me to be sad he left. I would have preferred he stayed, he's a big body and defends well and would have been a sr., but offensively, he wasn't good and with our new pro style, uptempo offense, I don't believe he had the tools to be really effective in it. Kid missed more bunnies than a 6'11 man should. Missed layups should have been two handed dunks. He played scared around the rim with the ball in his hands. (again, the last five games he started to aggressively go to the rim).

Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

(06-07-2019 06:20 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:54 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:47 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:49 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 06:55 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  It is certainly possible but couple things...Brooks was decent, not great. But the bigger point I want to make is, basketball isn't football. Yes a new coach with new schemes but its not nearly as complicated as with football that has three units (Offense, Defense, and ST) and a ton more guys, positions, philosophy's within position groups (which also change because the new head coach usually has new coordinators, etc.). Compared to that, basketball is easy peasy...10-12 players, basic offense and defense and philosophy change but its not as complicated.
Further, based on what we are hearing out of basketball practice, Brannen is going to be a giant step forward from Mick. Ex players that have watched the team the past week were blown away by what they were seeing and hearing. I think we will see players 'come out of their shells' that Mick had beaten them into and guys will actually have fun, the team should score a ton more, be more exciting, and ultimately better.
That's my take.

"Decent". You under value Brooks by a mile.

AAC Ranks
12th Player Efficiency Rating
5th Total Rebound Percentage
3rd Block Percentage
8th Defensive Rating
5th Win Shares per 40 minutes
8th Box Plus minus (2nd defensive plus minus)

6-11, 240lb players with 20+ PER's and that were as good as he was defensively aren't easily replaced.

Brooks is a stiff....

With out a pin this.....just sounds hollow and lacks conviction

Go to the UC board...I said it all last year, openly in that board. (With the exception of the last five games or so...then I took it back).

But a handful of games is too small a sample set for me to be sad he left. I would have preferred he stayed, he's a big body and defends well and would have been a sr., but offensively, he wasn't good and with our new pro style, uptempo offense, I don't believe he had the tools to be really effective in it. Kid missed more bunnies than a 6'11 man should. Missed layups should have been two handed dunks. He played scared around the rim with the ball in his hands. (again, the last five games he started to aggressively go to the rim).

Why so serious....

Someone is a bit worried about the season me thinks.

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 06:20 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:54 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:47 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:49 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  "Decent". You under value Brooks by a mile.

AAC Ranks
12th Player Efficiency Rating
5th Total Rebound Percentage
3rd Block Percentage
8th Defensive Rating
5th Win Shares per 40 minutes
8th Box Plus minus (2nd defensive plus minus)

6-11, 240lb players with 20+ PER's and that were as good as he was defensively aren't easily replaced.

Brooks is a stiff....

With out a pin this.....just sounds hollow and lacks conviction

Go to the UC board...I said it all last year, openly in that board. (With the exception of the last five games or so...then I took it back).

But a handful of games is too small a sample set for me to be sad he left. I would have preferred he stayed, he's a big body and defends well and would have been a sr., but offensively, he wasn't good and with our new pro style, uptempo offense, I don't believe he had the tools to be really effective in it. Kid missed more bunnies than a 6'11 man should. Missed layups should have been two handed dunks. He played scared around the rim with the ball in his hands. (again, the last five games he started to aggressively go to the rim).

Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

224 you say? 224 is 40 spots above ECU.

(06-07-2019 10:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

224 you say? 224 is 40 spots above ECU.

So you’re getting a guy that is at BEST a bit-part starter for ECU? Yikes.

(06-07-2019 10:48 AM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 10:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

224 you say? 224 is 40 spots above ECU.

So you’re getting a guy that is at BEST a bit-part starter for ECU? Yikes.

Also who couldn't start for the 224th ranked team and is going to start for UC? I'm looking at the potential starters and can't find it.

(06-07-2019 10:36 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 06:20 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:54 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:47 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Brooks is a stiff....

With out a pin this.....just sounds hollow and lacks conviction

Go to the UC board...I said it all last year, openly in that board. (With the exception of the last five games or so...then I took it back).

But a handful of games is too small a sample set for me to be sad he left. I would have preferred he stayed, he's a big body and defends well and would have been a sr., but offensively, he wasn't good and with our new pro style, uptempo offense, I don't believe he had the tools to be really effective in it. Kid missed more bunnies than a 6'11 man should. Missed layups should have been two handed dunks. He played scared around the rim with the ball in his hands. (again, the last five games he started to aggressively go to the rim).

Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

Ok, so who is the center that will be starting over him the freshman that averaged 2ppg? It's not like he's a sure thing and you brought in a grad transfer for that very reason.

(06-07-2019 10:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

224 you say? 224 is 40 spots above ECU.

Sure. What's that really have to do with anything though, I've openly admit we were horrific last year. I've been harder on Dooley than anyone. Being 40 spots better than us is still horrific as well.

The good news is was have 11 players, basically a new team outside of Gardner who was one of the best players in the AAC returning including a 7', 240lb guy you wanted and probably needed as much or more than we do if you are signing grad transfers like this and depending on a 2ppg returner.

(06-07-2019 11:13 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 10:36 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 06:20 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(06-06-2019 07:54 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  With out a pin this.....just sounds hollow and lacks conviction

Go to the UC board...I said it all last year, openly in that board. (With the exception of the last five games or so...then I took it back).

But a handful of games is too small a sample set for me to be sad he left. I would have preferred he stayed, he's a big body and defends well and would have been a sr., but offensively, he wasn't good and with our new pro style, uptempo offense, I don't believe he had the tools to be really effective in it. Kid missed more bunnies than a 6'11 man should. Missed layups should have been two handed dunks. He played scared around the rim with the ball in his hands. (again, the last five games he started to aggressively go to the rim).

Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

Ok, so who is the center that will be starting over him the freshman that averaged 2ppg? It's not like he's a sure thing and you brought in a grad transfer for that very reason.

Who are you talking about?

McNeal's last year playing D1 he was a backup for the team that finished 106 kenpom. (2018)

The other possible starter is Cumberland (maybe both start) and he was the best player on kenpom 187 Oakland.

This Cincy-ECU MBB rivalry has gotten really good.

(06-07-2019 11:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:13 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 10:36 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 06:20 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Go to the UC board...I said it all last year, openly in that board. (With the exception of the last five games or so...then I took it back).

But a handful of games is too small a sample set for me to be sad he left. I would have preferred he stayed, he's a big body and defends well and would have been a sr., but offensively, he wasn't good and with our new pro style, uptempo offense, I don't believe he had the tools to be really effective in it. Kid missed more bunnies than a 6'11 man should. Missed layups should have been two handed dunks. He played scared around the rim with the ball in his hands. (again, the last five games he started to aggressively go to the rim).

Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

Ok, so who is the center that will be starting over him the freshman that averaged 2ppg? It's not like he's a sure thing and you brought in a grad transfer for that very reason.

Who are you talking about?

McNeal's last year playing D1 he was a backup for the team that finished 106 kenpom. (2018)

The other possible starter is Cumberland (maybe both start) and he was the best player on kenpom 187 Oakland.

McNeal is 6-1. I'm talking about your center situation.

(06-07-2019 12:38 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:13 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 10:36 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

Ok, so who is the center that will be starting over him the freshman that averaged 2ppg? It's not like he's a sure thing and you brought in a grad transfer for that very reason.

Who are you talking about?

McNeal's last year playing D1 he was a backup for the team that finished 106 kenpom. (2018)

The other possible starter is Cumberland (maybe both start) and he was the best player on kenpom 187 Oakland.

McNeal is 6-1. I'm talking about your center situation.

They don't have a center situation, which is why they are all so confused.

Dear ECU,

We appreciate your concern for UC. Rest assured, we will once again be at the top of the conference and make the ncaa tourney. We just ask that you focus your efforts on looking at yourselves and please, for the love of John, can you try and come in sub 200 in RPI, for once? The rest of us would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

-Bearcat Nation

(06-07-2019 12:38 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:13 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 10:36 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 09:20 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  Well now you got a guy that couldn't start for the 224th ranked team instead that probably starts for you now instead.

He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

Ok, so who is the center that will be starting over him the freshman that averaged 2ppg? It's not like he's a sure thing and you brought in a grad transfer for that very reason.

Who are you talking about?

McNeal's last year playing D1 he was a backup for the team that finished 106 kenpom. (2018)

The other possible starter is Cumberland (maybe both start) and he was the best player on kenpom 187 Oakland.

McNeal is 6-1. I'm talking about your center situation.

Maybe he is too....

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

(06-07-2019 12:59 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 12:38 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:46 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 11:13 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 10:36 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  He isn't the starter. He will be lucky to get 10 min a game.

Ok, so who is the center that will be starting over him the freshman that averaged 2ppg? It's not like he's a sure thing and you brought in a grad transfer for that very reason.

Who are you talking about?

McNeal's last year playing D1 he was a backup for the team that finished 106 kenpom. (2018)

The other possible starter is Cumberland (maybe both start) and he was the best player on kenpom 187 Oakland.

McNeal is 6-1. I'm talking about your center situation.

Maybe he is too....

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

Brannen is implemented that positionless, low-major strategy.

(06-07-2019 12:51 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Dear ECU,

We appreciate your concern for UC. Rest assured, we will once again be at the top of the conference and make the ncaa tourney. We just ask that you focus your efforts on looking at yourselves and please, for the love of John, can you try and come in sub 200 in RPI, for once? The rest of us would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

-Bearcat Nation

The resultant better seed for UC will only lead to more embarrassment on premature exit.

(06-07-2019 01:14 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 12:51 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Dear ECU,

We appreciate your concern for UC. Rest assured, we will once again be at the top of the conference and make the ncaa tourney. We just ask that you focus your efforts on looking at yourselves and please, for the love of John, can you try and come in sub 200 in RPI, for once? The rest of us would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

-Bearcat Nation

The resultant better seed for UC will only lead to more embarrassment on premature exit.

Don't bring up premature embarrassment in front of BC1. He gets sensitive.

(06-07-2019 01:19 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 01:14 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(06-07-2019 12:51 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Dear ECU,

We appreciate your concern for UC. Rest assured, we will once again be at the top of the conference and make the ncaa tourney. We just ask that you focus your efforts on looking at yourselves and please, for the love of John, can you try and come in sub 200 in RPI, for once? The rest of us would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

-Bearcat Nation

The resultant better seed for UC will only lead to more embarrassment on premature exit.

Don't bring up premature embarrassment in front of BC1. He gets sensitive.

It's ok. WSU can only perform as a 7+ seed. We're all here for each other.

(06-07-2019 12:51 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Dear ECU,

We appreciate your concern for UC. Rest assured, we will once again be at the top of the conference and make the ncaa tourney. We just ask that you focus your efforts on looking at yourselves and please, for the love of John, can you try and come in sub 200 in RPI, for once? The rest of us would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

-Bearcat Nation

You sure about those proclamations.

I'm harder on Dooley than anyone and I've said on this board multiple times last year was the worst coaching job I've ever seen. Even with that opinion I wouldn't trade him for your coach. Cincy has a lot more advantages than ECU in basketball for sure but I don't find your hire that impressive.

I'm not sure why they even play the games.