(10-03-2013 05:34 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 11:53 AM)kardphan Wrote:  I guess pastner is just living in the moment because its a far cry from what he said last year. During his small quibble with jeff goodman saying cusa was underrated. I dont think anybody was buying what he was selling. Im going to assume he was just being a good spokesman for an atrocious league. But saying the AAC is a step up is the most captain obvious statement one could give.

Everything is relative.

If a conference is in the top 1/3 of all conferences; is it "decent" or "atrocious" as compared to the entire world of NCAA D1 basketball conferences? I think the answer to that is pretty obvious, but perhaps not.

Here is CBS Sports 2013 final ratings of conferences:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketba...pi/2012-13

There are 33 conferences listed and CUSA is ranked 11th. Not great, not even that good, but is indeed in the top 1/3. I also checked 2 years prior, which actually had CUSA rated higher.

It wasn't murderer's row, the ACC, or BE; but it was better than 22 other conferences and not as good as 10 others.

"Atrocious" or "decent"? Each can form their own opinion.

The AAC is indeed a step up, just like the ACC will be a step up from where the Cards are playing this year.

-----and how in the heck does Coach Paster stating the this conference is a step up equal him "living in the moment" or "far cry from what he said last year"?

I'm just saying you lose credibility when you say cusa was an underrated league in basketball. Only in his mind was it underrated and yes it was very much atrocious as in god awful. Any rational human being with two working eye balls would have the same observation. I mean living in the moment as in putting his captain obvious hat on. Saying the AAC is a step up gives him the no sh!t award.lol The ACC is only a step up relative to this season. In football yes its definitely a step up.

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

I see 4 as of right now. Anything past that is wishful thinking at this point. Maybe USF being that 5th team.

(10-03-2013 08:22 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

yes but he's not our only good recruit. Morman and Caupain are excellent. Sleep on Morman and we'll see what you have to say after your first game against us in Cincy.

Since when are 3-star recruits considered "excellent"? They're generally considered to be kids who are a couple of years away from being difference makers.

(10-03-2013 10:50 PM)kardphan Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

I see 4 as of right now. Anything past that is wishful thinking at this point. Maybe USF being that 5th team.

I agree. And even 4 is shaky.

(10-03-2013 04:47 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 01:44 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  Memphis was 113 - 13 in CUSA after all the good teams left (Louisville, Cincinnati, and the others). Even very good teams don't 113-13 in a decent conference. CUSA was really bad. I have to agree, there just might be a little culture shock having to play as many ranked teams as it seems we will this season along with some others that might be pretty good.

C-USA was not "really bad". It was, as measured by RPI, near the top third of all conferences. Memphis had outstanding results in an above average league.

I won't dispute that CUSA was 11th or 12th of 31 leagues last season. As you said, it is relative. To me and many others, that is nothing to brag about. There's a reason many leagues are guaranteed 1 bid conferences every year. Division 1 basketball includes leagues such as the SWAC, where programs barely have money to pay basic expenses like gas and coach bus service to conference road games. They play in tiny gyms in crowds that number in triple digits.

The need to fund only 13 scholarships compared to 85 for football means nearly anyone can join D1. Because of that basketball essentially has what football would have if you combined all of FBS and FCS. If you combined those and then had a Sun Belt fan bragging that they were in the 9th best conference out of 23 (10 FBS, 13 FCS), no one would be impressed.

Just as an example, last year BE #11 was ahead of CUSA #3. The gulf was so wide it's difficult to even attempt a comparison. That doesn't mean Memphis can't compete this season, it just explains why few outside of Memphis are impressed with gaudy conference performance in a league that was gutted in 2005.

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

If you are going to act like you know something about Temple basketball...you should at least have correct information...

And for the record,mi don't think Temple will finish that high in the league this year...

(10-04-2013 07:08 AM)templefan1 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

If you are going to act like you know something about Temple basketball...you should at least have correct information...

And for the record,mi don't think Temple will finish that high in the league this year...

Temple returns 23.2 points per game from last year.

Temples's best recruit is the 21st ranked PF 4 star Dan Dingle

Where is he wrong? Cummings may have started a few games last year but his point remains entirely valid.

(10-04-2013 07:08 AM)templefan1 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

If you are going to act like you know something about Temple basketball...you should at least have correct information...

And for the record,mi don't think Temple will finish that high in the league this year...

One of the great things about the Internet is that someone's always out there to edit what ou say. I'm happy to have you point out where I got it wrong.

I suspect it was when I said that they lost their starting 5. I hadn't thought that was the case, but that's what I read in one of the preseason reports, so I took them at their word.

Checking further, it appears that 2 starters are returning. Correct? Lee, the team's best rebounder who also chipped in 10 ppg was an important player. Cummings was more of a role player. They are the only 2 players back who averaged more than a dozen mpg. Fair enough so far?

Now let's look at what's gone. In addition to the 3 graduated starters, the top 2 players off the bench are also gone - O'Brien (20 mpg) and DiLeo (19 mpg). Here's what the 5 departing players took with them:

Wyatt - 20 ppg, 4 apg, 2 spg, 84 FT%, team's best player
Randall - 11 ppg, 6 rpg, 2 apg, #2 scorer and rebounder
O'Brien - 9 ppg, 49 FG%, 43 3p%, team's best 3-point shooter
Hollis-Jefferson - 9 ppg, 6 rpg, 3 apg, great defense
DiLeo - 3 ppg, 2 rpg, 2 apg, great defense

Any way you look at it the Owls lost a huge chunk of their production and don't appear to have superior recruits coming in ready to step in and pick up the slack.

I don't see how this team can be construed as a tournament team. If it does get there, Dunphy should be voted coach of the year.

I stand corrected on saying that the entire starting 5 is gone. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out. I will edit my earlier post.

Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

UConn fans are just mad because they are having a hard time recruiting. They are about to lose their commit of Daniel Hamilton to UCLA. Yes, he is going to UCLA, don't believe what any of his circle is saying.

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

Usually its the UoL fans trying to make everyone else feel small. Must be the Blue Grass inferiority complex.

(10-04-2013 09:13 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 07:08 AM)templefan1 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

If you are going to act like you know something about Temple basketball...you should at least have correct information...

And for the record,mi don't think Temple will finish that high in the league this year...

One of the great things about the Internet is that someone's always out there to edit what ou say. I'm happy to have you point out where I got it wrong.

I suspect it was when I said that they lost their starting 5. I hadn't thought that was the case, but that's what I read in one of the preseason reports, so I took them at their word.

Checking further, it appears that 2 starters are returning. Correct? Lee, the team's best rebounder who also chipped in 10 ppg was an important player. Cummings was more of a role player. They are the only 2 players back who averaged more than a dozen mpg. Fair enough so far?

Now let's look at what's gone. In addition to the 3 graduated starters, the top 2 players off the bench are also gone - O'Brien (20 mpg) and DiLeo (19 mpg). Here's what the 5 departing players took with them:

Wyatt - 20 ppg, 4 apg, 2 spg, 84 FT%, team's best player
Randall - 11 ppg, 6 rpg, 2 apg, #2 scorer and rebounder
O'Brien - 9 ppg, 49 FG%, 43 3p%, team's best 3-point shooter
Hollis-Jefferson - 9 ppg, 6 rpg, 3 apg, great defense
DiLeo - 3 ppg, 2 rpg, 2 apg, great defense

Any way you look at it the Owls lost a huge chunk of their production and don't appear to have superior recruits coming in ready to step in and pick up the slack.

I don't see how this team can be construed as a tournament team. If it does get there, Dunphy should be voted coach of the year.

I stand corrected on saying that the entire starting 5 is gone. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out. I will edit my earlier post.

Lee and Cummings return as starters, like you said in your follow up post(I believe Cummings started most of the games last year). Also, with Lee, he was injured late in the season last year. If healthy, you will see more scoring from him like he did in the first 20 games of the season...You need to remember the names Dingle, Decosey, and Brown. Those will be the core of temple! Decosey will be the leading scorer for this team and was a first team all-state NJ player in HS. Look for him to average 15+ pts this year. Dingle will be better than Hollis-Jefferson was last year. He is a heady player. The key to the season however will be backup center Watson...He needs to provide solid minutes.

You are definitely overestimating the loss of Randall and Dileo. Obrien was a great three pt threat, but he lacked defense and a low post game. Both were role players and their offensive game was very limited. Wyatt was a great player and really carried the team last year. Look for a more balance scoring attack with Lee, Decosey, Dingle and possible Pepper carrying the load.

I am not saying Temple will be a tournament team...but by the end of the year, this team will be good.

I just tend to get defensive when people start conveying "knowledge" of other team when they really don't know much...

(10-04-2013 12:05 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:47 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 01:44 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  Memphis was 113 - 13 in CUSA after all the good teams left (Louisville, Cincinnati, and the others). Even very good teams don't 113-13 in a decent conference. CUSA was really bad. I have to agree, there just might be a little culture shock having to play as many ranked teams as it seems we will this season along with some others that might be pretty good.

C-USA was not "really bad". It was, as measured by RPI, near the top third of all conferences. Memphis had outstanding results in an above average league.

I won't dispute that CUSA was 11th or 12th of 31 leagues last season. As you said, it is relative. To me and many others, that is nothing to brag about. There's a reason many leagues are guaranteed 1 bid conferences every year. Division 1 basketball includes leagues such as the SWAC, where programs barely have money to pay basic expenses like gas and coach bus service to conference road games. They play in tiny gyms in crowds that number in triple digits.

The need to fund only 13 scholarships compared to 85 for football means nearly anyone can join D1. Because of that basketball essentially has what football would have if you combined all of FBS and FCS. If you combined those and then had a Sun Belt fan bragging that they were in the 9th best conference out of 23 (10 FBS, 13 FCS), no one would be impressed.

Just as an example, last year BE #11 was ahead of CUSA #3. The gulf was so wide it's difficult to even attempt a comparison. That doesn't mean Memphis can't compete this season, it just explains why few outside of Memphis are impressed with gaudy conference performance in a league that was gutted in 2005.

Compared to the top conferences, C-USA was bad. Compared to the bottom conferences (e.g., SWAC), C-USA was good. The relevant comparison group are conferences eligible for bids.

Everyone is welcome to their subjective impressions (it is the fodder of messageboards) but the facts are that the Tigers performed very well in an above average conference.

We will soon find out how the Tigers perform in a stronger conference.

(10-04-2013 12:26 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 12:05 AM)CollegeCard Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:47 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 01:44 PM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  Memphis was 113 - 13 in CUSA after all the good teams left (Louisville, Cincinnati, and the others). Even very good teams don't 113-13 in a decent conference. CUSA was really bad. I have to agree, there just might be a little culture shock having to play as many ranked teams as it seems we will this season along with some others that might be pretty good.

C-USA was not "really bad". It was, as measured by RPI, near the top third of all conferences. Memphis had outstanding results in an above average league.

I won't dispute that CUSA was 11th or 12th of 31 leagues last season. As you said, it is relative. To me and many others, that is nothing to brag about. There's a reason many leagues are guaranteed 1 bid conferences every year. Division 1 basketball includes leagues such as the SWAC, where programs barely have money to pay basic expenses like gas and coach bus service to conference road games. They play in tiny gyms in crowds that number in triple digits.

The need to fund only 13 scholarships compared to 85 for football means nearly anyone can join D1. Because of that basketball essentially has what football would have if you combined all of FBS and FCS. If you combined those and then had a Sun Belt fan bragging that they were in the 9th best conference out of 23 (10 FBS, 13 FCS), no one would be impressed.

Just as an example, last year BE #11 was ahead of CUSA #3. The gulf was so wide it's difficult to even attempt a comparison. That doesn't mean Memphis can't compete this season, it just explains why few outside of Memphis are impressed with gaudy conference performance in a league that was gutted in 2005.

Compared to the top conferences, C-USA was bad. Compared to the bottom conferences (e.g., SWAC), C-USA was good. The relevant comparison group are conferences eligible for bids.

Everyone is welcome to their subjective impressions (it is the fodder of messageboards) but the facts are that the Tigers performed very well in an above average conference.

We will soon find out how the Tigers perform in a stronger conference.

...and that's exactly what I was trying to convey in my comments a few posts above. I was merely addressing the adjective "atrocious" being attached to a conference that was ranked in the top 1/3 of all conferences. It wasn't great or it would have been an annual multiple bid league and it wasn't one of the top performing conferences.

However, when compared to 30+ D1 conferences; it was above the average....which certainly doesn't qualify for "atrocious."

(10-04-2013 10:59 AM)Geotag Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

UConn fans are just mad because they are having a hard time recruiting. They are about to lose their commit of Daniel Hamilton to UCLA. Yes, he is going to UCLA, don't believe what any of his circle is saying.

Sure ignore his coach and him in favor of believing an annoynmous poster on the internet. OH! But the crystal ball on 247 says its going to happen...so it must!

UConn fans aren't mad about recruiting. We have Hamilton signed, Purvis transferring and Rock Lubin signed. We are in for Robinson, Cassell and Kasongo among others still. That is a solid class for UConn. We are never paper champions like Memphis. We actually win championships.

(10-04-2013 11:02 AM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

Usually its the UoL fans trying to make everyone else feel small. Must be the Blue Grass inferiority complex.

Your guy is the one that said it. It is your Tennessee version of inferiority. We just agree that Memphis was too good a program for CUSA. The AAC is better than the CUSA was/is, but it is not as good as the old Big East, but only the current ACC is currently as good as the old Big East was.

I would rate the conferences off the top of my head and little research:
ACC
Big Ten
Pac 12
AAC
Big East
Big 12
SEC
the field..

(10-04-2013 01:44 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:59 AM)Geotag Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

UConn fans are just mad because they are having a hard time recruiting. They are about to lose their commit of Daniel Hamilton to UCLA. Yes, he is going to UCLA, don't believe what any of his circle is saying.

Sure ignore his coach and him in favor of believing an annoynmous poster on the internet. OH! But the crystal ball on 247 says its going to happen...so it must!

UConn fans aren't mad about recruiting. We have Hamilton signed, Purvis transferring and Rock Lubin signed. We are in for Robinson, Cassell and Kasongo among others still. That is a solid class for UConn. We are never paper champions like Memphis. We actually win championships.

You guys were bashing a 3* kid for picking Oregon. A 3* really? You know you hit rock bottom when you are fighting with middling teams over a 3 star.

(10-04-2013 02:17 PM)Geotag Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 01:44 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:59 AM)Geotag Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

UConn fans are just mad because they are having a hard time recruiting. They are about to lose their commit of Daniel Hamilton to UCLA. Yes, he is going to UCLA, don't believe what any of his circle is saying.

Sure ignore his coach and him in favor of believing an annoynmous poster on the internet. OH! But the crystal ball on 247 says its going to happen...so it must!

UConn fans aren't mad about recruiting. We have Hamilton signed, Purvis transferring and Rock Lubin signed. We are in for Robinson, Cassell and Kasongo among others still. That is a solid class for UConn. We are never paper champions like Memphis. We actually win championships.

You guys were bashing a 3* kid for picking Oregon. A 3* really? You know you hit rock bottom when you are fighting with middling teams over a 3 star.

I can't argue with stupid. You legitamately make this forum a worse place on a daily basis.

(10-04-2013 02:22 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 02:17 PM)Geotag Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 01:44 PM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:59 AM)Geotag Wrote:  

(10-04-2013 10:15 AM)oldtiger Wrote:  Who would have thought that a basketball coach stating that the AAC is a step up from a previous conference would have created some of these comments?

Obviously, some folks just like to argue, even when there's nothing significant to argue about.

UConn fans are just mad because they are having a hard time recruiting. They are about to lose their commit of Daniel Hamilton to UCLA. Yes, he is going to UCLA, don't believe what any of his circle is saying.

Sure ignore his coach and him in favor of believing an annoynmous poster on the internet. OH! But the crystal ball on 247 says its going to happen...so it must!

UConn fans aren't mad about recruiting. We have Hamilton signed, Purvis transferring and Rock Lubin signed. We are in for Robinson, Cassell and Kasongo among others still. That is a solid class for UConn. We are never paper champions like Memphis. We actually win championships.

You guys were bashing a 3* kid for picking Oregon. A 3* really? You know you hit rock bottom when you are fighting with middling teams over a 3 star.

I can't argue with stupid. You legitamately make this forum a worse place on a daily basis.

You can't argue anything because you guys have been reduced to fighting over 3*. I am so tired of how the AAC is killing your recruiting. Man up and take on the challenge, you got Kevin Ollie for crying out loud.

(10-03-2013 10:51 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 08:22 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 04:41 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 02:53 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(10-03-2013 10:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  "I think the American is as good a basketball league as any in the country," Pastner said Tuesday night in New York. "That may be an unconventional answer but I think it's the truth. I think five to six teams will play in the NCAA Tournament."

I think Pastner is a smart man and knows what he is talking about.

1. UL
2. Memphis
3. UCONN
4. Temple
5. UC

who will be number six?

USF? UCF? Houston?

Consider that 2 or 3 teams could have an NIT shot and you are looking at potentially 9 out 12 teams playing in the post season. That is a DAMN good league and hopefully can get us more money down the road from the basketball alone.

There is absolutely no way that Temple should be mentioned with those other programs this year. They lost their entire starting 5 from last year and there nothing at all impressive about this year's recruiting class. They simply will not be on the same level as the others and do not project as an NCAA tournament team.

Frankly, Cincinnati projects to be pretty much what they were last year, an NCAA bubble team. After losing 3 starters, they are no sure thing to make the tournament. Their best recruit is a tremendously talented but 190 pound, 6-9 power forward. Reminds me a lot of UConn's DeAndre Daniels. The talent was their but the body was not when he arrived on campus. He needed his freshman year just to get himself physically up to BE level to be able to compete.

yes but he's not our only good recruit. Morman and Caupain are excellent. Sleep on Morman and we'll see what you have to say after your first game against us in Cincy.

Since when are 3-star recruits considered "excellent"? They're generally considered to be kids who are a couple of years away from being difference makers.

You will see they were underrated....