Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 95
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA

    Double digit minutes for Nolan Smith

    Your question wasn't directed toward me, but I'm going to pipe up and offer my opinion anyway. Nolan Smith will average double digit minutes as a Freshman because of two factors: first, we need his on-the-ball defense to prevent dribble penetration by our opponents point guard, and second we need another offensive player who can penetrate and create offense. In regard to defense, last year against Carolina, DeMarcus Nelson defended Ty Lawson. I see Nolan Smith filling that role in 2007. On offense, Nolan can create offense with penetration. At least that is what he did in the all-star games. Coach K will experiment with a variety of line ups and I am excited about the prospect of seeing D. Nelson, G. Henderson, L. Thomas, K. Singler and N. Smith on the court at the same time.

    Bob Green
    Yokosuka, Japan

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Jumbo View Post
    Ah, two of the favorite recurring topics on DBR. I just thought it was worth noting that last night, the Phoenix Suns played a six-man rotation over 48 minutes. For significant stretches of the game, they played Shawn Marion, a 6'7" SF-turned-PF at center, James Jones, a swingman, at the 4, and three guards. And this was in the NBA, where everyone is big, where veterans like Jalen Rose are locked to the bench, and the opponent has Tim Duncan in the middle, and plenty of size and depth in other spots.
    Now, Phoenix ended up losing, and did seem to wear down physically. (Well, I think as much of anything, Phoenix ran out of options). But, to take a team a strong as the Spurs down to the wire playing six men of 48 minutes while using a small lineup should show you something: A lot of our preconceptions about basketball are wrong.
    Duke might not have a Steve Nash running the point or someone as freakishly athletic to play a hybrid forward spot like Shawn Marion. But, then again, Duke's not facing many Tim Duncans either. The point is, there are many ways to skin a cat in basketball. And if Duke's lacking a bit of size next year, beyond Zoubek and maybe Thomas, that's not such a big deal.
    Might Duke have trouble guarding an occasional post player one-on-one? Sure. Might Duke lack a back-to-the-basket scorer at times? Perhaps. But on the other hand, how much do you think teams would enjoy trying to match up defensively against a lineup that featured, say, Paulus-Scheyer-Nelson-Henderson-Singler, at times next year?
    K's got plenty of talent to work with next year. He's got enough athletes to keep Duke competitive on the boards. He's got enough midsized players like Thomas, McClure and Singler, to battle against post players. As long as Duke develops more cohesiveness on the defensive end than last year, no one's going to overpower the team at the end. And then it's up to K to make the most out of a team with some potentially scary offensive weapons, and force teams to match up to Duke, rather than the other way around.
    The bottom line is there are only a handful of games where Duke's going to go against some sort of an awesome post presence. And as long as Duke counters that with other strengths, it shouldn't matter.
    To play devil's advocate, I'll say these things:

    1) We don't have a point guard like Steve Nash. I think this is a huge part of why things work for Phoenix.
    2) We don't have nearly the depth of athletes surrounding said fantastic point guard like Barbosa, Bell, Jones, and Marion.
    3) It was one game that they eventually lost due to fatigue. And if they'd tried it again, I suspect San Antonio would have further exploited their matchup advantages. Doing it for one game is one thing, but repeating it over and over will not be successful.
    4) With regard to the "we won't face a Tim Duncan," my response is that the difference between the better NCAA big men and Duncan is less drastic than the difference between our team and the Suns.
    5) Small ball will be sufficient to beat weaker teams, but we'd probably win those games with Thomas/Zoubek on the floor anyway. It's against the more elite teams that we'll need some size.

    Devil's advocacy aside, I don't think we're going to HAVE to play extended small ball minutes. I think that Thomas and Zoubek are going to make solid improvement this year. And if they can give us 35-40 minutes of solid post play, we'll be fine. I think small ball is best suited for limited use, as with any quirky strategy. Overuse will result in the strategy being exploited by better teams. But in short spurts, it can be a very effective weapon for us. And if Zoubek and Thomas can give us 35-40 minutes, that could leave us with about 10 minutes or so of small ball to wreak havoc on the opposition.
    Last edited by CDu; 05-21-2007 at 03:04 PM.

  3. #63
    Great counter points listed above. We don't have the bench or athletes for the last couple of years to play like that. Coach K has to pick up recruiting athletes and quality post players.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Devil's advocacy aside, I don't think we're going to HAVE to play extended small ball minutes. I think that Thomas and Zoubek are going to make solid improvement this year. And if they can give us 35-40 minutes of solid post play, we'll be fine. I think small ball is best suited for limited use, as with any quirky strategy. Overuse will result in the strategy being exploited by better teams. But in short spurts, it can be a very effective weapon for us. And if Zoubek and Thomas can give us 35-40 minutes, that could leave us with about 10 minutes or so of small ball to wreak havoc on the opposition.
    I agree wholeheartedly. I hope we can play small ball when Coach K thinks it gains us a competitive advantage . . . and not because we have no other reasonable alternatives.

    Remember that we went 4-6 winding down the ACC, out in the first round in ACC tournament, and out in the first round of the NCAA tournament. Yet people tout Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Nelson-Singler as being an optimal lineup. Small ball. Excuse me, but whats different from the team that went 4-8 at the end of last year? At either end of the court?

    Well, they are older and more experienced. True, but is that enough? Roberts out and Singler in. I've gotta defer judgment here because Singler hasn't played a single game yet. I'm hopeful but . . .

    I worry about small ball.

    This is I'm hoping for:

    1) BZ and/or LT make significant strides offensively. They don't have to be world-beaters but opponents have to respect their inside game.

    2) SOMEONE needs to be willing to step forward and be the man. When its crunch time, someone has to be able to and be willing to demand the damned ball and get it done. We didn't have that last year. Next year, I'm hoping that Henderson steps up. He's certainly got the talent but does he have the desire. I hope so and I think so. And if Singler comes in and shows that he's got the competitive fire to do it, all the better.

    3) B'ball is a team sport and I agree completely with Jumbo's central point that a team that plays well together is going to be hard to beat irrespective of the make-up of the individual parts. But this is a funny deal here. How does that happen? Last year's team didn't have it . . . I have some guesses as to why but they are irrelevant. How do we regain it? I personally have no clue but I am hopeful, and confident, that Coach K does.

    So for me, I nay say small ball. I want balance . . . a respectable (not great) interior game, I want a go-to guy, and I want teamwork.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Green View Post
    Your question wasn't directed toward me, but I'm going to pipe up and offer my opinion anyway. Nolan Smith will average double digit minutes as a Freshman because of two factors: first, we need his on-the-ball defense to prevent dribble penetration by our opponents point guard, and second we need another offensive player who can penetrate and create offense. In regard to defense, last year against Carolina, DeMarcus Nelson defended Ty Lawson. I see Nolan Smith filling that role in 2007. On offense, Nolan can create offense with penetration. At least that is what he did in the all-star games. Coach K will experiment with a variety of line ups and I am excited about the prospect of seeing D. Nelson, G. Henderson, L. Thomas, K. Singler and N. Smith on the court at the same time.

    Bob Green
    Yokosuka, Japan

    Thank you Bob!!! I think Nolan Smith has to see time as a freshman, and I really think he can bring a lot which has been missing to this team. With a hobbled Paulus and a sometimes tentative Scheyer, I don't think Duke had the necessary athleticism at the guard spots to compete against the Carolinas, the UVAs with Reynolds and Singletary, and the Eric Maynors of VCU. Many times, this inevitably fell on Demarcus, who would be justifiably gassed at the end of games.

    I think Smith's arrival will take a huge burden off of Nelson and help spread some of the defensive responsibilities. On offense, he's someone who is able to create and get to the rim with consistency, something Paulus and Scheyer cannot do, and something even Demarcus struggles with from time to time.

    The lineup Bob mentioned with Smith, Nelson, Henderson, Singler, and Thomas/Zoubek is a very exciting prospect. Though I imagine Paulus will probably start (though not guaranteed), this is the lineup I personally think Duke should go with. The athleticism of this personnel, the ablility to create offensively combined with the ability to deny dribble pentration make this a lineup I think Duke has to take a look at. This would be as athletic a lineup as Duke has had in a few years. Plus, bringing Paulus, Scheyer, King, McClure, and Zoubek or Thomas off the bench is a luxury any coach in the ACC would take in a second. I know this is different from what most people have, but a lineup like this would make Duke about as tough an out as they can be, IMHO.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    To play devil's advocate, I'll say these things:

    1) We don't have a point guard like Steve Nash. I think this is a huge part of why things work for Phoenix.
    2) We don't have nearly the depth of athletes surrounding said fantastic point guard like Barbosa, Bell, Jones, and Marion.
    3) It was one game that they eventually lost due to fatigue. And if they'd tried it again, I suspect San Antonio would have further exploited their matchup advantages. Doing it for one game is one thing, but repeating it over and over will not be successful.
    4) With regard to the "we won't face a Tim Duncan," my response is that the difference between the better NCAA big men and Duncan is less drastic than the difference between our team and the Suns.
    5) Small ball will be sufficient to beat weaker teams, but we'd probably win those games with Thomas/Zoubek on the floor anyway. It's against the more elite teams that we'll need some size.

    Devil's advocacy aside, I don't think we're going to HAVE to play extended small ball minutes. I think that Thomas and Zoubek are going to make solid improvement this year. And if they can give us 35-40 minutes of solid post play, we'll be fine. I think small ball is best suited for limited use, as with any quirky strategy. Overuse will result in the strategy being exploited by better teams. But in short spurts, it can be a very effective weapon for us. And if Zoubek and Thomas can give us 35-40 minutes, that could leave us with about 10 minutes or so of small ball to wreak havoc on the opposition.
    No college team has anything close to what the Suns or Spurs have. My point is that if an NBA team can win or play well going small (and the Suns made the Western Conference Finals last year with Boris Diaw at center), it can certainly work in college, where only a handful of teams have bigs with skills.

    I am, by no means, suggesting Duke play small-ball for extended minutes (although, to be honest, any lineup without Zoubek will be pretty small by some standards). I believe Zoubek will get a legit chance to play at least half the game. But, I am saying that Duke has the option to go small, and can do so effectively. Butler was tiny, and had a great season. If you look around the country, plenty of other teams succeeded without traditional size.

    The other argument, about depth, again was not to suggest that Duke should play six or seven guys, just that NBA teams somehow seem to do it, and do it well, in a game that's eight minutes longer (and a season that's 50 games longer). I posted something during the tournament showing how many of the Sweet 16 teams played seven guys or fewer (I believe it was 11 of the 16).

    The point? That people continue to have Duke tunnel vision, and they don't realize what's working elsewhere in the basketball world.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by jawk24 View Post
    Great counter points listed above. We don't have the bench or athletes for the last couple of years to play like that. Coach K has to pick up recruiting athletes and quality post players.
    Duke doesn't have the "bench" or "athletes" to play like what?

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by dw0827 View Post
    Remember that we went 4-6 winding down the ACC, out in the first round in ACC tournament, and out in the first round of the NCAA tournament. Yet people tout Paulus-Scheyer-Henderson-Nelson-Singler as being an optimal lineup. Small ball. Excuse me, but whats different from the team that went 4-8 at the end of last year? At either end of the court?

    Well, they are older and more experienced. True, but is that enough? Roberts out and Singler in. I've gotta defer judgment here because Singler hasn't played a single game yet. I'm hopeful but . . .
    First, who is "Roberts?"
    Second, no one is touting that as the optimal lineup. I mentioned it as an alternative that shouldn't be dismissed, and which could be very effective in spurts.
    Third, how will those guys be different than next year? Let's see, Paulus won't have a broken foot. Scheyer and Henderson will have a year of experience under their belts. Scheyer should be a lot physically stronger. Four of them will have had a ton of experience playing together. So, they'll be a year older, stronger, better and more mature, and half the guys who sent them on that 4-8 streak won't even be playing college hoops anymore. So, that's just a little of what will be different.
    Fourth, Singler is a totally different animal offensively than McRoberts. He can shoot. He has real post moves. He has great footwork. In fact, they really don't have much in common at all.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Classof06 View Post
    The lineup Bob mentioned with Smith, Nelson, Henderson, Singler, and Thomas/Zoubek is a very exciting prospect.
    Going out on a limb here - we will average less than 2 minutes per game where neither Paulus or Scheyer are on the floor. I like like the thought of athleticism too, but it's not gonna happen.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Classof06 View Post
    Thank you Bob!!! I think Nolan Smith has to see time as a freshman, and I really think he can bring a lot which has been missing to this team. With a hobbled Paulus and a sometimes tentative Scheyer, I don't think Duke had the necessary athleticism at the guard spots to compete against the Carolinas, the UVAs with Reynolds and Singletary, and the Eric Maynors of VCU. Many times, this inevitably fell on Demarcus, who would be justifiably gassed at the end of games.

    I think Smith's arrival will take a huge burden off of Nelson and help spread some of the defensive responsibilities. On offense, he's someone who is able to create and get to the rim with consistency, something Paulus and Scheyer cannot do, and something even Demarcus struggles with from time to time.

    The lineup Bob mentioned with Smith, Nelson, Henderson, Singler, and Thomas/Zoubek is a very exciting prospect. Though I imagine Paulus will probably start (though not guaranteed), this is the lineup I personally think Duke should go with. The athleticism of this personnel, the ablility to create offensively combined with the ability to deny dribble pentration make this a lineup I think Duke has to take a look at. This would be as athletic a lineup as Duke has had in a few years. Plus, bringing Paulus, Scheyer, King, McClure, and Zoubek or Thomas off the bench is a luxury any coach in the ACC would take in a second. I know this is different from what most people have, but a lineup like this would make Duke about as tough an out as they can be, IMHO.
    Agree with everything you are saying,and you could add Marquette to list of teams that gave Duke trouble for same reason when Nelson wore down, despite his Navy Seal training.

    Duke almost always got a lead, just had trouble maintaining it to the end.

    Nolan could be a big plus on both defense and Offense. even if Greg starts,when Nolan subs in you have the combination in place.

    And you can also add in Marty to the ten you listed as a player coach K could potentially use more in areas Nelson sometimes struggles in (though I am not predicting it, and defense would suffer though Marty has improved in this area) in certain situations to make Duke tough to defend its speed and athleticism.

    Lots of possibilities as long as Duke hits free throws, limits turnovers, secures a fair share of the defensive rebounds, and rests its top 5 occasionally, (not all at once unless K wants to throw in a wrinkle for a minute or two, or send a message to team about effort, which is not usually a problem for Duke).

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Classof06 View Post
    Thank you Bob!!! I think Nolan Smith has to see time as a freshman, and I really think he can bring a lot which has been missing to this team. With a hobbled Paulus and a sometimes tentative Scheyer, I don't think Duke had the necessary athleticism at the guard spots to compete against the Carolinas, the UVAs with Reynolds and Singletary, and the Eric Maynors of VCU. Many times, this inevitably fell on Demarcus, who would be justifiably gassed at the end of games.

    I think Smith's arrival will take a huge burden off of Nelson and help spread some of the defensive responsibilities. On offense, he's someone who is able to create and get to the rim with consistency, something Paulus and Scheyer cannot do, and something even Demarcus struggles with from time to time.

    The lineup Bob mentioned with Smith, Nelson, Henderson, Singler, and Thomas/Zoubek is a very exciting prospect. Though I imagine Paulus will probably start (though not guaranteed), this is the lineup I personally think Duke should go with. The athleticism of this personnel, the ablility to create offensively combined with the ability to deny dribble pentration make this a lineup I think Duke has to take a look at. This would be as athletic a lineup as Duke has had in a few years. Plus, bringing Paulus, Scheyer, King, McClure, and Zoubek or Thomas off the bench is a luxury any coach in the ACC would take in a second. I know this is different from what most people have, but a lineup like this would make Duke about as tough an out as they can be, IMHO.
    Out of curiosity, how many times have you seen Nolan Smith actually defend Reynolds, Singletary, Maynor, etc.? On what basis do you believe he'll be particularly adept at stopping dribble penetration.
    I also love the continued misperception that Scheyer is somehow not athletic -- it's really amazing.

  12. #72
    Jumbo,

    I think you overestimate the gains these guys will make from one year to the next. I agree about Paulus' foot although how much did it bother him late in the year? I, for one, don't know. Singler? Hasn't played a single college game yet so I'll defer on the sweeping optimism you espouse. I hope you're right but I want to see it before I believe it.

    As for the others, Henderson, Scheyer, Nelson, etc etc and the fact that they will be a year older, with another year of experience, and stronger, now faster than a speeding bullet and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound . . . well, thats great. I again think you are overstating reality. Yes, they will be better. But vastly better? Enough to turn around what was, in the end, a very very mediocre basketball team? I hope so.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Jumbo View Post
    Out of curiosity, how many times have you seen Nolan Smith actually defend Reynolds, Singletary, Maynor, etc.? On what basis do you believe he'll be particularly adept at stopping dribble penetration.
    I also love the continued misperception that Scheyer is somehow not athletic -- it's really amazing.
    The good news for Duke, not for college basketball is that Duke will be facing a much weaker ACC this year.

    Exploiting their PG and SG speed, and C weaknesses is clearly the way to beat Duke. I'm just not sure how many ACC teams besides UNC have enough returning talent to pull that off, or if their in-bound frosh are enough to make the differnece without

    Atsur/Gordon/Dowdell/Strawberry/Singletary/ JR Reynolds/Crittenden/Sean Marshall experience and talent. GA Tech losing Mario West but getting Lewis Clinch back is a wash but they will miss Crittenden and Young and FSU has no Al Thornton, BC no Jared Dudley, MD also loses Ibekwe, Mike Jones and their 7 footer, but still has Gist and two freshmen PGs returning, Wake loses Visser and Drum, etc.

    ACC in general is pretty weak in PGs where Duke is not that strong overall but has heck of a shooting guard in that position, but neither are very many ACC teams besides UNC. Lawson should run away with first team ACC PG though voting is not necessarily by position.

    Ditto for Tyler . Duke is weakest at his position, but after NC State McCauley/Costner and GA Tech Ra'Sean Dickey who burned them last year (but won't have Crittenden to get him the ball and play away where GA Tech usually loses), not that many high impact post guys in ACC. If May returns combined with Booker, Clemson could be tough for Duke.

    One good post player can be double and triple teamed. It's the combos that can also hit from mid-range that are hard to defend, but not many of those tandems. Similarly it is not the one fast guard but the pair of them that is most problematic.

    Let's not turn this into a UNC vs Duke player by player analysis. That is Duke's last ACC game in early February more than eight months from now, and there will be plenty of those threads. Let's at least wait until some of these guys have played a few college basketball games which thankfully is in November. Duke actually matches up pretty well with Ellington/Frasor; Green/Ginyard, and Thompson/Stevenson just need to find a way to neutralize Tyler and Lawson, and anything can happen in rivalry games.

    Maui field will be an early test, and maybe Wisconsin but they lost a lot too and game is not @ Wisc,

    but then a lot of home games and a lot of mostly weaker ACC teams pretty well assure talk of Duke demise are opposing fan base's hopes and exaggerations, not reality.

    Let the games begin.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by dw0827 View Post
    Jumbo,

    I think you overestimate the gains these guys will make from one year to the next. I agree about Paulus' foot although how much did it bother him late in the year? I, for one, don't know. Singler? Hasn't played a single college game yet so I'll defer on the sweeping optimism you espouse. I hope you're right but I want to see it before I believe it.

    As for the others, Henderson, Scheyer, Nelson, etc etc and the fact that they will be a year older, with another year of experience, and stronger, now faster than a speeding bullet and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound . . . well, thats great. I again think you are overstating reality. Yes, they will be better. But vastly better? Enough to turn around what was, in the end, a very very mediocre basketball team? I hope so.
    You're right. When have we ever seen guards improve with added experience and stength? Oh, that's right -- UVA last year. Whoops.

  15. #75

    Discussing two different things, really...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jumbo View Post
    No college team has anything close to what the Suns or Spurs have. My point is that if an NBA team can win or play well going small (and the Suns made the Western Conference Finals last year with Boris Diaw at center), it can certainly work in college, where only a handful of teams have bigs with skills.

    I am, by no means, suggesting Duke play small-ball for extended minutes (although, to be honest, any lineup without Zoubek will be pretty small by some standards). I believe Zoubek will get a legit chance to play at least half the game. But, I am saying that Duke has the option to go small, and can do so effectively. Butler was tiny, and had a great season. If you look around the country, plenty of other teams succeeded without traditional size.

    The other argument, about depth, again was not to suggest that Duke should play six or seven guys, just that NBA teams somehow seem to do it, and do it well, in a game that's eight minutes longer (and a season that's 50 games longer). I posted something during the tournament showing how many of the Sweet 16 teams played seven guys or fewer (I believe it was 11 of the 16).

    The point? That people continue to have Duke tunnel vision, and they don't realize what's working elsewhere in the basketball world.
    I think this debate (although I'm not really sure we're disagreeing, so it's barely a debate) is covering two different questions. Can we win many of our games with extended small ball? Absolutely. Can we occasionally surprise really good teams with extended small ball? No doubt. But I don't think we can compete at the top level with extended small ball minutes.

    And to be honest, none of the examples of teams succeeding with small ball have succeeded at an elite level. The only team that did was UCLA, and I'd argue we aren't in their category defensively or at guard. I'd also say they really didn't play small ball (just had shorter big men).

    And there aren't really any NBA success stories of teams playing only 6 players and succeeding. Phoenix was forced to do it, and they ran out of gas and lost. And that was only for one game. It can be argued that the 6-man lineup wore them out for the next game, when they were eliminated. Of course, this is topic is a largely irrelevant debate to me. I think it's clearly established that there's nothing wrong with a 7-8 man rotation in college basketball. UF won it with that approach.

    Can we be a top-25 team playing small ball? Sure. Can we be a top-5 team playing small ball? I doubt it. I think we could sneak up and occasionally beat the elites, but wouldn't be able to win 4 in a row against elite competition (like the last 2 weeks of the tourney) that way. But luckily, I don't think we'll be doing that. It sounds like we agree that our bigs will get time and our small ball will be used in small doses.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Jumbo View Post
    You're right. When have we ever seen guards improve with added experience and stength? Oh, that's right -- UVA last year. Whoops.
    Wow! UVA. 21-11 and knocked out in the first round of the ACC tournament and knocked out in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament.

    Now thats certainly something to look forward to. Whoops. Not.

  17. #77
    good call. you know, because basketball is really a 2-man sport.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by dw0827 View Post
    Wow! UVA. 21-11 and knocked out in the first round of the ACC tournament and knocked out in the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament.

    Now thats certainly something to look forward to. Whoops. Not.
    Well, that has to be one of the more ridiculous things written around here in a while. Are you actually debating whether Reynolds and Singletary were excellent players this season? Maybe there were other reasons why UVA wasn't, say, a national title contender. Or, I guess Kevin Durant isn't very good either. His team lost in the second round too.

  19. #79
    Its a team game, Jumbo.

    And its really a shame that you have such difficulty with people disagreeing with you. Its makes you shrill and condescending. Very ugly.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by dw0827 View Post
    Its a team game, Jumbo.

    And its really a shame that you have such difficulty with people disagreeing with you. Its makes you shrill and condescending. Very ugly.
    No, he is simply making you look foolish. Jumbo's initial observation was that, just as UVA's guards improved dramatically over the offseason, so might Duke's. Your response that the UVA team was knocked out in the first round of the tournament is non-sensical and irrelevant to the point he made. Whether the UVA team over or underachieved last season is not at issue, what is at issue is the developments of individual players from season to season.

    I suggest pausing for a few minutes and thinking before posting. Give it a try.
    "Just like you man. I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase." Omar Little

Similar Threads

  1. Advantage of a small student body?
    By DevilAlumna in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 03-29-2008, 07:27 PM
  2. One Small Victory for Duke
    By TwoDukeTattoos in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 09:23 AM
  3. ACC v. Small-11, Big-East, and SEC
    By Lotus000 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-09-2008, 06:37 PM
  4. Halloween Short Stories!
    By knights68 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-2007, 10:16 AM
  5. short will ferrel video
    By wiscodevil in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2007, 04:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •