Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 125
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicago 1995 View Post
    25 teams that will be better?

    OSU, MSU, Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, NC State, UNC, UK, UF, Arizona, Stanford, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, Texas, Kansas, Memphis

    That's 17. I want to look at some Big East, Pac 10 and A10 rosters and recruiting classes.
    You might want to rethink that list.

    OSU will lose Sullinger and Buford. Wisconsin loses Jordan Taylor. UNC loses virtually their entire starting 5. Syracuse loses their top 2 scorers and their PG, and they may also lose Fab Melo. Cincy lost 11 games this year and loses their best player and their second leading scorer. Texas lost 14 games this year and loses both of their centers and may lose their best player as well. MSU loses the only difference-maker on their team and also their 2 best perimeter shooters. Kansas loses the only 2 guys that could score consistently. Memphis lost 9 games this past year and may very well lose their difference maker. Michigan adds a stud big man but loses at least 3 of their six regulars (waiting to see about Hardaway and Burke). Florida lost 10 games this year and will lose at least 1 and possibly 3 of their starters (including their only inside guy and their best player). Arizona has a stud recruiting class but they lost 12 games in an awful Pac-12 and they lose 2 of their 3 best players.

    I'm not saying we'll clearly be better than all of those teams. But I'd say that those teams are all likely to be facing the same challenges we'll be facing. So I think it's unfair to expect us to struggle and them to not struggle. Only UK (who will reload), Louisville (who returns almost everyone), NC State (if Leslie returns), and Indiana (if Zeller returns) are clearly ahead of Duke on your list. The rest all have substantial questions to address just like Duke.

  2. #42

    Quick Responses

    Des Essientes writes:

    Just so we're, like, super-clear here: you're talking about Duke University's men's basketball team next year? The one with so many top 30 recruits that a few of them will barely see the court, even if we sign no one else and Mason bolts? That team? Because if you are, Donny, I'm sorry but you're out of your element.

    I am talking about that same Duke basketball team and I'm basing it not on the pre-college recruiting rankings of guys like Evan Goodman and Dave Telep, but what I've actually seen on the court. As I've made clear in my other posts, I believe based on what we all saw this year, that we're got a whole lot of questions about next year's team and very, very few sure answers. Most of the hope for this team comes from either (1) sheer faith in the unknown that is Gbinijie and MPIII and to a lesser extent Quinn Cook; and (2) unrealistic hope for improvement from experienced players who are at a point in their careers where big growth leaps just don't happen.

    You're right that we've got plenty of talent to be a top 25ish team, but at the beginning of the season, until we prove it, I don't think we are.

    sporthenry writes:

    I find it hard to believe that you know enough about Marcus Paige to call him more complete than a guy who the best coach in the country decided to start for the second half of the season. As far as his surrounding cast, I would have to disagree as well. In the post, he may get McAdoo back while we may get Mason back. I'd say both seem around equally likely to stay if not Mason has more to stick around for. Additionally, everyone assumes UNC is getting Oriakhi but that is far from a done deal and Duke could easily add either TP or Amile on top of their McD AA from last year. So front court would you rather have Mason/Kelly/Marshall or McAdoo/Oriakhi/James. I'd probably prefer our front court b/c Marshall should be better than James, and b/c of Kelly's versatility. And that appears to be best case scenario for UNC (well apart from them somehow getting Noels) while for Duke could still easily add another body even with the loss of Mason.

    As for the back court, well again, I would take Cook who was 31 according to RSCI compared to Paige who is 29 according to RSCI and a year behind. I think Cook is the key to our offense. That said, UNC has two guards who are coming off ACL injuries and Dexter had his occur in late January so it is unclear if he would be ready to start the season. So there are two big question marks for this team. But both teams will need their back courts to do a lot more but Duke has guys returning like Curry who have had to shoulder the load a lot more than Bullock and Hairston. Duke also has more versatility with Sheed, Dre, Curry, TT, and Gbinije than UNC where Bullock and Hairston seem to be identical players and McDonald not far behind. Overall, UNC might have a slight edge for the other 4 positions but I'll take a guy who had a 3.5 A/TO ratio in his freshmen year over an unproven guard going into a system that relies and may not have a dominant big man.

    I know enough about Tyler Thornton's offense to know that Marcus Paige is a more complete player. Much of what you write besides veers into a best case for Duke, worst case for Carolina. I'm not counting on Strickland in saying I think Paige would be playing with a better backcourt. Limited as they are, Bullock and Hairston are bigger, stronger and more athletic. Both have more room for growth in their games than our returning guards (save Cook). We add Sheed, who I like a great deal, but they add Tokoto to the mix. Even if James/Plumlee is a wash, if Carolina brings back McAdoo, they bring back the best player either team returns. With him, they're clearly better. Without, it's much closer.

    I agree, for what it's worth, Cook is the key to our offense next year. With the skill sets that Andre and Seth have, they are a lot more effective when they have someone who can create for them. Cook's clearly the guy who brings that potential to the table. We have to have him playing well and playing a lot next year. Some caution: as good as his stats were last year, he couldn't crack the rotation with any sort of significant contribution and he couldn't beat out Tyler Thornton. Cook's defense has to improve a ton, and I think he's also got to get his knee fully and finally right. Counting on him in projecting the team is a gamble, because despite our need for his skills this year, he couldn't break into the rotation and give us what we need.

    I've seen Katz's top 25, and I think that in addition to the 14 he's got ahead of us, Texas, Creighton, Gonazaga, Wisconsin, VCU, SD St and UNLV should be ranked ahead of us. That puts us 21, at best, in my poll. And there are a lot of teams that would merit consideration, at least, as being ahead of us. Maybe we've got a little more upside than some of those teams thanks to Cook, G, Sheed, Murphy and MPIII, but right now, that's a lot of unknowns and what are knowns aren't good enough to merit ranking in my opinion.

  3. #43

    Disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    You might want to rethink that list.

    OSU will lose Sullinger and Buford. Wisconsin loses Jordan Taylor. UNC loses virtually their entire starting 5. Syracuse loses their top 2 scorers and their PG, and they may also lose Fab Melo. Cincy lost 11 games this year and loses their best player and their second leading scorer. Texas lost 14 games this year and loses both of their centers and may lose their best player as well. MSU loses the only difference-maker on their team and also their 2 best perimeter shooters. Kansas loses the only 2 guys that could score consistently. Memphis lost 9 games this past year and may very well lose their difference maker. Michigan adds a stud big man but loses at least 3 of their six regulars (waiting to see about Hardaway and Burke). Florida lost 10 games this year and will lose at least 1 and possibly 3 of their starters (including their only inside guy and their best player). Arizona has a stud recruiting class but they lost 12 games in an awful Pac-12 and they lose 2 of their 3 best players.

    I'm not saying we'll clearly be better than all of those teams. But I'd say that those teams are all likely to be facing the same challenges we'll be facing. So I think it's unfair to expect us to struggle and them to not struggle. Only UK (who will reload), Louisville (who returns almost everyone), NC State (if Leslie returns), and Indiana (if Zeller returns) are clearly ahead of Duke on your list. The rest all have substantial questions to address just like Duke.
    I don't expect us to struggle and those teams not to struggle. I think those teams have fewer questions coming back than we do and have better returning cores than we do. I don't expect people here to agree, but I do hope that expectations here are realistic next year, and if people really think there are only 4 of 5 teams clearly better than us going into next year, expectations are not realistic at all.
    Last edited by Chicago 1995; 04-03-2012 at 09:57 AM. Reason: embarassing typo

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicago 1995 View Post
    I am talking about that same Duke basketball team and I'm basing it not on the pre-college recruiting rankings of guys like Evan Goodman and Dave Telep, but what I've actually seen on the court. As I've made clear in my other posts, I believe based on what we all saw this year, that we're got a whole lot of questions about next year's team and very, very few sure answers. Most of the hope for this team comes from either (1) sheer faith in the unknown that is Gbinijie and MPIII and to a lesser extent Quinn Cook; and (2) unrealistic hope for improvement from experienced players who are at a point in their careers where big growth leaps just don't happen.
    I disagree. I'd say most of the hope for next year comes from (1) returning at least 1 if not 2 All-ACC players, (2) returning a PF who will likely be All-ACC next year, (3) returning a healthy Cook and Gbinije - 2 players who struggled with injuries and inexperience, (4) adding a stud freshman SG, (5) adding a tall, athletic wing who was a top 10-15 recruit before coming a year early and redshirting, and (6) possibly adding a junior Nate James type transfer who might be eligible next year. You seem to be discounting a lot of factors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chicago 1995 View Post
    I've seen Katz's top 25, and I think that in addition to the 14 he's got ahead of us, Texas, Creighton, Gonazaga, Wisconsin, VCU, SD St and UNLV should be ranked ahead of us. That puts us 21, at best, in my poll. And there are a lot of teams that would merit consideration, at least, as being ahead of us. Maybe we've got a little more upside than some of those teams thanks to Cook, G, Sheed, Murphy and MPIII, but right now, that's a lot of unknowns and what are knowns aren't good enough to merit ranking in my opinion.
    With all due respect, I think you're WAY off base here. Creighton loses their second best player and may very well lose their best player as well. Even if McDermott returns, we're better. Wisconsin loses their only offensive weapon in Taylor. SDSU will likely lose their best player to the draft, and they lose their only big man. VCU loses their best player, and they lost all but one of their games against major conference opponents this year. UNLV loses 2 of their starters, and they weren't actually all that good this past year (the UNC win at home inflated their reputation). Gonzaga was okay this year but they lose their 7 footer. Texas loses both of their big men and may lose their best player as well. NONE of those teams should be ranked ahead of Duke next year.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicago 1995 View Post
    I don't expect us to struggle and those teams not to struggle. I think those teams have fewer questions coming back than we do and have better returning cores than we do. I don't expect people here to agree, but I do hope that expectations here are realistic next year, and if people really think there are only 4 of 5 teams clearly better than us going into next year, expectations are not realistic at all.
    I'm not saying we should be ranked in the top 10. I'm saying that your list is just as unrealistic as saying we should definitely be in the Top-10. You appear to be focusing entirely on our team's weaknesses and completely overlooking other team's weaknesses.

    The reality of college basketball is that turnover is a huge problem for nearly everyone. The fortunate thing for Duke is that we have a coach who (a) still recruits well and (b) does an EXTREMELY good job at putting together a gameplan to maximize his team's strengths.

    We'll be a top-15 team with or without Mason. With Mason, we'll easily be a top-10 team. That's not to say that next year's team won't have some potential flaws. It's just an acknowledgement that the rest of the good teams from this past year will also have flaws to overcome.

    And in looking at Katz's list, I think he's being overly generous to some teams. For example, for MSU he says "don't overlook a Tom Izzo team" even though they return basically nothing noteworthy. For Kansas, he says the same thing (again, even though they return very little of interest outside of Withey). And Memphis without Will Barton just isn't going to be very good. And Syracuse without Joseph, Waiters, Jardine, and Melo is also pretty questionable.
    Last edited by CDu; 04-03-2012 at 10:13 AM.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    With all due respect, I think you're WAY off base here. Creighton loses their second best player and may very well lose their best player as well. Even if McDermott returns, we're better. Wisconsin loses their only offensive weapon in Taylor. SDSU will likely lose their best player to the draft, and they lose their only big man. VCU loses their best player, and they lost all but one of their games against major conference opponents this year. UNLV loses 2 of their starters, and they weren't actually all that good this past year (the UNC win at home inflated their reputation). Gonzaga was okay this year but they lose their 7 footer. Texas loses both of their big men and may lose their best player as well. NONE of those teams should be ranked ahead of Duke next year.
    I think you're underestimating Texas and Wisconsin. Texas looks like they have a great recruiting class next year, and they were REALLY young this year. They seem like the classic case of a team that's going to make a huge jump. Wisconsin loses their best player, but so do we, and I think Wisconsin was better than us this year. And they bring in a good scorer to replace him. If Mason leaves and we don't get Shabazz I'd put these two teams ahead of Duke.

    Mason comes back, it's a whole different story. Pretty hard to rank us without knowing that.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    I think you're underestimating Texas and Wisconsin. Texas looks like they have a great recruiting class next year, and they were REALLY young this year. They seem like the classic case of a team that's going to make a huge jump. Wisconsin loses their best player, but so do we, and I think Wisconsin was better than us this year. And they bring in a good scorer to replace him. If Mason leaves and we don't get Shabazz I'd put these two teams ahead of Duke.

    Mason comes back, it's a whole different story.
    Texas has a very solid recruiting class, but they do lose both of their big men. If Brown returns and Ridley (the prize of their recruiting class - the rest are not likely to contribute much next year) they should be pretty good. But we should too. And if Brown leaves? That's a huge loss. That puts a lot of pressure on Ridley and Kabongo to be stars next year. If we lose Mason and they keep Brown, I'm okay with them being ahead of us. But I think it's close. If we keep Mason, we're better.

    Wisconsin without Taylor was substantially worse than Duke without Rivers. And we bring in a better replacement for Rivers than they do for Taylor. Even if Mason leaves, I think we're better than Wisconsin. That team was scrappy, but Taylor was the straw that stirred their drink. If we keep Mason, it's not close.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I disagree. I'd say most of the hope for next year comes from (1) returning at least 1 if not 2 All-ACC players, (2) returning a PF who will likely be All-ACC next year, (3) returning a healthy Cook and Gbinije - 2 players who struggled with injuries and inexperience, (4) adding a stud freshman SG, (5) adding a tall, athletic wing who was a top 10-15 recruit before coming a year early and redshirting, and (6) possibly adding a junior Nate James type transfer who might be eligible next year. You seem to be discounting a lot of factors.



    With all due respect, I think you're WAY off base here. Creighton loses their second best player and may very well lose their best player as well. Even if McDermott returns, we're better. Wisconsin loses their only offensive weapon in Taylor. SDSU will likely lose their best player to the draft, and they lose their only big man. VCU loses their best player, and they lost all but one of their games against major conference opponents this year. UNLV loses 2 of their starters, and they weren't actually all that good this past year (the UNC win at home inflated their reputation). Gonzaga was okay this year but they lose their 7 footer. Texas loses both of their big men and may lose their best player as well. NONE of those teams should be ranked ahead of Duke next year.
    I wouldn't say that thought was WAY off base. In today's game, rankings outside of the top 5 or 8 are interchangable..... Every fan base is going to find "hope" in next year's team, as we should. But I think the main points concerning Duke are: losing their best player (Rivers, and probably Plumlee) and counting on 3-5 players who have minimal or no experience. Plus right now we haven't landed a transfer or one of the top 3 recruits. You have to understand that these rankings are also influenced by how a team finishes the previous season and I think that could impact Duke quite a bit. The decline in play over the last 2-3 weeks of the season was alarming and the lackluster performance in the tourney where it just didn't look like a Coach K team (not just talking about physical play).

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    I think you're underestimating Texas and Wisconsin. Texas looks like they have a great recruiting class next year, and they were REALLY young this year. They seem like the classic case of a team that's going to make a huge jump. Wisconsin loses their best player, but so do we, and I think Wisconsin was better than us this year. And they bring in a good scorer to replace him. If Mason leaves and we don't get Shabazz I'd put these two teams ahead of Duke.

    Mason comes back, it's a whole different story. Pretty hard to rank us without knowing that.
    This is a good point and if Rick Barnes was not the coach I could see them making a deep run next year.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Randolph View Post
    I wouldn't say that thought was WAY off base. In today's game, rankings outside of the top 5 or 8 are interchangable..... Every fan base is going to find "hope" in next year's team, as we should. But I think the main points concerning Duke are: losing their best player (Rivers, and probably Plumlee) and counting on 3-5 players who have minimal or no experience. Plus right now we haven't landed a transfer or one of the top 3 recruits. You have to understand that these rankings are also influenced by how a team finishes the previous season and I think that could impact Duke quite a bit. The decline in play over the last 2-3 weeks of the season and the lackluster performance in the tourney where it just didn't look like a Coach K team (not just talking about physical play).
    I think the "probably" part is debatable with regard to Mason. We've landed a recruit who is better than 2 of the 3 guys we're looking to add (I don't expect we'll add any of the 3 freshman, I do think we'll add at least one of the transfers).

    So we return, at minimum, and All-ACC senior guard, a senior 6'10" forward who will likely be All-ACC, a senior shooter who will likely top 1000 points next year, and possibly a senior All-ACC center, and two likely impact freshmen in Murphy and Sulaimon. And that's ignoring anything that Gbinije and Cook (two sophomores who were hampered by injury and inexperience last year) bring to the table, or any role player skills that juniors Thornton and Hairston offer, or anything that Marshall may provide.

    We definitely have questions. But we have a lot of talent, too.

  11. #51
    I kind of laugh at this Andy Katz article right now because there are so many uncertainties for next year, and those of you who know me outside of DBR know that I think rankings are pretty much meaningless until the beginning of March.

    Anyway, here's the link. It gives us something to talk about until October!
    http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...moving-2012-13

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Everywhere
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicago 1995 View Post
    I don't expect us to struggle and those teams not to struggle. I think those teams have fewer questions coming back than we do and have better returning cores than we do. I don't expect people here to agree, but I do hope that expectations here are realistic next year, and if people really think there are only 4 of 5 teams clearly better than us going into next year, expectations are not realistic at all.
    If you really think that there are 20-25 teams that are clearly better that us going in to next year, I'd say that's just as weird. It would suggest you haven't placed the same amount of scrutiny on their potential rosters as you have Duke's.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    greater New Orleans area

    Anxiety inducing

    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    We definitely have questions. But we have a lot of talent, too.
    This quote really kind of epitomizes the 2011-2012 collection of players on Duke's roster....unfortunately at the end of the season, though there was clearly some talent, there wasn't a team.

    In a way, I think it may be a good thing for Duke to be ranked outside the top 10...lends to some more realistic expectations and reduces pressure on the team....Frankly, as a fan, I'd rather see the team lose a couple of games, but look happy playing together and growing, than to see them win a bunch during the regular season, but never really look like they enjoy playing together and never grow through the season.

    I'm not sure where this team will go next year. I have high hopes for Curry and some of the younger guards on the perimeter, but frankly am thinking that Andre would need a drastic change in attitude to be reliable...IMO he makes the entire perimeter weak defensively when he is on the floor, and that as a result of foot speed and attention/effort. So if he isn't REALLY on target offensively, it was at best difficult for Duke to keep up with teams with even average quickness on the perimeter.

    Right now, I think 15 is about right...and hope a team can grow out of the talent.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by DukeWarhead View Post
    If you really think that there are 20-25 teams that are clearly better that us going in to next year, I'd say that's just as weird. It would suggest you haven't placed the same amount of scrutiny on their potential rosters as you have Duke's.
    Yep. The grass is always greener on the other side. I can't see any reasonable way you could look at MSU's roster for next year and say it's better than ours (even without Mason). Same thing for OSU if Sullinger goes and they don't get Parker. Same thing for Kansas. Same thing for Memphis without Barton. Same thing for Wisconsin without Taylor. Same thing for Cincy without Gates and Dixon. Same thing for Syracuse without Waiters, Joseph, Jardine, and Melo. UNC has some talented guards, but they have a TON of questions about their inside play, their leadership, and their ballhandling. With just a LITTLE effort one can easily see the limitations/questions that those teams face.

    Without Mason I wouldn't be comfortable putting Duke in the top-10. But I wouldn't be comfortable with putting any of those teams in the top-10 either.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York
    Quote Originally Posted by Kfanarmy View Post
    This quote really kind of epitomizes the 2011-2012 collection of players on Duke's roster....unfortunately at the end of the season, though there was clearly some talent, there wasn't a team.

    In a way, I think it may be a good thing for Duke to be ranked outside the top 10...lends to some more realistic expectations and reduces pressure on the team....Frankly, as a fan, I'd rather see the team lose a couple of games, but look happy playing together and growing, than to see them win a bunch during the regular season, but never really look like they enjoy playing together and never grow through the season.
    Maybe you'd like to see this, not sure why you would, but teams that are losing are also generally unhappy. If a team looks happy in defeat, they are criticized for it. I would also submit that Duke's guys looked plenty happy playing together in Maui, in Chapel Hill, in Tallahassee.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kfanarmy View Post
    I'm not sure where this team will go next year. I have high hopes for Curry and some of the younger guards on the perimeter, but frankly am thinking that Andre would need a drastic change in attitude to be reliable...IMO he makes the entire perimeter weak defensively when he is on the floor, and that as a result of foot speed and attention/effort. So if he isn't REALLY on target offensively, it was at best difficult for Duke to keep up with teams with even average quickness on the perimeter.
    Andre is not a great defender, but this is an exaggeration. Duke's defense was not fatally compromised when he took the floor as a freshman or sophomore. Those years, in fact, we had top five defenses. We had better defenders around him then, as we might next season with a year of growth from everyone. A team can win big with Andre; it already has. I'd love for him to be a stronger defender, and I'd love for him to develop a handle. But even as presently constituted he can help his team. His career has demonstrated that much.

  16. #56
    The biggest reason to have confidence that Duke is a top 25 team, even in some of the worst-case scenarios, is simple: Duke kills the regular season.

    I mean, if someone wants to place a friendly wager on whether Duke is top 25 at the end of next season (in the polls, in computer rankings, in seeding, whatever the case), I will gladly accept. Heck, we probably get a 1 seed, knowing us :-)

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    greater New Orleans area
    Quote Originally Posted by Des Esseintes View Post
    Maybe you'd like to see this, not sure why you would, but teams that are losing are also generally unhappy. If a team looks happy in defeat, they are criticized for it. I would also submit that Duke's guys looked plenty happy playing together in Maui, in Chapel Hill, in Tallahassee.
    I didn't say I wanted to see them look happy while losing a particular game, rather I'd like to see them happy as a team playing together and growing. Singular moments of accomplishment will create moments, but I don't think you can argue that the team last year looked like it was having fun most of the time. To me they more often looked afraid to lose and individualistic than a team enjoying the opportunity to win and play together.


    Quote Originally Posted by Des Esseintes View Post
    Andre is not a great defender, but this is an exaggeration. Duke's defense was not fatally compromised when he took the floor as a freshman or sophomore. Those years, in fact, we had top five defenses. We had better defenders around him then, as we might next season with a year of growth from everyone. A team can win big with Andre; it already has. I'd love for him to be a stronger defender, and I'd love for him to develop a handle. But even as presently constituted he can help his team. His career has demonstrated that much.
    We will have to disagree on whether this is an exageration. You're essentially saying that he needs strong defenders around him to cover his weakness, but that takes great foot speed and places the whole team defense at risk, as someone is always hedging to cover the weaker player. I stand by the opinion that if he isn't REALLY on target offensively, to make up for defensive weakness, the team is weakened.


    In any case the lower ranking may be more reflective of the team and may be beneficial.

  18. #58

    You say potato, I say potato.

    Quote Originally Posted by DukeWarhead View Post
    If you really think that there are 20-25 teams that are clearly better that us going in to next year, I'd say that's just as weird. It would suggest you haven't placed the same amount of scrutiny on their potential rosters as you have Duke's.
    On the flipside, I'd suggest most of the people here are putting too much faith in our guys, and projecting too much improvement out of our players and not giving other teams the same benefit of the doubt. See, for example, the complaints about the sugggestion that Wisconsin is properly ranked ahead above us. They lose Taylor. Well, we lose Rivers. One seems to matter here more than the other.

    I'm not surprised people here disagree. We're a fan site, after all. We're all -- well other than Wheat -- Duke fans. I just have more concerns about what we bring back than most do, obviously, and am not willing to make the leap of faith that our unknowns are going to make huge leaps, at least not right away.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Chicago 1995 View Post
    We're a fan site, after all. We're all -- well other than Wheat -- Duke fans.
    A minor point, and hardly central to the debate in this thread re Duke's preseason ranking. But I have picked up some wonderful news in Chicago 1995's throwaway line here: Chicago 1995 mentions only Wheat, leaving out, significantly, ChicagoHeel. So I figure the 2 Chicago folks know each other - small town and all - and that Chicago 1995 is telling us ChicagoHeel is so depressed about the Heel-departures that we have a convert. Pretty good news, I'd say, because ChicagoHeel is a helluva good poster.

    Further, I'm betting - well, really, we can pretty much take this to the bank - that ChicagoHeel has also been talking with our other Heel-posters [shoutingncu and ClosetHurleyFan], and they've got inside info that McAdoo's gone, so they're so totally fed up that they're coming over to our side, too. The good news just keeps on coming.

    I hope they can persuade Wheat that UNC's glory days are over. That would make it a clean sweep: four great posters, all of whom would presumably retain some Heel-contacts and would thus be able to dish the dirt on player transfers [several, no surprise here, to UCLA] and Roy's coming collapse. I'd think Jerod Haase will apprentice a couple of years at UAB, and be named Roy's replacement in April 2014.

    Edit: Sorry, thread relevance: with Mason, preseason consensus #9; without, #13.
    Last edited by gumbomoop; 04-03-2012 at 12:22 PM.

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    http://content.usatoday.com/communit...all-rankings/1

    I can't wait to see the reaction USA Today's preseason Top 10 gets!

Similar Threads

  1. Dukies in the NBA 2012
    By juise in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 447
    Last Post: 05-31-2012, 07:39 PM
  2. DBR Bracketology 2012!!
    By blazindw in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-01-2012, 08:49 PM
  3. Bracketology Jan 2012
    By CameronBornAndBred in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-19-2012, 06:03 PM
  4. 2012 Final Four
    By madscavenger in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2011, 09:21 PM
  5. Premature Bracketology
    By Olympic Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-22-2010, 04:23 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
  •