Big10 tough in BBall???

[heitclone]

When referring to Boise State follow the same logic you used with the bolded portion of your post. In basketball 68 teams get into the NCAA Tournament. What if only 10 teams got invited into the NCAA Tournament? Murray State is 25-1 or something crazy like that this season. Would they deserve a bid over North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, Ohio State, Syracuse, Mizzou, Kentucky, Baylor, Michigan State, or Georgetown? Have they played a schedule even remotely close to the caliber of any of the 10 teams I listed?

Murray State is a great story and they will get their chance to play with some of the big boys come March but it isn't like a top 10 team is getting bumped out of the tournament to make room for them.

good point, the Boise comparison is basically that they are given the equivelant of a #1 seed in the tourney. If VCU and those teams were given #1 seeds people would be love to see them fail. The love for those type of Cinderella teams is that they are lower seeds, if a 12 seed from a power conference made a run it would be a big deal as well. It's the underdog factor that brings the excitement and gets people behind them, not necessarily the fact that they are a mid major. Boise ditched underdog status years ago.

[cymaniac17]

[QUOTE=Taco;2689739]

Dude, it's Kentucky. They recruit one and dones every year because playing for the Wildcats gives you the exposure you need to move up. Kentucky is ALWAYS going to be recruiting the cream of the crop - just like KU, Duke and UCONN (well, usually UCONN.)

Dude, I understand that it's Kentucky. Most years they are going to get one and done's, but there is still a risk involved. That's what the other poster was trying to say about too much risk involved for ISU to recruit one and done's. Sorry, but there is a lot more risk for schools like Kentucky, KU, etc to recruit one and dones every single year, than there would be for ISU to take a chance and sign one, one And done[quote]

Kentucky doesnt recruit kids. They get to pick pretty much any top 50 recruit they want because the majority of one and dones want to play there. They have no risk

[heitclone]

[quote=cymaniac17;2689774][QUOTE=Taco;2689739]Dude, I understand that it's Kentucky. Most years they are going to get one and done's, but there is still a risk involved. That's what the other poster was trying to say about too much risk involved for ISU to recruit one and done's. Sorry, but there is a lot more risk for schools like Kentucky, KU, etc to recruit one and dones every single year, than there would be for ISU to take a chance and sign one, one And done

Kentucky doesnt recruit kids. They get to pick pretty much any top 50 recruit they want because the majority of one and dones want to play there. They have no risk

Exactly, I think this year they have 3 kids who were in the top 6 in country and another who was a top 25 recruit. I'm sure they will have the same thing next year, all they really need is a couple kids to stick around for 2 years every now and then to blend with their stud freshmen and they won't skip a beat.

[Taco]

[quote=heitclone;2689785][quote=cymaniac17;2689774]

Dude, I understand that it's Kentucky. Most years they are going to get one and done's, but there is still a risk involved. That's what the other poster was trying to say about too much risk involved for ISU to recruit one and done's. Sorry, but there is a lot more risk for schools like Kentucky, KU, etc to recruit one and dones every single year, than there would be for ISU to take a chance and sign one, one And done


Exactly, I think this year they have 3 kids who were in the top 6 in country and another who was a top 25 recruit. I'm sure they will have the same thing next year, all they really need is a couple kids to stick around for 2 years every now and then to blend with their stud freshmen and they won't skip a beat.

Ok, fine, Kentucky has no risk. I was just using Kentucky as an example, bad example. My original point was that ISU would jump at taking one of these "one and done" caliber players any day of the week. The original poster I was responding to said there was a lot of risk involved, and I said, regardless, ISU or any other school would gladly take a player like that.

[Cyclonestate78]

Haha, there's a risk with every single high school athlete that signs that they're not going to produce and be a 3-4 year player. You would rather say "nah, we'll pass on this 5 star player who has the talent to go to the NBA next year if he decides to declare, and he a guy like him only comes around to ISU every so often, for some decent guy who may or may not pan out and be a player for us for a couple years." There's a risk in every single kid that signs his name on the dotted line to play for a school; a risk they may get injured, they may transfer, may not make grades, etc. Look at ISU's class in 2010, the 5 players signed were Ejim, Railey, Godfrey, McKnight, and Phillips. How many of them are still around? That was Harrison's class, and Harrison, who was a potential "1 and done" is still playing at UNC.

And to state that Kentucky doesn't have any risks is a joke. They have much more of a risk than ISU would by signing one or two "1 and done's", Kentucky is having to constantly recruit players every single year because the majority of their players are "1 and done". There is no guarantee that every top rated recruit will sign with Kentucky, thus if they don't get a good class one year, and were relying primarily on these "1 and done's", they're screwed.

How has Kentucky done on the recruiting trail since Calipari and his 1 and done scheme came to Lexington? How is their recruiting class looking for next year? Based on their track record recruiting with Calipari there is literally no risk at all.

[heitclone]

[quote=Taco;2689800][quote=heitclone;2689785]

Ok, fine, Kentucky has no risk. I was just using Kentucky as an example, bad example. My original point was that ISU would jump at taking one of these "one and done" caliber players any day of the week. The original poster I was responding to said there was a lot of risk involved, and I said, regardless, ISU or any other school would gladly take a player like that.

Exactly, if Fred tourned down a John Wall, Demarcus Cousins, Anthony Davis, Kidd-Gilcrist etc....because they were too big of risk I'd hope we'd looking for a different head coach. It's a no brainer.

[brett108]

they may very well bust in the tourney, but check out all their preseason wins. that's why they're the "best" conference this year - they proved it preseason by beating other good teams.

clearly several are struggling now.

The reason I believe they surged early is because their teams in general brought back alot of experience. They were as good as they were going to be right out of the gate, and were able to top some perrenial powers because of this. If you played those same matchups now, I doubt you would see the same outcomes. My guess is UK would beat Indiana by about 20 at this point.

[Cyclonestate78]

[quote=Taco;2689800][quote=heitclone;2689785]

Ok, fine, Kentucky has no risk. I was just using Kentucky as an example, bad example. My original point was that ISU would jump at taking one of these "one and done" caliber players any day of the week. The original poster I was responding to said there was a lot of risk involved, and I said, regardless, ISU or any other school would gladly take a player like that.

A good example would be Memphis or Georgia Tech.

When Calipari and his 1 and done circus left Memphis what happened to that program? It is clearly not the same Memphis program that it was before. Recruiting became more difficult and the holes in the roster that Cal's 1 and dones left simply couldn't be filled. Memphis went from a program playing for #1 seeds nearly every year and National Championships to being just another mid-major program.

Georgia Tech took a flyer on two 1 and done players in Thaddeus Young the 5th ranked recruit in the nation and Javaris Crittenton the #7 ranked recruit in the nation. In their 1 season at GT they finished 20-12, lost in the 1st Round of the NCAA Tournament, and after they left Georgia Tech they went 15-17 the following season and 12-19 the season after that. But.... I thought.... bringing in a 1 and done would be an instant boost in recruiting? Nope. It brings in instant success? Nope.

[Taco]

The reason I believe they surged early is because their teams in general brought back alot of experience. They were as good as they were going to be right out of the gate, and were able to top some perrenial powers because of this. If you played those same matchups now, I doubt you would see the same outcomes. My guess is UK would beat Indiana by about 20 at this point.

Indiana's best player is a freshman. Using the same logic, wouldn't he be better now than when he played against UK?

[CyJack13]

Indiana's best player is a freshman. Using the same logic, wouldn't he be better now than when he played against UK?

Michigan's best player is a freshman too.

[Taco]

Michigan's best player is a freshman too.

Yeah, and their other best player is a sophomore. Talk about a lot of experience.

[Taco]

[quote=Cyclonestate78;2689858][quote=Taco;2689800]

A good example would be Memphis or Georgia Tech.

When Calipari and his 1 and done circus left Memphis what happened to that program? It is clearly not the same Memphis program that it was before. Recruiting became more difficult and the holes in the roster that Cal's 1 and dones left simply couldn't be filled. Memphis went from a program playing for #1 seeds nearly every year and National Championships to being just another mid-major program.

Georgia Tech took a flyer on two 1 and done players in Thaddeus Young the 5th ranked recruit in the nation and Javaris Crittenton the #7 ranked recruit in the nation. In their 1 season at GT they finished 20-12, lost in the 1st Round of the NCAA Tournament, and after they left Georgia Tech they went 15-17 the following season and 12-19 the season after that. But.... I thought.... bringing in a 1 and done would be an instant boost in recruiting? Nope. It brings in instant success? Nope.

Alright pal, so what's Fred's theory on bringing in all of these transfers then?..... Hmm.. could it be that he wants to get good players coming here NOW, start winning games immediately, and that will in turn, get high school players to take notice and want to come play here.

[wonkadog]

No.. Wisconsin doesnt stomp anyone. They beat Penn State by about 5. Thats just how they go, they really dont score much on anyone.

I really think Iowa beats them in Carver after Bo tries to slow down the game. That Wisconsin team is a one man show.

Back on topic, Wisconsin blows. They are probably the most overated team in the country this year (and yes, I know they're only ranked in the teens) built up solely on media hype. I don't know why they keep being brought up as an "elite" kind of team in the Big 10. They're going to be one of those 3/4 seeds that everyone has losing in the first/second round.

[mfelske]

How does a school get away with constantly having 1-and-done players? Wouldn't that hose their APR and result in loss of scholarships?

Oh, and the Big 10 sucks. In everything.

[jdoggivjc]

Oklahoma State and Davidson are better than Iowa.

Well Missouri lost to Okie State, and KU lost to Davidson, so I guess they aren't very good teams as well.

Since you're being rediculous, I'll include some other examples. Creighton is not a very good team because they lost to Evansville. UNLV is not very good because they lost to TCU. Wichita State to Drake. Florida State to Clemson. The list goes on and on. Iowa caught Wisconsin on a cold shooting night, it happens in college basketball. They'll probably stomp on our face in Iowa City.

Might want to check your opinion of who's being ridiculous, considering, according to the NCAA's RPI, both his teams are "better" than Iowa, as well as two of the teams you listed yourself:

72 - Davidson
106 - Oklahoma St
109 - TCU
128 - Drake
130 - Iowa
157 - Evansville
173 - Clemson

NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Rankings - NCAA.com