PDA

View Full Version : Carolina pre-season #1? I say nay nay!



Eakane
07-13-2015, 06:20 PM
I think sometimes the press makes news rather than reporting on it. That's how I feel about the presumptive pre-season number 1 ranking for Carolina. Somebody said it, and then it took off.

Carolina will have a good squad -- lots of talented pieces; and no matter what people around here say, Roy is an excellent coach. But the team is not without significant problems. In no particular order: true, they don't lose much, and Tokoto may be addition by subtraction. But they don't gain much either. Just a little outside shooting, which admittedly, fills one of their needs; but not enough to be a game-changer. And true, they will all be one year older and more experienced, and Paige will presumably be healthy, but this is a team that went 26-12 last year. IMO, there's not enough to alter that sufficiently to put them at number 1. Maybe it gets a little better -perhaps 6-8 losses rather than 12. We'll see.

But the biggest problem is that the off-season was anything but uneventful. The scandal is not going away, and will at the least be a major distraction. Over at IC (had to visit to engage in a little bit of schadenfreude), they think the worst of it is over. That's not how I read the tea leaves. If anything, it's hardly begun.

So, can Roy put the pieces together, avoid the mines and make a championship run? It's possible, but I think unlikely. A few early season losses and I'll have to pay another visit to IC. :cool:

Wander
07-13-2015, 06:34 PM
The issue is that, unlike some years, there's not an easy #1 candidate to put there instead. I agree that UNC shouldn't be considered a runaway #1, but there's nobody that so obviously deserves to be ahead of them that it's stupid to rank UNC at 1. You can make an argument for Kansas, Oklahoma, Maryland, Virginia, maybe a few others, but they're all debatable.

superdave
07-13-2015, 06:41 PM
Would anyone care to bet that Roy figures out how to run an 8 or 9 man rotation that makes sense by the end of the season?

If he cannot figure that out, that team will never be as good as they ought to be. It's that sort of thing that drive guys like Tokoto crazy.

BD80
07-13-2015, 06:43 PM
I think sometimes the press makes news rather than reporting on it. That's how I feel about the presumptive pre-season number 1 ranking for Carolina. Somebody said it, and then it took off.

Carolina will have a good squad -- lots of talented pieces; and no matter what people around here say, Roy is an excellent coach. But the team is not without significant problems. In no particular order: true, they don't lose much, and Tokoto may be addition by subtraction. But they don't gain much either. Just a little outside shooting, which admittedly, fills one of their needs; but not enough to be a game-changer. And true, they will all be one year older and more experienced, and Paige will presumably be healthy, but this is a team that went 26-12 last year. IMO, there's not enough to alter that sufficiently to put them at number 1. Maybe it gets a little better -perhaps 6-8 losses rather than 12. We'll see.

But the biggest problem is that the off-season was anything but uneventful. The scandal is not going away, and will at the least be a major distraction. Over at IC (had to visit to engage in a little bit of schadenfreude), they think the worst of it is over. That's not how I read the tea leaves. If anything, it's hardly begun.

So, can Roy put the pieces together, avoid the mines and make a championship run? It's possible, but I think unlikely. A few early season losses and I'll have to pay another visit to IC. :cool:

This is actually quite amusing.

ol' roy was already faced with the heightened attention from the scandal

now he'll have the heightened attention of the pre-season #1 one, COMBINED with the scandal

EVERY interview will include questions about the scandal, and because unc is preseason #1, there will be more interviews; and unc will be listed first in each article - further highlighting the scandal.

Now let's add in the extra stress of being pre-season #1.

This could be a really fun season. I can easily see it being ol' roy's last.

Duvall
07-13-2015, 06:46 PM
The issue is that, unlike some years, there's not an easy #1 candidate to put there instead. I agree that UNC shouldn't be considered a runaway #1, but there's nobody that so obviously deserves to be ahead of them that it's stupid to rank UNC at 1. You can make an argument for Kansas, Oklahoma, Maryland, Virginia, maybe a few others, but they're all debatable.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzFnitW86xw

Watch #6 and #12.

Bob Green
07-13-2015, 07:29 PM
...and Tokoto may be addition by subtraction.

I totally disagree with this sentiment. Carolina is going to miss Tokoto. Yeah, I know he was good for a boneheaded play or two per game, but he also hustled, played defense and was the guy who was willing to do the dirty work.

OldPhiKap
07-13-2015, 07:31 PM
UNC has the potential to be really good this year. But as mentioned, there is no dominant team and a lot of competition. I think the two keys for them are Paige, and developing more reliable shooting from outside. I like Paige's game and hope he is healthy. Not sure who will be the other outside force though.

MarkD83
07-13-2015, 07:35 PM
UNC still does not have a lightning fast point guard to run the fast break and without Tokoto they lose a player that can fill the lane on the break.

duke09hms
07-13-2015, 08:01 PM
I'm starting to get uneasy with all this glee over UNC's upcoming season. Remember how they must have mocked us going into 2010? Their inability to develop players for the NBA has left a lot of latent talent on the bench. Latent talent that can break out unexpectedly. Like herpes. And as we surely know, seniors can very well put it together for their last year.

brevity
07-13-2015, 08:18 PM
I was looking for the link that prompted this thread. There isn't one.

Aside from a June update (http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2015/06/17/college-basketball-revised-top-25-projections-for-2015-16/) by the San Jose paper, Google News has nothing recent to report on the rankings next season. There may be a few isolated opinions, but no voting has taken place. So why are we doing this?

As weezie pointed out upthread, UNC isn't exactly stealing anyone's birthright at #1. They're not my choice -- just another isolated opinion -- but they are not an illogical choice. Besides, I have such low expectations for them next spring that a big fall from preseason #1 sounds just fine.

Duke95
07-13-2015, 08:27 PM
I was looking for the link that prompted this thread. There isn't one.


Unfortunately, there is, from the UNC department of propaganda. UNC is front page "news" on NCAA men's bb.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/107999/early-look-sizing-up-the-acc

Duke95
07-13-2015, 08:28 PM
UNC still does not have a lightning fast point guard to run the fast break and without Tokoto they lose a player that can fill the lane on the break.

Kennedy Meeks can fill the lane. If you wait long enough for him to get there.

camion
07-13-2015, 09:15 PM
Preseason All-America, NPOY, Number 1. I say let them hang October/November banners.

Ever since HB matriculated at UNC they have been awesome before the actual season started. The preseason hype hasn't helped them too much in March/April though.

Olympic Fan
07-13-2015, 11:06 PM
Haven't we been through this a few dozen times already?

I'm getting tired of explaining why Virginia, not UNC, should be the preseason ACC favorite next year.

As for Tokoto, amazing the argument that it's addition by subtraction -- he was (1) their best defender and (2) their second-best 3-point shooter AND (3) their BEST distributor (Paige had more assists, but Tokoto had more assists per minute played). Hard to say they won't miss him.

As for alternatives to UNC as the national No. 1, allow me to offer:

(1) Virginia -- a better core group that has won 30 games two straight years, including back-top-back outright ACC championships. They will start four seniors and a junior. They will also be the best defensive team in college basketball.

(2) Kentucky -- the late addition of Jamal Murray transforms their roster. Very nice mix of returning talent (Ulis, Poythress, Lee) and gifted newcomers (Murray, LaBissiere, Briscoe). Plus they play in the super-soft SEC, so a good chance to pile up a gaudy record.

(3) Kansas -- Anybody notice that Kansas -- without its freshmen recruits -- just won the World University Games for the United States? A great backcourt of Selden and Mason, plus Ellis back down low. Add dynamic PF Chieck Diallo and transfer guard Davonte Graham and they have a nice rotation. Cliff Alexander -- now there is addition by subtraction (there was a reason he was undrafted).

(4) Maryland -- a lot of new pieces, but the best PG in college basketball helps. Last year's team lacked strength down low, but the addition of Robert Carter Jr. and freshman center Diamond Stone makes a big difference. If Rasheed Sulaimon has indeed learned from his mistakes and matured, the Terps could be awesome.

(5) Duke -- okay, a lot of new pieces, I admit. But there's more talent in Durham than in Chapel Hill. K proved last year he could win with freshmen in key roles. He actually has a better core group this year. The last time UNC was better than Duke was 2012 ... I won't believe it until I see it.

Wander
07-13-2015, 11:18 PM
As for Tokoto, amazing the argument that it's addition by subtraction -- he was (1) their best defender and (2) their second-best 3-point shooter AND (3) their BEST distributor (Paige had more assists, but Tokoto had more assists per minute played). Hard to say they won't miss him.


Only (1) is true. (2) isn't even remotely close to true, and (3) is also incorrect. Nate Britt and Justin Jackson were both superior 3-point shooters (neither of them were great, it's just that Tokoto is really bad). Paige is also easily a better distributor when you take turnovers into account.

Duke95
07-13-2015, 11:25 PM
Only (1) is true. (2) isn't even remotely close to true, and (3) is also incorrect. Nate Britt and Justin Jackson were both superior 3-point shooters (neither of them were great, it's just that Tokoto is really bad). Paige is also easily a better distributor when you take turnovers into account.

Actually, #2 is correct in percentage terms, even though Tokoto was only 12-32.

Olympic Fan
07-13-2015, 11:34 PM
Only (1) is true. (2) isn't even remotely close to true, and (3) is also incorrect. Nate Britt and Justin Jackson were both superior 3-point shooters (neither of them were great, it's just that Tokoto is really bad). Paige is also easily a better distributor when you take turnovers into account.

Really? Not even "remotely close to true"?
UNC 3-point percentages:

Paige .395
Tokoto .375
Britt .366
Berry .354
Jackson .304 (he is a superior 3-point shooter in your eyes?)

Maybe one of the reasons that Tokoto left was that Roy didn't want him shooting 3s -- even though he shot them better than anyone other than Paige.

As for the playmaking numbers, Tokoto had 163 assists (to Paige's 170). It's true that he led the team in turnovers, but he also created a ton of baskets for UNC -- more per minute than Paige.

And, as even you concede, he WAS their best defender (by far, I would argue) ... I didn't mention it, but he was also their best open-court player.

moonpie23
07-13-2015, 11:35 PM
let em have their little "#1" ranking.......it's short lived...

mkirsh
07-13-2015, 11:51 PM
UNC will be very good next year - they will have good and experienced players and a very good coach. But what they don't seem to have is elite talent - outside of Page (who is likely a late first rounder) do they have any sure fire NBA players? Maybe Jackson gets there? So while they will be more experienced than other elite teams I would argue that they will have a lower overall ceiling. Doesn't mean they can't win it all (many have noted similarities to 2010), but generally it's hard to win when the best 3 players on the floor play for the other side. I think they will have a great regular season record and just get overmatched by someone younger but better in the tourney.

Wander
07-14-2015, 12:31 AM
Really? Not even "remotely close to true"?
UNC 3-point percentages:

Paige .395
Tokoto .375
Britt .366
Berry .354
Jackson .304 (he is a superior 3-point shooter in your eyes?)

Maybe one of the reasons that Tokoto left was that Roy didn't want him shooting 3s -- even though he shot them better than anyone other than Paige.


Yes, really, not remotely close. Tokoto is a horrible jump shooter. Looking at percentages without the absolute numbers or any other context is not a good way to judge these things and leads to ridiculous conclusions like Sean Dockery being a better three point shooter than JJ Redick in 2005 or Marshall Plumlee being the best shooter in the history of college basketball. There's a reason that Tokoto barely got drafted. Kobe once hit as many threes in one game as Tokoto did this entire season.

pfrduke
07-14-2015, 12:38 AM
Yes, really, not remotely close. Tokoto is a horrible jump shooter. Looking at percentages without the absolute numbers or any other context is not a good way to judge these things and leads to ridiculous conclusions like Sean Dockery being a better three point shooter than JJ Redick in 2005 or Marshall Plumlee being the best shooter in the history of college basketball. There's a reason that Tokoto barely got drafted. Kobe once hit as many threes in one game as Tokoto did this entire season.

Also, change that to career and it's:

Paige - 225-590 - .381
Berry - 17-48 - .354
Britt - 29-83 - .349
Jackson - 28-92 - .304
Tokoto - 21-79 - .266

In other words, when Tokoto takes close to as many shots as the rest, he's far, far worse of a shooter. 12-32 is probably an aberration when 1) you start 9-47 and 2) you're a career .544 free throw shooter.

Kedsy
07-14-2015, 12:46 AM
(many have noted similarities to 2010)

I have said this before, but 2015-16 UNC is a lot closer to 2011-12 Florida State and/or 2012-13 Miami than they are to 2009-10 Duke. For one thing, 2010 Duke lost only 6 and 7 games in the previous two seasons. 2016 UNC lost 12 and 10 games in the previous two seasons. That's a big difference for a team that didn't really add anybody (like UNC). I'll also say I agree with Bob Green, Olympic Fan and others about Tokoto. He was the one player on UNC's team who scared me, and now he's gone. For UNC to be any good, Paige and Jackson have to play like All Americans, and personally I'm not sure either of them has it in him.

I suppose anything can happen (cue the UConn theme song), but I'll be surprised if UNC is particularly fearsome come post-season, 2016.

Kedsy
07-14-2015, 12:48 AM
Also, change that to career and it's:

Paige - 225-590 - .381
Berry - 17-48 - .354
Britt - 29-83 - .349
Jackson - 28-92 - .304
Tokoto - 21-79 - .266

In other words, when Tokoto takes close to as many shots as the rest, he's far, far worse of a shooter. 12-32 is probably an aberration when 1) you start 9-47 and 2) you're a career .544 free throw shooter.

While this all may be true, it simply highlights UNC's shooting woes in general when anyone other than Paige takes a shot outside of a few feet.

Wander
07-14-2015, 03:54 AM
While this all may be true, it simply highlights UNC's shooting woes in general when anyone other than Paige takes a shot outside of a few feet.

I agree with this. My guess is that Jackson - who as Olympic Fan points out did not have a good percentage last year - is going to make a big step forward in this area. But I admit that is not a guarantee, and if UNC doesn't get any better at 3 point shooting, then no way is Tokoto addition by subtraction, and no way is UNC the #1 team.

conmanlhughes
07-14-2015, 08:52 AM
I see UNC being a lot like 2012-2013 Duke in terms of starting out dominantly, but faltering and not making a huge amount of improvement throughout the year. It will take time, but I fully expect Maryland, Iowa State, Kentucky, Virginia, and maybe even LSU (and a few surprise teams) come March.

NashvilleDevil
07-14-2015, 09:14 AM
I see UNC being a lot like 2012-2013 Duke in terms of starting out dominantly, but faltering and not making a huge amount of improvement throughout the year. It will take time, but I fully expect Maryland, Iowa State, Kentucky, Virginia, and maybe even LSU (and a few surprise teams) come March.

You mean the 2012-13 team that went to the Elite 8 and missed Ryan Kelly for a portion of the season? And the team that was in a back and forth with Louisville in that Elite 8 game until Kevin Ware's freakish injury? That team?

conmanlhughes
07-14-2015, 09:39 AM
You mean the 2012-13 team that went to the Elite 8 and missed Ryan Kelly for a portion of the season? And the team that was in a back and forth with Louisville in that Elite 8 game until Kevin Ware's freakish injury? That team?

Yes. I feel like Team A at the beginning of the year was not very different than Team B other than playing an injured Ryan Kelly. Now, obviously that was a HUGE loss, but Other teams took advantage of the period in which we regressed and got better. Louisville had a healthy Dieng and their guards improved at the pressure defense. Miami obviously improved from a team that nearly got beat by St. Leo and FGCU to a legit top 5 team.

You are correct that the Ware injury changed everything. They started playing inspired, and we didn't.

flyingdutchdevil
07-14-2015, 10:01 AM
...there really are no great teams on paper next season. Kentucky is depleted and too young, Duke is too young, UNC is experienced but not talented (and can't shoot), Kansas is experienced but is filled with second bananas, Maryland lacks depth, Iowa State just lost their coach, Virginia is down their best offensive player, etc etc etc. Also, the freshman crop wasn't great compared to most years.

As is usual, there will a few teams that look great towards the end of the season, but right now it looks to be a downish year in college hoops.

sandinmyshoes
07-14-2015, 10:02 AM
I think some of you may be guilty of wishful thinking.

I do think UNC has as good a case for #1 as any, but this is because there is less clarity at the top than usual. On the other hand, UK was a clear #1 at the beginning of last season, but did not, as we all know, finish there.

My concern is that there is a good chance that Theo Pinson is a better player than Tokoto. He might be nearly as good defensively, but a lot better offensively. He was injured last year, as was that Berry kid. All their freshman came on nicely toward the end of the season, and their 3% shooting came around. That was significant because it was generally against better opponents. It is a near cliche to note that the biggest improvement for players is from frosh to soph.

Looking back, after a rocky start, they had a decent progression despite injuries to Paige and the others. I checked their schedule, and they didn't have any horrendous losses in the last 3/4s of their schedule. There was a tendency to play to the level of their opponent, but with a few different bounces of the ball, they could have beat the eventual national champion twice, and they were knocked out of the tourney by the NCAA runner up.

I think Williams main worry will be with mental toughness. They don't have a superstar on that team that I can see, so the team will have to gel. A healthy Paige could be the player whose mental toughness gets them over the hump in close games or counters a rally from the other team, but I think another will have to step up to that level. The two most likely candidates are, in my opinion, Jackson and Pinson. I saw Pinson play some in high school and he definitely has a motor and strong will.

So while we list all the reasons why they might not be as good as projected, if we ignore the positives, it seems a little like sticking our heads in the sand. I keep finding myself going "Oh, please! Oh, please!" because because if they fall flat, it might affect their already struggling recruiting for an extended period of time, but if they win the Championship, it might re-boost their immediate recruiting and give them a surge that outlasts the impact of the academic scandal.

Zmac32
07-14-2015, 10:03 AM
There isn't a roster that, top to bottom, has as much talent as UNC. The argument could also be made that no team has more impact players returning from the previous season.

Carolina returns four starters and nine impact players, therefore returning 88 percent of their scoring from a team that made the Sweet 16. They also return 84 percent of their rebounding and 75 percent of their assists. That's a recipe for success if I've ever heard one. As much as it pains me to say, it's much easier to make an argument FOR Carolina at the number 1 spot than it is to make the argument AGAINST...at this point.

As we all know, those rankings don't count for a darn thing. While Carolina seems to have the most talented roster in the country this year...UNC has had trouble conquering the intangible facets of the game the past few seasons. Coach K has proven time and time again that he is the superior coach (in all areas), but specifically his ability to draw the very best out of each player..while still functioning effectively as a team. If UNC is able to come together as a team the same way Duke teams in the past have, I could see them being a legitimate title contender. But until I see Roy actually do it..I'm not ready to crown them the favorites.

Dukehky
07-14-2015, 10:52 AM
Carolina should be pretty good. They still lack outside shooting, but I actually think Berry will be better from the outside. Paige should be healthy all year, and that kid can ball. He's really good. The big question mark to me is how much of a leap do Pinson and Jackson make? Better question, how much of a leap does Roy's system allow those two to make. Pinson and Jackson are no Winslow, but they were studs in high school and Jackson was starting to make some noise at the end of last year. We'll see I guess. In terms of favorites for the ACC, may as well be UNC. I like the Devils here, but whatever.

Carolina is going to be good, so is UVA, so is Duke. Gonna be an interesting year, that's for certain.

brlftz
07-14-2015, 10:54 AM
There isn't a roster that, top to bottom, has as much talent as UNC. The argument could also be made that no team has more impact players returning from the previous season.

Carolina returns four starters and nine impact players, therefore returning 88 percent of their scoring from a team that made the Sweet 16. They also return 84 percent of their rebounding and 75 percent of their assists. That's a recipe for success if I've ever heard one. As much as it pains me to say, it's much easier to make an argument FOR Carolina at the number 1 spot than it is to make the argument AGAINST...at this point.

As we all know, those rankings don't count for a darn thing. While Carolina seems to have the most talented roster in the country this year...UNC has had trouble conquering the intangible facets of the game the past few seasons. Coach K has proven time and time again that he is the superior coach (in all areas), but specifically his ability to draw the very best out of each player..while still functioning effectively as a team. If UNC is able to come together as a team the same way Duke teams in the past have, I could see them being a legitimate title contender. But until I see Roy actually do it..I'm not ready to crown them the favorites.

Replace the word "talent" with the word "experience" and I'd agree. I don't see this as a particularly talented team, as in 1st round draft choices/future NBA contributors.

edit to say: lack of talent along with lack of experience winning big games makes me skeptical of them as a national contender. I can sort of see a #1 ranking, but I'd be shocked to see them in the final four

BluDvlsN1
07-14-2015, 11:02 AM
Pre Season "subjective" poll ! vs a season of facts home and away wins and National Champs.

Let em have it, just one more reason why. I hope they read it and believe it.

I'll take our "dog" position any day!

But that's just me. ;)

Wander
07-14-2015, 11:14 AM
There isn't a roster that, top to bottom, has as much talent as UNC.

There are a bunch of teams that likely have as much or more talent than UNC, including us. It's their combination of talent and experience that arguably is above those other teamss.

dukelifer
07-14-2015, 12:05 PM
There isn't a roster that, top to bottom, has as much talent as UNC. The argument could also be made that no team has more impact players returning from the previous season.

Carolina returns four starters and nine impact players, therefore returning 88 percent of their scoring from a team that made the Sweet 16. They also return 84 percent of their rebounding and 75 percent of their assists. That's a recipe for success if I've ever heard one. As much as it pains me to say, it's much easier to make an argument FOR Carolina at the number 1 spot than it is to make the argument AGAINST...at this point.

As we all know, those rankings don't count for a darn thing. While Carolina seems to have the most talented roster in the country this year...UNC has had trouble conquering the intangible facets of the game the past few seasons. Coach K has proven time and time again that he is the superior coach (in all areas), but specifically his ability to draw the very best out of each player..while still functioning effectively as a team. If UNC is able to come together as a team the same way Duke teams in the past have, I could see them being a legitimate title contender. But until I see Roy actually do it..I'm not ready to crown them the favorites.

The NCAA could have something to say about this season. We shall see. That said- UNC will be a very good team- no doubt. They have a shot to get to the FF. But winning it all takes a little fortune. Player health is key and a major part of UNC's success will hinge on Marcus Paige who has had his issues with injuries.

gumbomoop
07-14-2015, 12:11 PM
...there really are no great teams on paper next season. Kentucky is depleted and too young, Duke is too young, UNC is experienced but not talented (and can't shoot), Kansas is experienced but is filled with second bananas, Maryland lacks depth, Iowa State just lost their coach, Virginia is down their best offensive player, etc etc etc.

I agree with your overall point, but disagree re Terps' depth, which seems pretty substantial to me.

Inside/bigs/4/5 -- Stone, Carter, Dodd, Cekovsky, plus Layman as occasional stretch 4
Wings -- Layman, Sulaimon, Nickens, Wiley
PG -- Trimble, backed for 5-6 mpg by Sulaimon and/or juco Jaylen Brantley

Arguably they have 10 guys who could play. Because Layman can skillfully play both wing 3 and stretch 4, we might speculate that Cekovsky, still a project, slips to 9th or 10th man and increasingly DNP, possibly redshirts. And Brantley won't play much, both because Sulaimon might get the backup minutes at PG and because Trimble is going to play 35+ from mid-season on.

But even calling it an 8-man rotation is understating their depth, because of Layman's and Sulaimon's versatility.

My default criteria are: talent, experience, depth. Terps are very talented, deep, and experienced enough. Will all the new guys jell with the returnees? Will Rasheed be an inspiration rather than a distraction? Will Nickens and Wiley fully embrace Rasheed, whose arrival takes minutes on the wing from both of them? Is Stone real deal? Will Carter improve on his strong first 2 seasons at GaTech? Will Dodd continue solid, solid improvement?

Terps have superb PG, 2 strong wings with capable backups, powerful bigs. I'd give them the preseason national #1.

Indoor66
07-14-2015, 12:23 PM
I agree with your overall point, but disagree re Terps' depth, which seems pretty substantial to me.

Inside/bigs/4/5 -- Stone, Carter, Dodd, Cekovsky, plus Layman as occasional stretch 4
Wings -- Layman, Sulaimon, Nickens, Wiley
PG -- Trimble, backed for 5-6 mpg by Sulaimon and/or juco Jaylen Brantley

Arguably they have 10 guys who could play. Because Layman can skillfully play both wing 3 and stretch 4, we might speculate that Cekovsky, still a project, slips to 9th or 10th man and increasingly DNP, possibly redshirts. And Brantley won't play much, both because Sulaimon might get the backup minutes at PG and because Trimble is going to play 35+ from mid-season on.

But even calling it an 8-man rotation is understating their depth, because of Layman's and Sulaimon's versatility.

My default criteria are: talent, experience, depth. Terps are very talented, deep, and experienced enough. Will all the new guys jell with the returnees? Will Rasheed be an inspiration rather than a distraction? Will Nickens and Wiley fully embrace Rasheed, whose arrival takes minutes on the wing from both of them? Is Stone real deal? Will Carter improve on his strong first 2 seasons at GaTech? Will Dodd continue solid, solid improvement?

Terps have superb PG, 2 strong wings with capable backups, powerful bigs. I'd give them the preseason national #1.

But they are the Terps. They can screw it up. :o:cool:

Olympic Fan
07-14-2015, 12:25 PM
My concern is that there is a good chance that Theo Pinson is a better player than Tokoto. He might be nearly as good defensively, but a lot better offensively. He was injured last year, as was that Berry kid. All their freshman came on nicely toward the end of the season, and their 3% shooting came around. That was significant because it was generally against better opponents. It is a near cliche to note that the biggest improvement for players is from frosh to soph.

Looking back, after a rocky start, they had a decent progression despite injuries to Paige and the others.

Talk about wishful thinking ...

First, the assertions about Pinson ... he "might" be nearly as good defensively [as Tokoto} big leap there, but not nearly as big a leap as the assertion that he will be "a lot better offensively."

Where does that come from? Yes, he was hurt and missed the last part of the season, but he also played 300 minutes in 24 games -- and showed ZERO offensive skills. I'm not knocking him for his low scoring total since he was never a main scoring option, but the guy shot 36.8 percent from the field and 26.9 percent from 3-point range ... it's hard to see any evidence that he will be "a lot better" offensively than Tokoto.

Secondly, the assertion that the had "decent progression" after a tough start. They finished 4-4 down the stretch in the ACC, beating four also-rans and losing to three NCAA teams and an NIT team. They were dominated at home by NC State and blown out on the road by Pitt! They were 9-8 in their final 17 games, counting postseason. That's decent progression?

I know they made the Sweet 16, but look at their games more closely -- they beat unranked Harvard in their opener when Harvard missed three 3-pointers in the final seconds that would have beaten them. Now UNC is getting all this credit as a Sweet 16 team. Would they be getting the same credit if they are bounced from the first round? Does the fact that Harvard missed three game-winning shots suddenly elevate UNC from borderline top 10 status (which they deserve) to preseason No. 1? Their other NCAA win was a fortunate matchup with Arkansas, an overrated team from the bogus SEC -- heck, Clemson clocked Arkansas this year.

I'm not saying North Carolina won't be good next season. But preseason No. 1 -- for a team that didn't add any significant talent to a 12-loss team? UNC has shooting issues and they were a mediocre defensive team that lost its best defensive player. That's not No. 1 in my book.

flyingdutchdevil
07-14-2015, 12:54 PM
I agree with your overall point, but disagree re Terps' depth, which seems pretty substantial to me.

Inside/bigs/4/5 -- Stone, Carter, Dodd, Cekovsky, plus Layman as occasional stretch 4
Wings -- Layman, Sulaimon, Nickens, Wiley
PG -- Trimble, backed for 5-6 mpg by Sulaimon and/or juco Jaylen Brantley

Arguably they have 10 guys who could play. Because Layman can skillfully play both wing 3 and stretch 4, we might speculate that Cekovsky, still a project, slips to 9th or 10th man and increasingly DNP, possibly redshirts. And Brantley won't play much, both because Sulaimon might get the backup minutes at PG and because Trimble is going to play 35+ from mid-season on.

But even calling it an 8-man rotation is understating their depth, because of Layman's and Sulaimon's versatility.

My default criteria are: talent, experience, depth. Terps are very talented, deep, and experienced enough. Will all the new guys jell with the returnees? Will Rasheed be an inspiration rather than a distraction? Will Nickens and Wiley fully embrace Rasheed, whose arrival takes minutes on the wing from both of them? Is Stone real deal? Will Carter improve on his strong first 2 seasons at GaTech? Will Dodd continue solid, solid improvement?

Terps have superb PG, 2 strong wings with capable backups, powerful bigs. I'd give them the preseason national #1.

Maryland definitely has the best starting 5 in the nation (is it even close?), but I don't like their depth.

Jaylen Brantley is a juco PG. He's pretty tiny (5'11") and is known as a scorer, not a distributor. Also, given that this is Melo Trimble's team, having a good PG back-up isn't as important (especially as Sulaimon can play a few minutes a game at PG).

Nickens and Wiley are now both sophomores and combined for around 10 points. But they both shot an abysmal 38% from the floor. I'm sure they'll improve, but I don't really consider them to be great depth.

In the frontcourt, Dodd is now a junior who averaged 4.0 points and 3.8 rebounds as a sophomore. He's competent, but a pretty big drop-off from Stone or even Carter. And Cekovsky is your typical 7 foot European who is just a big body.

You're right that Maryland has bodies. My issue is whether they have competent depth. That's still to be decided.

flyingdutchdevil
07-14-2015, 12:56 PM
I'm not saying North Carolina won't be good next season. But preseason No. 1 -- for a team that didn't add any significant talent to a 12-loss team? UNC has shooting issues and they were a mediocre defensive team that lost its best defensive player. That's not No. 1 in my book.

But who do you think should be #1? This is clearly a down year talent-wise in college basketball, and I think every top-tier team has huge question marks. Plus, someone has to be #1.

I don't have a problem with UNC being pre-season #1, cus I know deep down inside that they will crash and burn in Feb/Mar.

sandinmyshoes
07-14-2015, 12:59 PM
Talk about wishful thinking ...

First, the assertions about Pinson ... he "might" be nearly as good defensively [as Tokoto} big leap there, but not nearly as big a leap as the assertion that he will be "a lot better offensively."

Where does that come from? Yes, he was hurt and missed the last part of the season, but he also played 300 minutes in 24 games -- and showed ZERO offensive skills. I'm not knocking him for his low scoring total since he was never a main scoring option, but the guy shot 36.8 percent from the field and 26.9 percent from 3-point range ... it's hard to see any evidence that he will be "a lot better" offensively than Tokoto.

Secondly, the assertion that the had "decent progression" after a tough start. They finished 4-4 down the stretch in the ACC, beating four also-rans and losing to three NCAA teams and an NIT team. They were dominated at home by NC State and blown out on the road by Pitt! They were 9-8 in their final 17 games, counting postseason. That's decent progression?

I know they made the Sweet 16, but look at their games more closely -- they beat unranked Harvard in their opener when Harvard missed three 3-pointers in the final seconds that would have beaten them. Now UNC is getting all this credit as a Sweet 16 team. Would they be getting the same credit if they are bounced from the first round? Does the fact that Harvard missed three game-winning shots suddenly elevate UNC from borderline top 10 status (which they deserve) to preseason No. 1? Their other NCAA win was a fortunate matchup with Arkansas, an overrated team from the bogus SEC -- heck, Clemson clocked Arkansas this year.

I'm not saying North Carolina won't be good next season. But preseason No. 1 -- for a team that didn't add any significant talent to a 12-loss team? UNC has shooting issues and they were a mediocre defensive team that lost its best defensive player. That's not No. 1 in my book.

Why in the world would I wishful think for UNC to be #1 at the beginning of the season?

First, about Pinson. I will admit that my opinion of him is probably skewed by having seen him in high school. In a lot of ways he is like Tokoto. I believe he is actually a tic quicker, jumps about as well, and maybe a wee bit longer, whereas Tokoto is stronger. Both are good passers (I checked on that impression and found out that Pinson was 4th on their team in assists). My memory of Pinson from high school was that he was a streaky but improving shooter. Perhaps I over estimate his shooting potential. It is, however, important when assessing him to remember that even in some of the games he played, he was playing on a sore foot. When I looked up his stats, I noticed that he had surgery on it after the season.

As to their progression, they did have the bad outings that you mention, but I always keep in mind as well how tough a teams plays in their losses. UNC under Williams has always been odd in that way, playing to the level of their comp, and that team last year was especially so. It's reasonable to expect improvement, though as I pointed out, they need an injection of tough mindedness besides Paige (again, from what I saw in HS, Pinson could help there).

Finally, there IS a reason why they are being picked #1. We should understand that, with some qualifiers of course. Or, maybe you're right. One thing is for sure, you'll get a chance to pat yourself on the back during the season. One thing we can agree on, it's almost certain they won't stay #1 the entire season. They're just not that far ahead of everyone else.

vick
07-14-2015, 01:07 PM
I know they made the Sweet 16, but look at their games more closely -- they beat unranked Harvard in their opener when Harvard missed three 3-pointers in the final seconds that would have beaten them. Now UNC is getting all this credit as a Sweet 16 team. Would they be getting the same credit if they are bounced from the first round? Does the fact that Harvard missed three game-winning shots suddenly elevate UNC from borderline top 10 status (which they deserve) to preseason No. 1?

I don't really follow recruiting enough to have a call on who should be #1, but this is an excellent point. If your method for determining the top team in November is dependent on a single three point miss eight months prior, that's hard to defend logically.

PackMan97
07-14-2015, 01:10 PM
Carolina has a glass jar and has for quite some time. They are no longer a team that can impose their will. They are no longer the team that when down by 20 and 5 minutes left to go you wonder, "When will the comeback start?" Carolina is simply no longer special. The "Carolina Swagger" used to be real. They KNEW they were better than everyone else and they played like they had to prove that every single time they took the court. They had that killer instinct that makes Champions. Now they walk with a swagger, but wilt when the pressure is on. Sure, they rise above a few games every season, but they aren't the same program and they aren't the same team.

No one is intimidated by Carolina. No one fears them. If they do get tagged at #1, they won't last long. They don't have it in them to defend a #1 ranking night in and night out.

Kedsy
07-14-2015, 01:56 PM
There isn't a roster that, top to bottom, has as much talent as UNC. The argument could also be made that no team has more impact players returning from the previous season.

Carolina returns four starters and nine impact players...

You kind of lost me when you suggested James, Britt, and Hicks are "impact players." Or are you talking about Stillman White? Frankly, even a generous interpretation of that term probably wouldn't cover Berry or Pinson, either. If any of those guys are "impact players," then pretty much every returning player in the country is an impact player. Are you suggesting that simply having 9 returning players should make a team #1?

I'm also not sure how you're defining "talent." As others have pointed out, by most measures there are many teams as or more talented than UNC. They do have a decent mix of talent and experience, but again I don't think that alone makes a #1 team.

As far as returning almost all their scoring, rebounding, and assists, that's (again) just another way of saying they have a lot of returning players. If your team was a middling, 12-loss team, I'm not sure why it's an advantage to return everyone if you don't add significantly to the mix.


First, the assertions about Pinson ... he "might" be nearly as good defensively [as Tokoto} big leap there, but not nearly as big a leap as the assertion that he will be "a lot better offensively."

Agreed. If you look at tempo-free, minute-independent stats, Pinson performed a little worse than Tokoto last season. Pinson's oRtg was a smidgen better (104.3 to 103.8), but came with a lower usage pct (15.0 to 17.9), so that's more or less a wash. His shooting (eFG%=45.0%; TS%=41.9%) was worse than Tokoto's (eFG%=48.4; TS%=45.0%); his Assist% was worse (19.4% to 24.0%), his win shares per 40 (.116 to .118) and BoxPlusMinus (8.1 to 8.6) were both similar but a little worse.

That said, Tokoto was a junior and Pinson was a freshman. It's not unreasonable to expect improvement from Pinson which might make him better offensively than Tokoto. Though as you point out, it's a leap to say "a lot" better offensively.



Secondly, the assertion that the had "decent progression" after a tough start. They finished 4-4 down the stretch in the ACC, beating four also-rans and losing to three NCAA teams and an NIT team. They were dominated at home by NC State and blown out on the road by Pitt! They were 9-8 in their final 17 games, counting postseason. That's decent progression?

I know they made the Sweet 16, but look at their games more closely -- they beat unranked Harvard in their opener when Harvard missed three 3-pointers in the final seconds that would have beaten them. Now UNC is getting all this credit as a Sweet 16 team. Would they be getting the same credit if they are bounced from the first round? Does the fact that Harvard missed three game-winning shots suddenly elevate UNC from borderline top 10 status (which they deserve) to preseason No. 1? Their other NCAA win was a fortunate matchup with Arkansas, an overrated team from the bogus SEC -- heck, Clemson clocked Arkansas this year.

Thank you for pointing this out. It's been bugging me for awhile. Harvard's misses at the end of their first round game with UNC weren't desperation heaves, they were fairly open shots that get made 40% of the time. If one of them goes in, and UNC goes home a first-round loser, I doubt they'd even be in the pre-season top 10. That alone should be enough to discount them as a #1 team right now.

gurufrisbee
07-14-2015, 08:23 PM
NC was a good team last year and they return almost everyone. Anytime that happens that team will be discussed as a possible top team the next year.

Tokoto is absolutely a loss for them. Without question.

Virginia should be ahead of them to start. As much returning talent with more success last year.

Maryland is questionable because they were in a weak conference last year and did lose some important guys.

Kentucky is definitely questionable because they lost a ton.

Kansas is very much in the conversation because Mason and Selden and Ellis are probably the best returning trio in the nation.

Oklahoma is also there because Hield, Woodward, Spangler, and Cousins is probably the best returning quad in the nation.

Iowa State returns a ton of talent, even with a new coach.

While there isn't one stand out team that should be pre-season #1 there are a handful of very legitimate options. NC is one.

I'm fine with them being #1 pre-season.

They will have a hard time holding that spot when they lose twice to Duke.

gurufrisbee
07-14-2015, 08:26 PM
Yes, I would not put too much stock into their Sweet Sixteen run either. Harvard was a decent team, but they barely beat them. Arkansas was wildly overrated (as was the entire SEC), so that does not mean much. They did play well against Wisconsin (but that is clearly not the same as BEATING Wisconsin).

Of course how well you did the year before in the tournament does not necessarily mean much for the next season. :)

Furniture
07-14-2015, 09:30 PM
Who cares. Close thread pls....

El_Diablo
07-15-2015, 10:48 AM
Agreed. If you look at tempo-free, minute-independent stats, Pinson performed a little worse than Tokoto last season. Pinson's oRtg was a smidgen better (104.3 to 103.8), but came with a lower usage pct (15.0 to 17.9), so that's more or less a wash. His shooting (eFG%=45.0%; TS%=41.9%) was worse than Tokoto's (eFG%=48.4; TS%=45.0%); his Assist% was worse (19.4% to 24.0%), his win shares per 40 (.116 to .118) and BoxPlusMinus (8.1 to 8.6) were both similar but a little worse.

Pinson broke his foot in January, missed several games, and was hampered by the injury even after he returned, undergoing surgery after the season. So these statistics are an extremely poor indicator of what to expect from him next year.

Paige also underwent surgery after the season, to address bone spur issues that affected him for most of the year. If he is healthy, I see no reason why he cannot show significant improvement over his junior year (e.g., the way he played as a healthy sophomore).

Berry injured his groin in January and also missed some time. I am not sure how much he was affected after returning, however.

Last year they also had the third strongest schedule in men's basketball. Not the third strongest of the season, but the third strongest schedule of all teams over the past decade (per Kenpom).

When evaluating UNC's performance last year or the single-season stats of specific returning players, people keep ignoring things like injuries, SoS and the fact that other contenders have just as many (or more) issues. But if UNC stays healthy, try not to be too surprised when they beat us 1-2 times and earn a #1 seed. I think they pretty clearly deserve a top preseason ranking and do not find it at all unreasonable for them to start at #1 (although I would probably put Maryland there myself).

Eakane
07-15-2015, 11:25 AM
Pinson broke his foot in January, missed several games, and was hampered by the injury even after he returned, undergoing surgery after the season. So these statistics are an extremely poor indicator of what to expect from him next year.

Paige also underwent surgery after the season, to address bone spur issues that affected him for most of the year. If he is healthy, I see no reason why he cannot show significant improvement over his junior year (e.g., the way he played as a healthy sophomore).

Berry injured his groin in January and also missed some time. I am not sure how much he was affected after returning, however.

Last year they also had the third strongest schedule in men's basketball. Not the third strongest of the season, but the third strongest schedule of all teams over the past decade (per Kenpom).

When evaluating UNC's performance last year or the single-season stats of specific returning players, people keep ignoring things like injuries, SoS and the fact that other contenders have just as many (or more) issues. But if UNC stays healthy, try not to be too surprised when they beat us 1-2 times and earn a #1 seed. I think they pretty clearly deserve a top preseason ranking and do not find it at all unreasonable for them to start at #1 (although I would probably put Maryland there myself).

No team has the cloud of an NCAA investigation hanging over their heads like UNC has. That is not going away. It's bad enough that SACS put them on probation, but does even the most ardent Carolina fan believe that the NCAA isn't going to impose some sanction? That they are going to just look away?

(And for those who respond to this thread by saying "who cares?" or "why this now?" well, last time I checked, no one is forced to read a thread, much less respond to it.)

So what else have we learned?
1. The loss of Tokoto may be a real loss, though my Carolina friends argue the addition by subtraction point on the basis that it opens up more PT for guys with a higher ceiling than JP.
2. The return of a lot of players is not necessarily a good thing if the returning players had a mediocre season (by UNC standards, though I don't think any elite program would be thrilled with 26-12).
3. Roy has to find a way to make a group of fairly talented players play together. Roy, and every Carolina coach before him, including Dean, have always been unable to sustain the effort they bring for big games. Always up for Duke, not so much against College of Charleston. It was hard to imagine how close they came to beating us after watching how they mailed it in at Pitt last year, or how State toyed with them at the baby blue dome.
4. They may well start the season #1, but I think that will be a thing of the past before the New Year.

El_Diablo
07-15-2015, 11:29 AM
No team has the cloud of an NCAA investigation hanging over their heads like UNC has. That is not going away. It's bad enough that SACS put them on probation, but does even the most ardent Carolina fan believe that the NCAA isn't going to impose some sanction? That they are going to just look away?

Right, but by "issues," I simply meant the ones that matter in terms of determining who the top-ranked team should be (i.e., other contenders have lots of roster-related question marks as well).

Olympic Fan
07-15-2015, 11:29 AM
Pinson broke his foot in January, missed several games, and was hampered by the injury even after he returned, undergoing surgery after the season. So these statistics are an extremely poor indicator of what to expect from him next year.

Actually, Pinson only "returned" for two games after going out on Jan. 21 -- he played a total of 10 minutes in those games and was shut down. He took just five shots in those two games (hitting two), so his post-injury return had little to do with his awful freshman performance.

Freshmen do improve and it's possible Pinson will, but I don't think his freshman performance is any worse indicator of his potential tan any other freshman's.

Kedsy
07-15-2015, 11:29 AM
Last year they also had the third strongest schedule in men's basketball. Not the third strongest of the season, but the third strongest schedule of all teams over the past decade (per Kenpom).

I'm not sure KenPom's schedule strength numbers are so comparable across seasons. For example, while you're right about the last decade, from 2002 to 2004 there were seven (7) teams with better KenPom schedule strength numbers than UNC's 2015 number. Also, UNC's NCSOS in 2015 was only 15th. Meaning most of their SOS superiority came from playing in the ACC, so it doesn't differentiate UNC from teams like Duke and Virginia.

Finally, Tokoto played against the same schedule as Pinson (probably harder, since Pinson's injury came during the ACC season), so schedule strength can't be used to puff up Pinson's numbers vis-a-vis Tokoto. Although the injury possibly could (though not much since after the injury he only played a total of 23 minutes, so those later stats probably didn't dilute his overall statistical effectiveness very much). Your argument would be stronger if Pinson was any good before the injury, but that doesn't appear to be the case.


Actually, Pinson only "returned" for two games after going out on Jan. 21 -- he played a total of 10 minutes in those games and was shut down. He took just five shots in those two games (hitting two), so his post-injury return had little to do with his awful freshman performance.

Freshmen do improve and it's possible Pinson will, but I don't think his freshman performance is any worse indicator of his potential tan any other freshman's.

I believe Pinson played 14 additional minutes in the NCAA tournament, though that doesn't take too much away from your point, which I agree with.

tux
07-15-2015, 11:39 AM
I think it's pretty simple. Talent-wise, UNC is a known quantity and in good shape. They will need to develop some cohesiveness and toughness that they lacked last year. Last year, they were capable of looking like a top 5-10 team for stretches of a game. If they can do that consistently, they will have a great shot at a conference title and a deep tournament run. The NCAA cloud could light a fire or it could add unwanted pressure and distractions. Handling distractions doesn't appear to be Roy's strong suit. Whatever happens, it's not going to be boring.

El_Diablo
07-15-2015, 11:46 AM
Actually, Pinson only "returned" for two games after going out on Jan. 21 -- he played a total of 10 minutes in those games and was shut down. He took just five shots in those two games (hitting two), so his post-injury return had little to do with his awful freshman performance.

Freshmen do improve and it's possible Pinson will, but I don't think his freshman performance is any worse indicator of his potential tan any other freshman's.

He played in five games after returning. I think you might have overlooked the NCAA tournament games.


I'm not sure KenPom's schedule strength numbers are so comparable across seasons. For example, while you're right about the last decade, from 2002 to 2004 there were seven (7) teams with better KenPom schedule strength numbers than UNC's 2015 number. Also, UNC's NCSOS in 2015 was only 15th. Meaning most of their SOS superiority came from playing in the ACC, so it doesn't differentiate UNC from teams like Duke and Virginia.

Finally, Tokoto played against the same schedule as Pinson (probably harder, since Pinson's injury came during the ACC season), so schedule strength can't be used to puff up Pinson's numbers vis-a-vis Tokoto. Although the injury possibly could (though not much since after the injury he only played a total of 23 minutes, so those later stats probably didn't dilute his overall statistical effectiveness very much). Your argument would be stronger if Pinson was any good before the injury, but that doesn't appear to be the case.

UNC's NCSOS was 15th, and Virginia's was 170th. So they are highly differentiated. My point about the SoS was related to the record, not individual stats. I kind of collapsed my points while responding on my phone but they were intended to be separate. Yes, UNC had 12 losses, but they played a very tough schedule whereas Virginia (to take an example) had a creampuff nonconference schedule and an easier conference schedule.

Kedsy
07-15-2015, 12:08 PM
UNC's NCSOS was 15th, and Virginia's was 170th. So they are highly differentiated. My point about the SoS was related to the record, not individual stats. I kind of collapsed my points while responding on my phone but they were intended to be separate. Yes, UNC had 12 losses, but they played a very tough schedule whereas Virginia (to take an example) had a creampuff nonconference schedule and an easier conference schedule.

Do you believe the schedule difference can explain UNC's 12 losses vs. Virginia's 4? Perhaps more significantly, do you think Virginia's "easier conference schedule" can explain UNC's 8 conference losses vs. Virginia's 3 conference losses?

If not, I'm not sure I understand your point. Virginia was a better team than UNC last year. UVa lost Anderson and Atkins while UNC lost Tokoto. I believe Tennessee transfer Darius Thompson will be eligible for Virginia, but I have no idea if he's any good. Other than him, far as I can tell, neither team is bringing in anybody of consequence.

So Olympic Fan's point seems valid to me. Based on the above, UNC shouldn't leapfrog Virginia in the polls, regardless of schedule strength.

TexHawk
07-15-2015, 01:03 PM
(3) Kansas -- Anybody notice that Kansas -- without its freshmen recruits -- just won the World University Games for the United States? A great backcourt of Selden and Mason, plus Ellis back down low. Add dynamic PF Chieck Diallo and transfer guard Davonte Graham and they have a nice rotation. Cliff Alexander -- now there is addition by subtraction (there was a reason he was undrafted).

1. KU played the tournament with Carlton Bragg and Legerald Vick, two of their freshman recruits. Chieck Diallo did not play, but he could have if he was American.
2. Davonte Graham is not a transfer, he played for KU last season. He had an injury early, but played quite a bit late. He was probably our best player in the tournament loss to WSU.
3. KU played without Brannen Greene (injury) and Svi Mikhailuk (not American), likely our 6th/7th guys.
4. Cliff gets a bad rap. Everyone expected him to be Embiid 2.0. He was playing better towards the end of the year, before the NCAA issues. I didn't like him as a player very much, but he played hard when given the chance.
5. On paper, Mason-Graham-Selden-Ellis-Diallo is a pretty formidable group. But given the NCAA performance of Selden / Ellis, and the complete face plant by the Big12 last year, we shouldn't be preseason #1.
6. Having said that, if Kentucky had just won the WUG, that would influence the preseason voters.

duke09hms
07-15-2015, 01:36 PM
Do you believe the schedule difference can explain UNC's 12 losses vs. Virginia's 4? Perhaps more significantly, do you think Virginia's "easier conference schedule" can explain UNC's 8 conference losses vs. Virginia's 3 conference losses?

If not, I'm not sure I understand your point. Virginia was a better team than UNC last year. UVa lost Anderson and Atkins while UNC lost Tokoto. I believe Tennessee transfer Darius Thompson will be eligible for Virginia, but I have no idea if he's any good. Other than him, far as I can tell, neither team is bringing in anybody of consequence.

So Olympic Fan's point seems valid to me. Based on the above, UNC shouldn't leapfrog Virginia in the polls, regardless of schedule strength.

I think UVA will miss Justin Anderson a lot more than UNC will miss Tokoto. Both good defenders, but I think Anderson contributed more and more efficiently on the offensive end. Regardless, what is getting into most Duke fans' heads is the fact that UNC is deservedly a top-5 team going into the season for returning talent AND experience. Maybe they shouldn't leapfrog UVA in the polls, but I'd put MD, UNC, UVA, and Kansas in no particular order in the higher echelon of title contenders.

I know I can't stand the thought of them winning title #4.

El_Diablo
07-15-2015, 01:59 PM
Do you believe the schedule difference can explain UNC's 12 losses vs. Virginia's 4? Perhaps more significantly, do you think Virginia's "easier conference schedule" can explain UNC's 8 conference losses vs. Virginia's 3 conference losses?

Nope. It could explain a difference of a couple losses, but not five.


If not, I'm not sure I understand your point. Virginia was a better team than UNC last year.

Yep. Last year, Virginia was better than UNC. We agree on that. I never said or implied that UNC was better than Virginia last year. You raised UVA's SoS as a comparison point, and I pointed out why it was a bad comparison, but let me be clear: overall, UVA was clearly better than UNC last season (notwithstanding UNC's victory over UVA in their most recent meeting despite Tokoto's 6 points and 5 turnovers). UVA did not seem nearly as impressive without Anderson, or after he game back at partial strength.


UVa lost Anderson and Atkins while UNC lost Tokoto. I believe Tennessee transfer Darius Thompson will be eligible for Virginia, but I have no idea if he's any good. Other than him, far as I can tell, neither team is bringing in anybody of consequence.

Year-over-year differences are not solely attributable to who comes in vs. who leaves. But UVA's losses are worse than UNC's...I don't really see how someone could truly believe otherwise. UNC also has a lot of upside on its roster in terms of growth from highly-rated rising sophomores Jackson, Pinson and Berry (two of whom were hampered by injuries for the second half of last season, and the other one of whom emerged late in the season, playing with more confidence and scoring in double figures 11 of the last 12 games). Not to mention the potential impact of a healthy Marcus Paige, which seems to be getting overlooked by a lot of people. Some people want to keep pointing to UNC's warts from last year, like the 12 losses? Fine. But I think it's only fair to acknowledge some mitigating factors (injuries, SoS) when doing so. Acknowledging mitigating factors doesn't mean that one has to conclude that there are no warts to begin with, however. UNC clearly has some question marks, but I think their upside outweighs those question marks moreso than, say, UVA's upside outweighs their own question marks in terms of determining who will start the season ranked #1.

Duvall
07-15-2015, 02:15 PM
Ah yes - Hypothetical Marcus Paige, the greatest player in ACC history, if not NCAA history. Never mind that the actual Marcus Paige has never posted numbers better than very good even when he was at his best, surely next year will be the year that we finally see the real All-American Paige.

El_Diablo
07-15-2015, 02:24 PM
Ah yes - Hypothetical Marcus Paige, the greatest player in ACC history, if not NCAA history. Never mind that the actual Marcus Paige has never posted numbers better than very good even when he was at his best, surely next year will be the year that we finally see the real All-American Paige.

Ah yes, DBR snark, the greatest snark in sports message board history, if not internet history. Never mind that no one is claiming that Paige is capable of being anything better than very good.

BD80
07-15-2015, 02:39 PM
Ah yes, DBR snark, the greatest snark in sports message board history, if not internet history. Never mind that no one is claiming that Paige is capable of being anything better than very good.

Leading/anchoring a team that is a justifiable #1 in the country?

That's better than "very good."

He may be that good. But for unc to be in the conversation for #1 Paige must be better than "very good."

OldPhiKap
07-15-2015, 02:45 PM
Two seasons ago, Paige was voted first team all-ACC by the coaches, finishing only a few votes behind Jabari for POY:

http://www.theacc.com/news/2014-ACCMBB-Coaches-All-ACC-Basketball-Team-Announced_03-10-14_m4phg6

"The leading scorer for the Tar Heels this year, Paige followed up his 2013 ACC All-Freshman season with a solid 2014 that saw him average 17.1 points, 4.45 assists and 1.58 steals. In all, Paige ranked in the Top 10 in eight individual categories in the league, including scoring (sixth), assists (fourth), steals (fifth), free throw percentage (second) and 3-pointers made (third)."


Paige, if healthy, is "very good" at minimum. And although I am not on Mt. Hatemore, I think it is fair to say that I am far from a Carolina fan.

Kid can ball.

Kedsy
07-15-2015, 02:58 PM
Never mind that no one is claiming that Paige is capable of being anything better than very good.

In fairness, this isn't entirely true. You may not be claiming Paige will be anything better than very good, but several posters (and experts, too) have touted a healthy Paige as a probable All American.

The thing is, though, that this is the third straight pre-season that people have been telling us how good UNC is going to be. Except so far they haven't been. Sure, the excuses are there: in 2013-14, PJ Hairston ended up not playing at all, and McDonald missed half the season. Last year, the various injuries. Still, despite glowing pre-season reports, UNC had double-digit losses both years. Could the excuses be justified, and really UNC is a powder keg of basketball goodness just waiting to blow up? Possibly. But in my mind it's just as likely that the current crop of UNC players just isn't as good as some people think they are, and this year's UNC team will end up 3rd or 4th in the ACC, 10th to 15th in the country, and go down in the 2nd or 3rd round. Assuming they're not on probation.

OldPhiKap
07-15-2015, 03:11 PM
In fairness, this isn't entirely true. You may not be claiming Paige will be anything better than very good, but several posters (and experts, too) have touted a healthy Paige as a probable All American.

The thing is, though, that this is the third straight pre-season that people have been telling us how good UNC is going to be. Except so far they haven't been. Sure, the excuses are there: in 2013-14, PJ Hairston ended up not playing at all, and McDonald missed half the season. Last year, the various injuries. Still, despite glowing pre-season reports, UNC had double-digit losses both years. Could the excuses be justified, and really UNC is a powder keg of basketball goodness just waiting to blow up? Possibly. But in my mind it's just as likely that the current crop of UNC players just isn't as good as some people think they are, and this year's UNC team will end up 3rd or 4th in the ACC, 10th to 15th in the country, and go down in the 2nd or 3rd round. Assuming they're not on probation.

I think the constant is: Carolina has A or A- quality talent but a B or B- coach if the players don't fit his rigid system.

Roy was, after all, voted most overrated by his peers.

Put another way -- if K had those rosters, I think he would make both of those teams into contenders. So would Dean. And that is what is killing the Carolina faithful; they all know that's true.

duke09hms
07-15-2015, 03:19 PM
In fairness, this isn't entirely true. You may not be claiming Paige will be anything better than very good, but several posters (and experts, too) have touted a healthy Paige as a probable All American.

The thing is, though, that this is the third straight pre-season that people have been telling us how good UNC is going to be. Except so far they haven't been. Sure, the excuses are there: in 2013-14, PJ Hairston ended up not playing at all, and McDonald missed half the season. Last year, the various injuries. Still, despite glowing pre-season reports, UNC had double-digit losses both years. Could the excuses be justified, and really UNC is a powder keg of basketball goodness just waiting to blow up? Possibly. But in my mind it's just as likely that the current crop of UNC players just isn't as good as some people think they are, and this year's UNC team will end up 3rd or 4th in the ACC, 10th to 15th in the country, and go down in the 2nd or 3rd round. Assuming they're not on probation.

Sure it's not out of the question that they rack up the losses and flame out early, but if they avoid major injuries to their key contributors it's easy to see them making a push. The necessary positive catalysts for them to contend for a title aren't that unlikely. They can count on the freshman-->sophomore improvement for Berry, Pinson, and Jackson, 2 of which were hampered by injury. And going injury-free is something that is necessary for any team, so that's not UNC-specific. That plus Marcus Paige returning to his All-ACC (All-American is a huge stretch) level is probably enough to be a title contender/top-5 team. Those aren't really implausible conditions to meet. That they have the same returning core (minus Tokoto) that ran great teams down to the wire while hampered by injuries is concerning to me.

No one's labeling them as the clear favorite, but given a down year in college basketball, they're definitely in that conversation. Really rooting for UMD/UVA and us to keep the Heels from title #4 this year. If K can work some chemistry magic for the second straight year, we're right there too. I'm curious to see if Turgeon can actually coach and blend his talented roster.

El_Diablo
07-15-2015, 03:33 PM
In fairness, this isn't entirely true. You may not be claiming Paige will be anything better than very good, but several posters (and experts, too) have touted a healthy Paige as a probable All American.

Okay, I hereby revise my statement to say that not a single post in this thread has claimed that Paige will be an All-American this year, so while maybe someone somewhere may be making that claim, it is not being made here, so I believe the snarky reply was not entirely warranted.

To the merits of the "Paige isn't that great" points, I would just like to point out that Paige scored 17.5 PPG as a sophomore while shooting 39% from 3-point range. He had a 2.33 assist:turnover ratio as a junior while improving his outside shooting percentage slightly, even though his overall scoring was down by a few points due in part to a 25% decrease in free throw attempts (probably because he was playing with bone spurs that limited his mobility, and he was less willing to attack the basket). Will he play up to, or possibly even surpass, his sophomore-level scoring prowess now that he has had surgery to clean up his bone spurs? I have no clue, but I suspect he will be a better, more productive player this year than he was last year. Not that any of this matters, since we are talking about the preseason ranking rather than actual 2015-2016 results. For purposes of ranking teams in the preseason and forecasting his contributions for the upcoming year, he gets somewhat of a pass on his decreased junior year production because of the injury, and I feel that it's not completely unreasonable to do so if one is being objective about it. He has shown himself to be--at least--a very good basketball player.

Duvall
07-15-2015, 03:57 PM
Ah yes, DBR snark, the greatest snark in sports message board history, if not internet history. Never mind that no one is claiming that Paige is capable of being anything better than very good.

Paige reaching his ceiling of very goodness isn't going to make a national contender out of UNC, or even have that much of an impact. He wasn't *that* far from his peak last year, despite the media's regular recitation of his various ailments.

UNC will become a contender if, and only if, at least two of their underachieving freshmen become elite players as sophomores. That could happen, but it's more likely than not that it won't.

Duke95
07-15-2015, 06:25 PM
Title of this thread made me think of:

http://memecrunch.com/meme/75RW6/hey-sha-ne-ne/image.png?w=400&c=1

Wander
07-15-2015, 07:31 PM
Yep. Last year, Virginia was better than UNC. We agree on that. I never said or implied that UNC was better than Virginia last year. You raised UVA's SoS as a comparison point, and I pointed out why it was a bad comparison, but let me be clear: overall, UVA was clearly better than UNC last season (notwithstanding UNC's victory over UVA in their most recent meeting despite Tokoto's 6 points and 5 turnovers). UVA did not seem nearly as impressive without Anderson, or after he game back at partial strength.

I think it's actually debatable who was better at the end of last season, even though UVA was clearly better over the course of the entire season. They had pretty similar results near the end of the season, UNC had a slightly better tournament performance even accounting for a very close win against Harvard, and UNC won the late head-to-head on a neutral court. Now, the big question is how much of this was due to UVA awkwardly bringing back Anderson before he was ready. But I think it's at least debatable.

Duvall
07-24-2015, 08:24 PM
Yeah, a team with Murray + Skal + Ulis will be substantially better than UNC by March, the only time that matters.

duke2x
07-24-2015, 11:12 PM
Maybe it gets a little better -perhaps 6-8 losses rather than 12.

This is probably about right. They will be better but will probably be a #2 or #3 seed in a field where a #7 or #8 could win the title. They always win 2-3 games that they have absolutely no business winning.

In addition to the personnel issues, UNC has to pay the piper for the easy ACC schedule last year. Games against the consensus bottom 5 (BC, CU, GT, VT, WF) are omitted. Whether the ACC will be 5 deep or 10 deep is up for discussion. The ACC schedule for the preseason media #1:

ACC Road: @Duke, @FSU, @Louisville, @NCSU, @ND, @Syracuse, @UVA.
ACC Home: Duke, NCSU, Syracuse, Miami, Pitt

Compare that to Duke's ACC schedule:
ACC Road: @Louisville, @Miami, @UNC, @NCSU, @Pitt
ACC Home: FSU, Louisville, UNC, NCSU, ND, Syracuse, UVA

Compare those to UVA's ACC schedule:
ACC Road: @Duke, @FSU, @Louisville, @Miami, @Pitt
ACC Home: Louisville, Miami, ND, UNC, NCSU, Syracuse

I can see 12-6 for UNC pretty easily. I have a harder time seeing much less than 14-4 for UVA.

NSDukeFan
07-25-2015, 06:11 AM
Yeah, a team with Murray + Skal + Ulis will be substantially better than UNC by March, the only time that matters.

Looks like Murray is a game changer for UK and puts them among the favorites next year.

rocketeli
07-25-2015, 09:10 AM
The problem with these pre-pre-pre season rankings is that they are based on the assumption that everyone returning will be improved. However you have three possibilities; a player could get better, but also stay the same or even get worse (attitude, injuries, playing out of position etc.). If you give equal weight to each possibility, then the probability of say, a team with five starters who are all back all getting better is .33 x .34 x .33 x .34 x .33 which is like 0.4%, that is, highly unlikely.

sagegrouse
07-25-2015, 09:31 AM
On the subject of "Carolina pre-season #1? I say nay nay!" Would it be more appropriate to quote the sheep themselves? "Baa! Baa!"

I think preseason #1 is just great. For example, it sets up two interesting scenarios:

Little Casino: Carolina starts the season as #1 and falls to #20 with the usual record of ten losses. The Heels lose in the ACC quarters and the NCAA first round (Mebbe Harvard makes the shots this time). There will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth on the Hill.

Big Casino: Carolina is preseason #1, stays right at the top of the polls through most of the season, and then receives a post-season ban of four years on February 15, taking the Heels out of both the ACC and NCAA tournaments for as long as current players and coaches remain at UNC. Chaos will ensue; the coaches are all gone, along with most of the players. The Dark Ages arrive in Chapel Hill. Although I don't normally have ill wishes for the Tar Heels (beyond losing most every game), but they deserve Big Casino to bring down their program due to their unprecedented misbehavior in athletics and academics.

BD80
07-25-2015, 12:13 PM
On the subject of "Carolina pre-season #1? I say nay nay!" Would it be more appropriate to quote the sheep themselves? "Baa! Baa!"

I think preseason #1 is just great. For example, it sets up two interesting scenarios:

Little Casino: Carolina starts the season as #1 and falls to #20 with the usual record of ten losses. The Heels lose in the ACC quarters and the NCAA first round (Mebbe Harvard makes the shots this time). There will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth on the Hill.

Big Casino: Carolina is preseason #1, stays right at the top of the polls through most of the season, and then receives a post-season ban of four years on February 15, taking the Heels out of both the ACC and NCAA tournaments for as long as current players and coaches remain at UNC. Chaos will ensue; the coaches are all gone, along with most of the players. The Dark Ages arrive in Chapel Hill. Although I don't normally have ill wishes for the Tar Heels (beyond losing most every game), but they deserve Big Casino to bring down their program due to their unprecedented misbehavior in athletics and academics.

BD's Casino:

unc starts at #1, loses every game it plays. ol' roy melts down, taking a mid-season leave of absence, during which the NCAA drops the hammer on the bball program, lowering 3 banners, wiping out 10 seasons of wins, severely limiting off-campus recruiting, reduces scholarships for years. And hits other programs like women's soccer and bball and football, but who cares about those.

The bball program is so severely hit that they can't even get losing high school coaches to replace roy. ol' roy returns to the bench to finish the unprecedented unvictorious season. And returns to the bench for 5 more unvictorious seasons. It turns out the scholarship reduction has no effect as ol' roy can't convince even 8 guys to play for the heels in any year - the very color "tar heel blue" has become cause for scorn and derision, children are taunted in school for wearing the color or any indicia of carolina. ol' roy finally snaps when a ref won't let him use the time-outs he has been hoarding for years. The carolina BOD has to choose between disbanding the program or hire D'oh as coach. They choose poorly, and D'oh further craters a program believed to have bottomed out. The next year the BOD surrenders and the long history of carolina basketball comes to an end. Michael Jordan tries to ride in to save the program, but the BOD, politely refuses, citing MJ's history of decisions with the Charlotte franchise.

OldPhiKap
07-25-2015, 12:24 PM
BD's Casino:

unc starts at #1, loses every game it plays. ol' roy melts down, taking a mid-season leave of absence, during which the NCAA drops the hammer on the bball program, lowering 3 banners, wiping out 10 seasons of wins, severely limiting off-campus recruiting, reduces scholarships for years. And hits other programs like women's soccer and bball and football, but who cares about those.

The bball program is so severely hit that they can't even get losing high school coaches to replace roy. ol' roy returns to the bench to finish the unprecedented unvictorious season. And returns to the bench for 5 more unvictorious seasons. It turns out the scholarship reduction has no effect as ol' roy can't convince even 8 guys to play for the heels in any year - the very color "tar heel blue" has become cause for scorn and derision, children are taunted in school for wearing the color or any indicia of carolina. ol' roy finally snaps when a ref won't let him use the time-outs he has been hoarding for years. The carolina BOD has to choose between disbanding the program or hire D'oh as coach. They choose poorly, and D'oh further craters a program believed to have bottomed out. The next year the BOD surrenders and the long history of carolina basketball comes to an end. Michael Jordan tries to ride in to save the program, but the BOD, politely refuses, citing MJ's history of decisions with the Charlotte franchise.

Strong onions right here.

devildeac
07-25-2015, 12:53 PM
BD's Casino:

unc starts at #1, loses every game it plays. ol' roy melts down, taking a mid-season leave of absence, during which the NCAA drops the hammer on the bball program, lowering 3 banners, wiping out 10 seasons of wins, severely limiting off-campus recruiting, reduces scholarships for years. And hits other programs like women's soccer and bball and football, but who cares about those.

The bball program is so severely hit that they can't even get losing high school coaches to replace roy. ol' roy returns to the bench to finish the unprecedented unvictorious season. And returns to the bench for 5 more unvictorious seasons. It turns out the scholarship reduction has no effect as ol' roy can't convince even 8 guys to play for the heels in any year - the very color "tar heel blue" has become cause for scorn and derision, children are taunted in school for wearing the color or any indicia of carolina. ol' roy finally snaps when a ref won't let him use the time-outs he has been hoarding for years. The carolina BOD has to choose between disbanding the program or hire D'oh as coach. They choose poorly, and D'oh further craters a program believed to have bottomed out. The next year the BOD surrenders and the long history of carolina basketball comes to an end. Michael Jordan tries to ride in to save the program, but the BOD, politely refuses, citing MJ's history of decisions with the Charlotte franchise.

I'd like a double portion of that Pantone 287-hued Devilishly delicious koolaid, please. On the rocks.

JStuart
07-25-2015, 01:12 PM
I'd like a double portion of that Pantone 287-hued Devilishly delicious koolaid, please. On the rocks.

I'll have what he's having...and a Devil's Elbow IPA chaser, please.

MarkD83
07-25-2015, 01:57 PM
BD's Casino:

unc starts at #1, loses every game it plays. ol' roy melts down, taking a mid-season leave of absence, during which the NCAA drops the hammer on the bball program, lowering 3 banners, wiping out 10 seasons of wins, severely limiting off-campus recruiting, reduces scholarships for years. And hits other programs like women's soccer and bball and football, but who cares about those.

The bball program is so severely hit that they can't even get losing high school coaches to replace roy. ol' roy returns to the bench to finish the unprecedented unvictorious season. And returns to the bench for 5 more unvictorious seasons. It turns out the scholarship reduction has no effect as ol' roy can't convince even 8 guys to play for the heels in any year - the very color "tar heel blue" has become cause for scorn and derision, children are taunted in school for wearing the color or any indicia of carolina. ol' roy finally snaps when a ref won't let him use the time-outs he has been hoarding for years. The carolina BOD has to choose between disbanding the program or hire D'oh as coach. They choose poorly, and D'oh further craters a program believed to have bottomed out. The next year the BOD surrenders and the long history of carolina basketball comes to an end. Michael Jordan tries to ride in to save the program, but the BOD, politely refuses, citing MJ's history of decisions with the Charlotte franchise.

I didn't even see BD80 on the Mt Hatemore Ballot. This is a strong last push but alas the polls are closed.

Olympic Fan
07-25-2015, 03:25 PM
On the subject of "Carolina pre-season #1? I say nay nay!" Would it be more appropriate to quote the sheep themselves? "Baa! Baa!"

I think preseason #1 is just great. For example, it sets up two interesting scenarios:

Little Casino: Carolina starts the season as #1 and falls to #20 with the usual record of ten losses. The Heels lose in the ACC quarters and the NCAA first round (Mebbe Harvard makes the shots this time). There will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth on the Hill.

Big Casino: Carolina is preseason #1, stays right at the top of the polls through most of the season, and then receives a post-season ban of four years on February 15, taking the Heels out of both the ACC and NCAA tournaments for as long as current players and coaches remain at UNC. Chaos will ensue; the coaches are all gone, along with most of the players. The Dark Ages arrive in Chapel Hill. Although I don't normally have ill wishes for the Tar Heels (beyond losing most every game), but they deserve Big Casino to bring down their program due to their unprecedented misbehavior in athletics and academics.

The problem with Big Casino is your timetable ... while the NCAA may hand down a postseason ban on Feb. 15, UNC will have an appeal that will stretch the process out beyond this season. There is almost no chance that any NCAA penalties will prevent UNC from playing in the 2016 NCAA Tournament. The only way that happens is if UNC does what Syracuse did -- self-impose a ban. And the only way that happens is if UNC gets to Feb. 15 and the season is already in the toilet.

I honestly don't think that happens ... I've made it clear I don't think UNC is a top 5 team next season, but they should be borderline top 10 -- good enough for a 2-3-4 seed. And with what's coming up in the future (looking at Roy's current recruiting problems), I am sure they'll roll the dice with that team.

Duvall
07-25-2015, 03:31 PM
The problem with Big Casino is your timetable ... while the NCAA may hand down a postseason ban on Feb. 15, UNC will have an appeal that will stretch the process out beyond this season. There is almost no chance that any NCAA penalties will prevent UNC from playing in the 2016 NCAA Tournament. The only way that happens is if UNC does what Syracuse did -- self-impose a ban. And the only way that happens is if UNC gets to Feb. 15 and the season is already in the toilet.

I honestly don't think that happens ... I've made it clear I don't think UNC is a top 5 team next season, but they should be borderline top 10 -- good enough for a 2-3-4 seed. And with what's coming up in the future (looking at Roy's current recruiting problems), I am sure they'll roll the dice with that team.

Especially since the 2015 and 2016 classes of high school players appear to be making a functional ban of UNC from the 2017 NCAA Tournament by choosing other schools.

BD80
07-25-2015, 03:53 PM
I didn't even see BD80 on the Mt Hatemore Ballot. This is a strong last push but alas the polls are closed.

I wouldn't qualify. I had a weakness for carolina co-eds, so I cannot truthfully say I hate all things carolina. I can say my priorities are true, I lost my most significant relationship with a female heel over a Duke-carolina basketball game.

sagegrouse
07-25-2015, 04:07 PM
The problem with Big Casino is your timetable ... while the NCAA may hand down a postseason ban on Feb. 15, UNC will have an appeal that will stretch the process out beyond this season. There is almost no chance that any NCAA penalties will prevent UNC from playing in the 2016 NCAA Tournament. The only way that happens is if UNC does what Syracuse did -- self-impose a ban. And the only way that happens is if UNC gets to Feb. 15 and the season is already in the toilet.

I honestly don't think that happens ... I've made it clear I don't think UNC is a top 5 team next season, but they should be borderline top 10 -- good enough for a 2-3-4 seed. And with what's coming up in the future (looking at Roy's current recruiting problems), I am sure they'll roll the dice with that team.

Hey, OF: This is my card game. You make up your own.

Kindly,
Sage

'While it is clear that UNC athletics would like to drag this out forever (or at least until the end of their coaching and AD contracts), I still believe that the higher-ups want this whole sorry episode in the rearview mirror. This is a horrible and growing embarrassment to what used to be a leading university'

Duvall
07-25-2015, 04:23 PM
'While it is clear that UNC athletics would like to drag this out forever (or at least until the end of their coaching and AD contracts), I still believe that the higher-ups want this whole sorry episode in the rearview mirror. This is a horrible and growing embarrassment to what used to be a leading university'

That assumes that the people making decisions about the future of the University of North Carolina consider preserving and/or restoring the status of the school to be a major priority. That does not appear to be the case.

OldPhiKap
07-25-2015, 05:52 PM
^^^^ given the revolving door between the Ram's Club and the BOT described somewhere earlier this week, I am not sure there is an "academic leadership" group that is in any way distinct from the "athletic booster" group.

weezie
07-25-2015, 05:54 PM
...I lost my most significant relationship with a female heel over a Duke-carolina basketball game.

She didn't deserve you.

BD80
07-25-2015, 05:55 PM
^^^^ given the revolving door between the Ram's Club and the BOT described somewhere earlier this week, I am not sure there is an "academic leadership" group that is in any way distinct from the "athletic booster" group.

There is something about the juxtaposition of "leadership" and "revolving door" that just seems so appropriate with respect to unc administration.

MarkD83
07-25-2015, 07:28 PM
That assumes that the people making decisions about the future of the University of North Carolina consider preserving and/or restoring the status of the school to be a major priority. That does not appear to be the case.

After reading Pack Pride a few times I am beginning to wonder if the PR firms hired by UNC are filled with NC State grads who are having a great time suggesting idiotic things to UNC just to see what happens.