It was to show what recruiting rankings are like on this roster. Relax bud...I'm well aware rankings are not exact but if you compare our roster with the top 10 programs currently I bet their average star ranking for recruits is a lot higher than ours.
OSU
- Thread starter neigo
- Start date
Who , by name , wrote that? I just never read that before.
.
Priller was NEVER a two star, asnd never should have come to IU. GG is only a 2 star because IU signed him. I have looked at the spring rankings, and Priller was no where to be found. CTC is fortunate to have survived, with the number of failures in the Yogi and then the Hartman classes. Very fortunate, and he has not learned from that.
We will likely start the year as a top 10 team with our substandard roster. We finished last year ranked #9 in the final Coach's Poll ahead of Duke, UK, and Maryland. How is that possible if the elite schools are kicking our ass in recruiting? Is it our elite coach? No, we don't have an elite coach. Maybe coaches look more at what a kid can do than what star value Rivals gives a kid.
Every player that started in the title game was a top 100 recruit....which included the team that scored 100 on us
We have Big 10 talent, we don't have national title type talent.
Last year was our build up to year, if we weren't good last year that would be really bad
Have we had the success UK and Duke has had? I don't beleive we have. Also that Duke team embarrassed us. So I take it you feel we are Bringing in elite talent that will win a national title?
That's my point. The number of stars are convenient for us to compare a player, but coaches should rely on more than that.
Priller and April were panic moves in the hopes they could become decent over time or at least become practice players. They were available for a reason and it isn't like Crean was surprised. A team isn't defined by your #12 and #13 player.
I would love to have the best talent. Teams win with less talent. The best talent doesn't always win. Chemistry, coaching, talent, and depth win titles. Luck with being in a bracket with upsets plays a huge role. An upset before the Sweet 16 could have put us in the Final 4 this year. Duke peaked while we were still figuring it out. That game meant nothing to how the teams were playing in March.
I'll take Duke and UKs stars and live with the occasional flame out in the tourney along with their FFs and you can have the hoping for a good seed in the upset bracket
You can nitpick the seasons when the talent heavy teams get upset but in the big picture there is a reason that they are making multiple FFs and that reason is five star talent. The lack of those stars is why we can't get past the S16
If I didn't know better, I would think you were talking about IUFB, not hoops.
To be fair, Duke lost Amile Jefferson not long after we played them. It was a huge loss for them, one they never were able to adjust from.
I always think is sorta funny when a Duke loses a player it makes a huge difference but when we are down 4 players. Blackman out for year Morgan shoulder pops out nearly every game. Robert out at the end year Hartman broken hand. We should have still beat UNC.
[
we were the champions of fantasy land then -- hoist the banner that reads "could beaten Duke in March had we played them"
I love this
we were the champions of fantasy land then -- hoist the banner that reads "could beaten Duke in March had we played them"
I love this
File this under "y'all haters can suck it"...
The magazine was Dick Vitale's 1989-90 preseason magazine. Article starts on page 93, entitled "Prep Phenoms: The Top 20 High School All-Americans." Contributors to the story, among others, include Chris Wallace of Blue Ribbon Sports, Bob Gibbons of All Star Sports, Van Coleman of The National Recruiters Cage Letter and several references from The Hoop Scoop. And I quote, from the fall before their high school senior year:
"If Bradley bulks up, look for the Bradley-Montross matchup to evolve throughout the 90's and into the next century to the point where it rivals the previous best center rivalry in the history of the game--Bill Russell versus Wilt Chamberlain."
From further in the article:
"We have never observed a more skilled, better coordinated big man with the speed and agility of Bradley. Although he is still just a young colt, Bradley could become the franchise player of the next several decades (a la Jabbar or Wilt Chamberlain) if he had strength and bulk," said Gibbons.
1st team All-American that preseason were Bradley, Montross, Anfernee Hardaway, Ed O'Bannon and Chris Webber (the only junior on the list).
Way to grow a pair and take the bet, shirtsandskins. But predictable of you, the same fool who accuses others of having anger issues all while posting fifty times a day on here with your borderline obsessional hate of Crean.
The magazine was Dick Vitale's 1989-90 preseason magazine. Article starts on page 93, entitled "Prep Phenoms: The Top 20 High School All-Americans." Contributors to the story, among others, include Chris Wallace of Blue Ribbon Sports, Bob Gibbons of All Star Sports, Van Coleman of The National Recruiters Cage Letter and several references from The Hoop Scoop. And I quote, from the fall before their high school senior year:
"If Bradley bulks up, look for the Bradley-Montross matchup to evolve throughout the 90's and into the next century to the point where it rivals the previous best center rivalry in the history of the game--Bill Russell versus Wilt Chamberlain."
From further in the article:
"We have never observed a more skilled, better coordinated big man with the speed and agility of Bradley. Although he is still just a young colt, Bradley could become the franchise player of the next several decades (a la Jabbar or Wilt Chamberlain) if he had strength and bulk," said Gibbons.
1st team All-American that preseason were Bradley, Montross, Anfernee Hardaway, Ed O'Bannon and Chris Webber (the only junior on the list).
Way to grow a pair and take the bet, shirtsandskins. But predictable of you, the same fool who accuses others of having anger issues all while posting fifty times a day on here with your borderline obsessional hate of Crean.
But in spite of all the injuries, you still think IU would've beaten a team that dominated them earlier in the year when IU was at full strength? That makes no sense.
Thanks, for posting it
As for your opinion of me, the opinions of people like you means nothing to me...feel free to boycott me. M
Gee, and I figured that after getting called a liar that posting this might generate something resembling an apology. Silly me.
I said i think they could have beat Duke. I think we will all agree it would have been a good game. Which would suggest that one team vastly improved while the other regressed. Thanks for noting that IU was injury riddled at the end of the year. Im alright not using it as an excuse as long as we dont use it as an excuse for other teams.
A healthy IU couldn't compete with them, but a beat up IU could defeat them? Highly unlikely, but I understand why you think that.
I am pretty sure the IU team that played Duke in December was not as good as the IU team in March. Meaning we improved a lot after that game and were playing a lot better than what we were early in the season. Also Duke had also lost a key big man and they were really short in the front court.
Both teams played UNC late in the season. Duke was competitive with them, while IU was not. IU certainly improved during that time, but it's unlikely they could've competed defensively against a fundamentally solid team like Duke.
Finished above them in the rankings, but the head to head match up told the story. Duke was superior.
Agree that teams improve and regress, I just don't think IU matched up well with them, as their game showed.
If one game indicated how you played the next time against a team how can you explain how on 12/7 Oklahoma beat Villanova 78-55 and on 4/2 Villanova beat Oklahoma 95-51.
I understand your point, but the UNC common opponent doesn't suggest IU would've fared very well.
Just look at our 87 team where we beat both NW and UW at home by over 30 points. A couple of months later when we played them on the road it was a very close game and the UW game went to 3 ot's.
Exceptions are out there, even from nearly 30 years ago. IU just didn't match up well with duke, and their lack of fundamental play hurt them against good teams.
But by the same token, UK beat Duke fairly easily in December and IU dispatched that same UK team in March. Gut feeling, IU could have been far more competitive with Duke second time around but would have dropped a semi-close game.
IU barely beat UK, and their lack of fundamental play would've killed them again vs Duke.
Duke and UK are extreme examples.
When Duke won the NC two years ago every Duke player that played in the title game was a McDonalds All American.
EVERY PLAYER. Not saying that is what it takes but the talent Coach K and Cal are getting is unreal.
I've never seen a poster get this upset over a deleted post...you're an overachiever
I'm sorry...I just went back and reread your post, and saw where you clearly said it was your opinion.
Carry on.
I know a Duke and UK is the top of college basketball but do you honestly think we are recruiting at a high enough level to win a national title?
