Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 157
  1. #121
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    Clemson hasn't been in any of the top 25 rankings I have seen this offseason.

    Duke, Miami, and UNC are the only ACC teams that got a spot in the June re-rankings. There were about a dozen rankings just after the NCAA Tournament game. A couple of those had UVA. None had Clemson.
    I’m not really surprised Clemson isn’t at this moment thought a preseason top-25, but I would be surprised if folks who follow the transfer portal and who think about way-early ‘23-‘24 don’t consider them, say, top-35.

    I understand why the way-early consensus is Duke, Miami, UNC as top-tier ACC. But I think Clemson will most likely be consensus top-4 ACC come Sept. Admittedly, after Duke, Miami, and UNC, the question of “who’s next?” may be thought pretty murky. If we put ND, GT, FSU, BC, UL as likely bottom tier [Do we, those specific 5?], that leaves 7 teams in a fulsome murky middle: Clemson, UVa, Pitt, Wake, VT, NCSt, maybe Syracuse.

    I think Clemson will by Sept-Oct emerge, among ACC-watchers, as consensus top-4. Somebody’s gotta be #4. I’d put them preseason at #2. Wishful thinking, perhaps.

  2. #122
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    Rankings post NBA draft deadline are coming out, and Kansas is emerging as the consensus No. 1 with Kevin McCullar's return.

    ESPN moved them up to No. 1, past us, and Lunardi also has him as his No. 1 overall seed.

    Jeff Goodman has us as No. 2 behind Purdue as well.

    CBS has us as No. 3, behind Kansas and Purdue.

    I think I'd rather enter the season in the Top 5 than No. 1... let Kansas take that target.
    I agree. I would put both Kansas and Purdue ahead of Duke going into the season. I am excited about Duke’s potential, but Duke has to replace its starting 5 and best perimeter shooter from last season. My Padres are a great example of needing to see a team in action before awarding them anything.
    Carolina delenda est

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by gumbomoop View Post
    I’m not really surprised Clemson isn’t at this moment thought a preseason top-25, but I would be surprised if folks who follow the transfer portal and who think about way-early ‘23-‘24 don’t consider them, say, top-35.

    I understand why the way-early consensus is Duke, Miami, UNC as top-tier ACC. But I think Clemson will most likely be consensus top-4 ACC come Sept. Admittedly, after Duke, Miami, and UNC, the question of “who’s next?” may be thought pretty murky. If we put ND, GT, FSU, BC, UL as likely bottom tier [Do we, those specific 5?], that leaves 7 teams in a fulsome murky middle: Clemson, UVa, Pitt, Wake, VT, NCSt, maybe Syracuse.

    I think Clemson will by Sept-Oct emerge, among ACC-watchers, as consensus top-4. Somebody’s gotta be #4. I’d put them preseason at #2. Wishful thinking, perhaps.
    One thing about the ACC next season is that UNC, Clemson, and Miami all play each other twice each. UNC, of course, plays Duke twice. The unbalanced schedule favors Virginia and then Duke to a slightly lesser extent. Clemson and Miami may be the better teams but Virginia has the potential for having an excellent ACC record by virtue of their schedule. Duke should also have an excellent record by virtue of having the best team and a relatively favorable schedule.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by cato View Post
    I agree. I would put both Kansas and Purdue ahead of Duke going into the season. I am excited about Duke’s potential, but Duke has to replace its starting 5 and best perimeter shooter from last season. My Padres are a great example of needing to see a team in action before awarding them anything.
    Replace its starting 5? How do you figure?

  5. #125
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Replace its starting 5? How do you figure?
    I think they meant replace the starting center (5). That is, replace the person that played the 5.

  6. #126
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is offline Moderator, Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Storrs, CT
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Replace its starting 5? How do you figure?
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    I think they meant replace the starting center (5). That is, replace the person that played the 5.
    I definitely did the same double take here…
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    Replace its starting 5? How do you figure?
    DBA had the correction. Duke needs to replace Lively II, who started at the 5 and fit very well into the defensive scheme.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    One thing about the ACC next season is that UNC, Clemson, and Miami all play each other twice each. UNC, of course, plays Duke twice. The unbalanced schedule favors Virginia and then Duke to a slightly lesser extent. Clemson and Miami may be the better teams but Virginia has the potential for having an excellent ACC record by virtue of their schedule. Duke should also have an excellent record by virtue of having the best team and a relatively favorable schedule.
    I know I should give Bennett the benefit of the doubt at this point, but the Virginia roster looks really weak.

    Beekman is a great player, but he has never been all that strong on offense. The rest of the roster has been decimated. Gardner, Clark, Franklin, Shedrick, Vander Plas are all gone. The only other guys they get back are Isaac McKneely and Ryan Dunn, neither of whom looked like someone you would build around.

    The frontcourt is especially weak. SF transfer Andrew Rhode comes over from a nice season with St. Thomas in the the Summit League... good luck with the talent step up to the ACC. As far as I can tell, their bigs are going to be Jacob Groves, the goofy one of the Groves twins who averaged 6ppg for Oklahoma last year, and Jordan Minor who put up good numbers last season... for Merrimack. None of their recruits look like players prepared to take on significant roles for an ACC team from day one.

    I'm far from convinced the Cavs have the roster to be more than a mid-tier ACC team this coming season. If I am trying to peg various ACC teams who might be tourney hopefuls, I'm not sure Virginia is on the list at this point.

    -Jason "it is possible I missed something... but I'm seeing a really poor Cavs roster at this point" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    From the daily email sent out by the Field of 68...

    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  10. #130
    ^If only I had the graphics an editing skills...

    They do good work in that newsletter.

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Man, that Floria Atlantic story is truly incredible.

  12. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Man, that Floria Atlantic story is truly incredible.
    It is certainly a great story. I'm torn as to what I think they will do next year. On the one hand, they finished #17 in KenPom (one spot above Duke) and bring everybody back after making the final four. I can see why people have them in the top 10. However, I feel like we may have seen the peak of the FAU story. Going into last year, nothing in FAU's history or Dusty May's track record suggested they would put together a 30-win season. Nothing in their recent recruiting suggested that they had final four talent. I'm not saying last year was completely a fluke, but I'm not sold on them being a title contender. I think I would fall somewhere closer to T-Rank which has them at #20. I might take the over on them being a 9-seed, as they were last year, but I don't know about top 5.

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    FAU

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Maturin View Post
    It is certainly a great story. I'm torn as to what I think they will do next year. On the one hand, they finished #17 in KenPom (one spot above Duke) and bring everybody back after making the final four. I can see why people have them in the top 10. However, I feel like we may have seen the peak of the FAU story. Going into last year, nothing in FAU's history or Dusty May's track record suggested they would put together a 30-win season. Nothing in their recent recruiting suggested that they had final four talent. I'm not saying last year was completely a fluke, but I'm not sold on them being a title contender. I think I would fall somewhere closer to T-Rank which has them at #20. I might take the over on them being a 9-seed, as they were last year, but I don't know about top 5.
    Remember that the story may have rough edges. From The Athletic earlier this year:

    The FAU players were aware some of them could probably get more money elsewhere. But …

    “That’s not guaranteed,” Martin said. “Coach May is a man of his word. If he tells you he’s gonna get us paid, then that’s what he’s gonna do. He’s gonna speak to it. That number is gonna be that number. It’s not gonna be like, you go to a high-major and they say you’re gonna get 500k and you end up only getting 300. That stuff is not guaranteed at the high-major level, because I’ve heard so many situations where schools still owe these players, and I ain’t trying to be one of those players that didn’t get all my money.”

    https://theathletic.com/4521911/2023...fer-dusty-may/

    Maybe the player misspoke, or misunderstood, but it sounds like the coach may crossed some clear lines.

  14. #134
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    Maybe the player misspoke, or misunderstood, but it sounds like the coach may crossed some clear lines.
    Are there "clear lines?"

    Sincere question. Follow up question, assuming the answer is "yes," - do those lines make any sense?

  15. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Yes

    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    Are there "clear lines?"

    Sincere question. Follow up question, assuming the answer is "yes," - do those lines make any sense?
    The role of schools is fairly clear:

    "Under the interim policy, schools can inform student-athletes about potential NIL opportunities and can work with an NIL service provider to administer a "marketplace" that matches student-athletes with those opportunities. They cannot, however, engage in negotiations on behalf of an NIL entity or a student-athlete to secure specific NIL opportunities."

    https://www.espn.com/college-sports/...member-schools

    I don't see anything about coaches guaranteeing NIL amounts, so that's why I am troubled by the FAU story.

    Line drawing can be difficult whenever you are writing rules (I did it for years at the SEC), and one can always differ with where the lines should be drawn. Given that the NCAA can't prohibit NIL payments under the law, but wants to keep recruiting from being simply a case of schools bidding for players based on $, I think the NCAA's line is defensible. Could there be a better way to regulate NIL? Probably, but I haven't followed it enough to have an opinion. Probably others here have.

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Here's an interesting look at the "top 25", as the teams are reshuffled by age. Even with Duke having a fair number of returnees, we're still the 2nd youngest behind Kentucky.

    Villanova, Arkansas, and Kansas all get senior citizen discounts.

    Jeff Borzello's 2023-24 Top 25 Teams, Ranked By Adjusted Age

    SCHOOL AAWM*
    Villanova Wildcats 22.8
    Arkansas Razorbacks 22.7
    Kansas Jayhawks 22.6
    Texas A&M Aggies 22.6
    Florida Atlantic Owls 22.4
    San Diego State Aztecs 22.3
    Saint Mary's Gaels 22.3
    Tennessee Volunteers 22.2
    North Carolina Tar Heels 22.1
    Texas Longhorns 22.1
    Alabama Crimson Tide 22.0
    Michigan State Spartans 21.9
    Gonzaga Bulldogs 21.8
    Creighton Bluejays 21.7
    Miami Hurricanes 21.7
    Purdue Boilermakers 21.7
    Baylor Bears 21.6
    Colorado Buffaloes 21.6
    Marquette Golden Eagles 21.5
    Arizona Wildcats 21.3
    UConn Huskies 21.3
    USC Trojans 21.3
    Houston Cougars 21.0
    Duke Blue Devils 20.8
    Kentucky Wildcats 20.2

    * AAWM: average age weighted by minutes
    Player ages as of March 1, 2024
    Projected minutes courtesy barttorvik.com

    https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...2023-24-season
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  17. #137

    Only two ACC teams in Bart's top 25

    https://barttorvik.com/trankpre.php

    The Bart rankings for next year are out. Only two ACC schools in the top 25. Sadly but as expected, the Hoos are not in that cohort. Duke is, as it should be.

    Perhaps the ACC will not be relatively better next year. While we focus on what the ACC got back or in the portal, perhaps other conferences did better.

  18. #138
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    The role of schools is fairly clear:

    "Under the interim policy, schools can inform student-athletes about potential NIL opportunities and can work with an NIL service provider to administer a "marketplace" that matches student-athletes with those opportunities. They cannot, however, engage in negotiations on behalf of an NIL entity or a student-athlete to secure specific NIL opportunities."

    https://www.espn.com/college-sports/...member-schools

    I don't see anything about coaches guaranteeing NIL amounts, so that's why I am troubled by the FAU story.

    Line drawing can be difficult whenever you are writing rules (I did it for years at the SEC), and one can always differ with where the lines should be drawn. Given that the NCAA can't prohibit NIL payments under the law, but wants to keep recruiting from being simply a case of schools bidding for players based on $, I think the NCAA's line is defensible. Could there be a better way to regulate NIL? Probably, but I haven't followed it enough to have an opinion. Probably others here have.
    The NCAA, like the year old black lab down the street, has been neutered. What FAU is doing does seem egregious, but maybe egregious is just a fancy word for OK?

  19. #139

    Bracketology post NBA declaration/draft

    I always like to look around this time of the year at what third parties off the board are saying about our outlook and seeding since rosters become pretty stable. I am liking what I am seeing so far!. I know until games are played its all guessing, but it is entertaining just the same. If you guys have other projections out there, feel free to add. I'd like to get a feel for what the consensus is. I went with the most well known and what comes up in a search.


    Andy Katz (NCAA.com) #1 seed (2nd overall)

    https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball...ba-draft-early

    HoopsHD #1 seed (I think 2nd or 3rd overall)

    https://hoopshd.com

    Lunardi #1 seed (4th overall)

    https://www.espn.com/espn/feature/st...ld-predictions

    ResourceNexus #3 seed!?!?! (and only had 4 ACC teams total), I guess do not know why I am including this bracket as I tried to find them on bracketmatrix.com, and they do not submit. But just gives a view of some of the haters out there.

    https://theresourcenexus.com/2024-nc...-bracketology/

  20. #140

    Clemson and a bunch of mud

    Quote Originally Posted by LeadingEdge View Post
    https://barttorvik.com/trankpre.php

    The Bart rankings for next year are out. Only two ACC schools in the top 25. Sadly but as expected, the Hoos are not in that cohort. Duke is, as it should be.
    I’m plumping for Clemson to be preseason consensus ACC top 4. I’d put them at 2. Want to point out that Torvik has Clemson at 3 in the ACC.

    Further, from DnBD’s recent post, here are 2 that predict Clemson to make the ‘24 NCAAT.

    Although in most recent ACC preseasons I have tended toward seeing a top tier, bottom tier, and “muddy middle,” I could argue that way early, the ‘23-‘24 ACC preseason has a clear #1 and then a “muddy next whole bunch of teams.” Should Heels be #2 [full stop...] or #7? Should Miami be #3 or #5? Is UVa top 4 or 8-9? Could a plausible argument be made for any of Pitt, NCSt, Wake, or VT to be preseason top 4?

Similar Threads

  1. 2023-24 (too early) projected lineups
    By proelitedota in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 04-19-2023, 02:15 PM
  2. Get your 2023 Football Tix early
    By pokeresq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-02-2023, 02:25 PM
  3. Way Too Early 2022-2023 Speculation
    By BigZ in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 359
    Last Post: 10-04-2022, 05:10 PM
  4. Way Too Early Top 25 Rankings
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 142
    Last Post: 10-12-2021, 03:35 PM
  5. Way too early ACC rankings for next year
    By gofurman in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-16-2012, 09:38 AM

Posting Permissions

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