CHN's college hoops preview

Incyte · 07-07-2007, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by johnsonjj

The best prediction of future performance is past performance.

I hope you didn't hear that from your investment firm.

CTTB78 · 07-07-2007, 01:47 PM

This site really needs a dose of reality. Ohio St. is one of the 5 voting choices for 2008 NCAA champ? Last season is over guys.

And Iowa State at 138? I don't think there is one bookie in the country that would take Marist, High Point (yes High Point!!!), Louisana Monroe, Bucknell, Utah, Charleston or Wis. GB over ISU on a neutral court at the end of this season. These guys write this stuff for a living?

The emphasis of worrying about a freahman point guard running the show is 1970s vintage. Ask Texas or Ohio St. Our guy might not be a top 5 incoming kid, but he's not chopped liver either.

jdoggivjc · 07-07-2007, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by CTTB78

This site really needs a dose of reality. Ohio St. is one of the 5 voting choices for 2008 NCAA champ? Last season is over guys.

And Iowa State at 138? I don't think there is one bookie in the country that would take Marist, High Point (yes High Point!!!), Louisana Monroe, Bucknell, Utah, Charleston or Wis. GB over ISU on a neutral court at the end of this season. These guys write this stuff for a living?

The emphasis of worrying about a freahman point guard running the show is 1970s vintage. Ask Texas or Ohio St. Our guy might not be a top 5 incoming kid, but he's not chopped liver either.

I wouldn't go as far as Utah. They're traditionally good, and they have knocked us out of the tourney before. But those other teams? Yeah. I'm pretty sure we'd handle all those teams at the BEGINNING of the season.

Oldgeezer · 07-08-2007, 09:24 AM

Isn't it funny how everything fits neatly into little boxes? No one commenting on this basketball issue has done any research on the teams under discussion. How many experienced players back? who did they add? what did they do last year? The only criteria is, "Do they play in a major conference?" If not, they can't be very good. Just like hiring a coach from the MVC.

Wesley · 07-08-2007, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by brianhos

I think it will be rough at the start, they will probably lose some games you expect them to win, but will gel later in the year. Just like football, I just want to see consistent improvement.

Hope we do not lose to UNI. That would be the pits.

83Clone · 07-08-2007, 11:18 AM

Can't really argue with anything he said. Our returning players didn't set the world on fire and the newcomers, as with all newcomers, are unproven.

Hopefully they (the newcomers) are all as good or better than advertised, as we have been let down before (Taggert, etc), and McD can get them to gel by the middle of January.

travman23 · 07-08-2007, 11:26 AM

I'm cautiously optimistic about this year. We look good on paper but lot of new faces that will have to learn on the job quickly. If we can get good PG play that will make Taylor even better I think. And if Brackins and Thompson can come in and be able to score around the basket that will help both them and Jir be able to play a little more inside-outside ball and take a few perimeter shots to keep the defense on their toes.

I think the first month or so you'll see this team trying to establish roles and get comfortable but after that I think we'll know more about what this year's team is capable of.

Wesley · 07-08-2007, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by mjones34

I think most of the write up was pretty good and the 138 was kind of a slap in the face. We should be closer to 70-80.

138 was about where we ended up last year. With Stinson we were about 100. We really need to kick it up a notch to hit 70-80.