RebKell's Junkie Boards :: View topic - My early, early top 25

RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums

My early, early top 25
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

pilight

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is

Back to top

Posted: 09/13/06 9:15 pm ::: My early, early top 25	Reply

1 Maryland 2 Stanford 3 North Carolina 4 Duke 5 Oklahoma 6 Tennessee 7 USC 8 UConn 9 Purdue 10 LSU 11 Kentucky 12 Vanderbilt 13 Georgia 14 George Washington 15 TCU 16 Rutgers 17 Washington 18 Baylor 19 DePaul 20 Ohio State 21 Arizona State 22 Hartford 23 Utah 24 Florida State 25 New Mexico _________________ I'm a lonely frog I ain't got a home

BallState1984

Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 1892
Location: Halfway between Muncie and West Lafayette

Back to top

Posted: 09/13/06 9:33 pm :::	Reply

I stand corrected in my response from an earlier post. Purdue deserves its ranking.

shmace83002

Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 481

Back to top

Posted: 09/13/06 10:44 pm :::	Reply

USC at 7 even w/ gemelos and that other pregger out

umbeta1455

Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 1897
Location: Maine

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 10:53 am :::	Reply

Wow, Hartford at 22, usually America East is never looked at to have a good team. I also thought they lost one or two players who were instrumental for helping Hartford beat Temple.

dtsnms

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 11:47 am :::

umbeta1455 wrote:

Wow, Hartford at 22, usually America East is never looked at to have a good team. I also thought they lost one or two players who were instrumental for helping Hartford beat Temple.

I think that's not an unreasonable expectation this year. Seriously. I noticed that right away (well, I should up here). I give pilight some props for catching them, no one else is.

bballfan2005

Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 1:00 pm ::: Re: My early, early top 25

pilight wrote:

1 Maryland
2 Stanford
3 North Carolina
4 Duke
5 Oklahoma
6 Tennessee
7 USC
8 UConn
9 Purdue
10 LSU
11 Kentucky
12 Vanderbilt
13 Georgia
14 George Washington
15 TCU
16 Rutgers
17 Washington
18 Baylor
19 DePaul
20 Ohio State
21 Arizona State
22 Hartford
23 Utah
24 Florida State
25 New Mexico

Having seen Lindy's and Athlon, I can safely say that this preseason poll is definitely on par with those prognostications. That's not a compliment at all.

Pilight did take the time to put out a poll and had the guts to post it. For that, I have to say that I admire the effort. But that's where the compliments end.

Your first four are good, though I don't think I'd have Duke at #4 (personally place them right outside the Top 5). Oklahoma and Tennessee are fine at #5 and #6, respectively. But then you strike out miserably with USC at #7. Come on, pilight. A team without Gemelos, LeNoir, and Cameron is a Top 10 team in your eyes? Hell, a team WITH Gemelos, LeNoir, and Cameron is barely Top 15 in MY eyes! You're drinking some serious Lady of Troy koolaid.

Purdue at #9 after what they went through this offseason? Sorry, but I don't see it. Ohio State at #20 is borderline ridiculous. No way OSU suffered as many key losses as Purdue. Say what you want about OSU's postseason woes, but they're a great team during the regular season.

Georgia at #13 is crazy in and of itself. Georgia at #13 BEHIND BOTH Vanderbilt and Kentucky is awful. Kentucky over Vanderbilt is just wrong on so many levels.

George Washington is about 11 places too high and TCU probably doesn't even belong on the list.

Rutgers seems to be a little low at #16, but they've got some issues to work out...maybe that's a good spot for them right now.

Washington at #17 and Baylor at #18 are way, way too high. Washington isn't projected to crack the Top 4 in the Pac-10 (despite USC's problems), and Baylor sure as hell isn't going to finish #2 in the Big 12 behind Oklahoma without Sophia Young, Abi Wabara, AND Chemeka Scott.

DePaul at #19? Maybe. Okay, I'll buy that.

ASU at #21? Seriously? You think they're worst than Washington? Didn't ASU finish #2 in the Pac-10 last season and only lost one key player from that team?

Hartford at #22 is too high for a preseason poll, but the team is stronger than your #23 and #24 teams, both of which seem out of place. Utah lost its team last year to the WNBA, and FSU lost three starting guards. Furthermore, Utah isn't picked to finish ahead of BYU and FSU isn't considered the #4 team in the ACC per anyone with good knowledge of the league.

With all that said, there must be a special formula pilight's using to come up with this poll. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense.

_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!

Mathies to LA 2013

ucbart

Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 2815
Location: New York

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 1:20 pm ::: Re: My early, early top 25

bballfan2005 wrote:

pilight wrote:

I'm still not sold on Oklahoma's guard play to have thenm be a borderline top 5 team. They were simply awful against Stanford in the NCAA tournament. I also think Tennessee has a ton of questions marks with guard play. Although that won't matter, Pat has a player she can treat like Holdsclaw now with Parker. Give her the ball and call it an offense.

pilight

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 1:46 pm :::

Quote:

But then you strike out miserably with USC at #7. Come on, pilight. A team without Gemelos, LeNoir, and Cameron is a Top 10 team in your eyes? Hell, a team WITH Gemelos, LeNoir, and Cameron is barely Top 15 in MY eyes! You're drinking some serious Lady of Troy koolaid.

Maybe so. Cameron isn't terribly relevant and LeNoir is expected back for the conference season. Gemelos hurts, but this team is going to surprise some people even without her.

Quote:

Purdue at #9 after what they went through this offseason?

They've got three returning starters and have upgraded their coach. The Boilers will be fine.

Quote:

Ohio State at #20 is borderline ridiculous. No way OSU suffered as many key losses as Purdue. Say what you want about OSU's postseason woes, but they're a great team during the regular season.

Losing Merrill is going to hurt them more than people think. They may rack up another good record, the B10 doesn't look that strong, but they'll be forgotten by the second weekend of the tournament.

Quote:

Georgia at #13 is crazy in and of itself. Georgia at #13 BEHIND BOTH Vanderbilt and Kentucky is awful. Kentucky over Vanderbilt is just wrong on so many levels.

Georgia has to replace their whole starting backcourt. Kentucky brings back essentially everyone from a team that finished ahead of Vandy in the SEC last year and only a game behind UGA. Vandy also brings back almost every key player.

Quote:

George Washington is about 11 places too high and TCU probably doesn't even belong on the list.

Each returns four starters on teams that were competitive with the big girls a year ago. I'm sure you would be giving the major conference also-rans these spots instead.

Quote:

Rutgers seems to be a little low at #16, but they've got some issues to work out...maybe that's a good spot for them right now.

They lost an awful lot from a team that was bottom half of the top 10 last year.

Quote:

Washington at #17 and Baylor at #18 are way, way too high. Washington isn't projected to crack the Top 4 in the Pac-10 (despite USC's problems), and Baylor sure as hell isn't going to finish #2 in the Big 12 behind Oklahoma without Sophia Young, Abi Wabara, AND Chemeka Scott.

Washington always gets picked too low. They were in the fight for the second spot in the P10 last year and they will be again this year. You think UCLA without Blue & Willis or overrated Cal is going to stop them?

The B12 looks exceptionally weak this year. Baylor is a bit of a flyer, but I like Kim Mulkey as a coach and I don't see anyone else that's going to step up out there.

Quote:

ASU at #21? Seriously? You think they're worst than Washington? Didn't ASU finish #2 in the Pac-10 last season and only lost one key player from that team?

They lost two of their top three scorers and their leading rebounder in Kovesdy and Denson. Guard play was their weakness a season ago and they're going to have to rely on it even more this year.

Quote:

Hartford at #22 is too high for a preseason poll, but the team is stronger than your #23 and #24 teams, both of which seem out of place. Utah lost its team last year to the WNBA, and FSU lost three starting guards. Furthermore, Utah isn't picked to finish ahead of BYU and FSU isn't considered the #4 team in the ACC per anyone with good knowledge of the league.

Hartford is returning most of a second round NCAA team, that puts them in the 20's.

Florida State has been in the top four of the ACC each of the last two seasons and was ahead of the 5th place team by a wide margin last year. I don't think Virginia or NC State will be as improved as everyone else does. The Cavs and Pack are both led by has-been coaches who the game passed by several years ago. They can grind out respectable seasons and make the tournament on reputation in their good years, but that's about it. FSU has some chance of being better than that.

Utah lost quite a bit....from a top 10 team. They're too well coached to fall too far.

_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home

mikey87

Joined: 29 Oct 2005
Posts: 2165
Location: In My Crib..

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:00 pm :::	Reply

NO way in hell Vandy or Kentucky is better than GA period. Georgia is a top 10 team especially with Humphrey, Ok yeah so she lost Baker and Kendrick we still have Hardrick, Chambers, Rhoden, and Houts who are going to pick it up. I have seen these girls practice and believe me they are ready to step it up

acusefan

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 55

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:08 pm :::

obviously I am a syracuse fan so I don't worry about the top 25 at any point in the season but I do have a few questions about your comments.

Quote:

(rutgers)They lost an awful lot from a team that was bottom half of the top 10 last year.

Hartford is returning most of a second round NCAA team, that puts them in the 20's.

Utah lost quite a bit....from a top 10 team. They're too well coached to fall too far.

You say that both Rutgers and Utah lost a lot form top 10 teams but that Utah is too well coached to fall to far but I guess Rutgers isn't coached well enough to keep from falling.(?) I love how you make being a "bottom half top 10 team" sound like a weak team.

Hartford is tough to gauge because they don't play in a big conference and they'll get some poll love because everyone loves Rizzotti.

How though can you put two teams next to eachother when one has just about everyone coming back and the other lost everyone that made a big contribution and doesn't have a recruiting class thats going to put them in the top 25.

pilight

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:14 pm :::

acusefan wrote:

I dropped Utah further than Rutgers. Both teams were in the 8-12 range at the end of last season.

_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home

IndyPurduefan

Joined: 25 Oct 2005
Posts: 1319
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:18 pm ::: Re: My early, early top 25

pilight wrote:

I certainly hope you're right about Purdue. They've had such a tumultuous offseason that it's tough for me to even start thinking of gauging how they will be this year.

Coach Versyp is a no nonsense my way or the highway coach and the returning players were accustomed to Curry's soft-spoken 'yall please play better pretty please' southern comfort attitude. Sometimes players don't take well to such a change.

If the players all buy into what Sharon is preaching, and we stay healthy (already lost one player to an ACL), then I think we'll see some great things from Purdue. If attitudes develop or we have injuries, we're in deep kaka.

_________________
Go Boilers!!

acusefan

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 55

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:43 pm :::

pilight wrote:

acusefan wrote:

I dropped Utah further than Rutgers. Both teams were in the 8-12 range at the end of last season.

my point is utah didn't drop far enough.

bballfan2005

Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:51 pm :::

pilight wrote:

Maybe so. Cameron isn't terribly relevant and LeNoir is expected back for the conference season. Gemelos hurts, but this team is going to surprise some people even without her.

False. Cameron's loss isn't terribly significant (except for outside shooting purposes), but not having Gemelos will wear down Murphy. LeNoir isn't expected to be back in time for the start of the conference season. Her injury puts her on the shelf until January. The Pac-10 season starts in December, pilight.

Quote:

They've got three returning starters and have upgraded their coach. The Boilers will be fine.

Quote:

Losing Merrill is going to hurt them more than people think. They may rack up another good record, the B10 doesn't look that strong, but they'll be forgotten by the second weekend of the tournament.

Losing Merrill is a loss but not the end of the world. They did just fine in 2005, and I expect them to do well in 2007 (both seasons without her).

Quote:

Georgia also brings back a player that neither Kentucky or Vanderbilt posseses: ALL-AMERICAN/POY candidate Tasha Humphrey. Her return alone pretty much negates any advantage Kentucky or Vanderbilt would've had over UGA. Besides, Kendrick isn't a huge loss.

Quote:

Each returns four starters on teams that were competitive with the big girls a year ago. I'm sure you would be giving the major conference also-rans these spots instead.

I sure would. Mid-major teams don't excite me, especially those that don't go deep into the NCAA Tournament the previous year. We're not talking about ODU 1997 or the La Tech teams of the Barmore days. We're talking about true mid-major teams that belong in the bottom 5, Mr. Mid-major.

Quote:

They lost an awful lot from a team that was bottom half of the top 10 last year.

They lost a lot of BODIES, but did they really lose that much outside of Pondexter? I'd say no. Plus, their postseason success the past two years makes them a better choice for a Top 15 team than Vandy, Kentucky, TCU, and George Washington.

Quote:

Washington always gets picked too low.

Maybe because they're not that good, perhaps?

Quote:

They were in the fight for the second spot in the P10 last year and they will be again this year.

No they weren't. They finished behind Stanford, Arizona State, UCLA, and USC and only ahead of Cal.

Quote:

You think UCLA without Blue & Willis or overrated Cal is going to stop them?

UCLA? No. Cal? Yes. Cal may be "overrated", but they've got a good number of talented young players returning. Unlike Washington, a team that relies on contribution from one player, Cal has two or three key contributors on which it can rely. In this Pac-10, Washington is no higher than #5.

Your ignorance with respect to the Pac-10 is showing...

Quote:

The B12 looks exceptionally weak this year. Baylor is a bit of a flyer, but I like Kim Mulkey as a coach and I don't see anyone else that's going to step up out there.

No, choosing a depleted Baylor team to finish second to Oklahoma is just plain stupid. Texas A&M and Texas will finish higher in the Big 12 South ALONE, and then you have to look at Kansas State and Iowa State in the Big 12 North. Clearly you didn't...

Quote:

They lost two of their top three scorers and their leading rebounder in Kovesdy and Denson. Guard play was their weakness a season ago and they're going to have to rely on it even more this year.

They play in the Pac-10 and have finished Top 3 in the league for two straight seasons. Guard play wasn't too shaky last season from my observations...just a matter of getting freshmen acclimated to the system. I can tell you that Dymond Simon (ever seen her play? Probably not) will help them a great deal. Plus, they still have 6'6 McDonalds All-American Kirsten Thompson to develop (a recruit that your sentimental favorite, UW, let get away).

Quote:

Hartford is returning most of a second round NCAA team, that puts them in the 20's.

Obviously, someone on the ESPN board disagrees with that statement. An American East fan, nonetheless.

Quote:

Florida State has been in the top four of the ACC each of the last two seasons and was ahead of the 5th place team by a wide margin last year.

Who were the #3 and #5 teams in the ACC in 2005? NC State and Virginia, respectively. Who finished #5 in 2006? NC State, which only trailed FSU by one more game than the difference between FSU and the ACC's Big Three (research will show you that). While I don't completely give NC State a free pass for "underachieving" last season based on the caliber of athletes returning, I will say this. FSU didn't have to play the best team in the conference THREE TIMES last season like NC State did or TWICE like Virginia did. A senior-laden FSU team played UNC, Duke, and Maryland once each...and got blown out every single game. How do you expect a young FSU team to fare any better? If anything, they'll fare worse because the guard play just isn't there.

BTW, here's a little something you probably didn't know. FSU has been ousted in their opening game of the past two ACC Tournaments. Guess which teams bounced them out? Virginia in 2005 and NC State in 2006.

Quote:

I don't think Virginia or NC State will be as improved as everyone else does.

That's because you know nothing about the ACC, pilight. Nobody said anything about NC State improving, but they'll still have a chance to compete for a spot in the top half of the conference this season despite losing 3 starters. Virginia, on the other hand, WILL improve by virtue of returning 4 starters from a very young team last season and bringing in a very solid recruiting class led by a McDonalds All-American two-guard and an Olympian. The coaching staff is pretty good, too.

Quote:

The Cavs and Pack are both led by has-been coaches who the game passed by several years ago. They can grind out respectable seasons and make the tournament on reputation in their good years, but that's about it. FSU has some chance of being better than that.

Probably the most ignorant passage I've read today. Did you also fail to realize that both coaches have battled serious forms of cancer (Ryan-pancreatic; Yow-breast) this decade? No, you didn't. You just spouted off at the mouth and showed a lack of class in your statements.

To even imply that a coach's reputation alone gets him or her into the tournament is ridiculous. If that's the case, Gary Williams would've been dancing in 2005 and 2006 as opposed to being forced to play in the NIT. And there's no way that Virginia wouldn't have made the tournament last year over Cal.

For FSU to fare any better than Virginia and North Carolina State on a consistent basis, Semrau would have to find a way to improve recruiting. Right now, she's still not getting the type of impact recruits she needs to build a storied program. For example, Gail and Pat battled for the highest-rated recruit in the state of Florida the past two seasons (Krystal Thomas). Thomas didn't even mention FSU as one of her highest suitors. Says a lot, doesn't it?

On the other hand, Yow and Ryan are still showing that they can get into the homes of major recruits and are continuing to pursue the Top 20-type kids. Not bad for a couple of has-been old biddies, hmm?

Quote:

Utah lost quite a bit....from a top 10 team. They're too well coached to fall too far.

It's not always about coaching, pilight. A coach does have to have capable athletes to win. Right now, Utah doesn't have that.

_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!

Mathies to LA 2013

IndyPurduefan

Joined: 25 Oct 2005
Posts: 1319
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 2:55 pm :::

Quote:

They've got three returning starters and have upgraded their coach. The Boilers will be fine.

The coach isn't an upgrade, pilight. What exactly did she do at Indiana to convince you that she'll do any better than Curry did? Furthermore, they don't have a deep bench and lost what was once a promising recruiting class. You're drinking kool-aid here.

The only thing that Versyp has done that was better than Curry was beat Purdue at Purdue last year. It was truly a stunning upset. Of course, Purdue then turned around and thumped the shit out of IU in the Big Ten tourney just a couple weeks later.

Purdue has a lot of question marks this year. A lot. A year ago I woudl tell you that this year Purdue had definite Final Four talent. Now, however......god knows.

_________________
Go Boilers!!

lola528

Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 218
Location: Lafayette, Indiana

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 3:24 pm :::

IndyPurduefan wrote:

Quote:

They've got three returning starters and have upgraded their coach. The Boilers will be fine.

The Boilers will be fine, and more than fine. They are crazy about Coach V, including the players who were horribly distressed to find out KC was bailing out for TTech. I don't know where this "my way or the highway" business got started, but it's not really true. She did let them know that she was not happy with their past conditioning and that she wanted to play a style of ball that meant they had to be in the top shape of their lives. Some players, I think, don't really want to work that hard--but the good ones do. Her recruiting is going great--we have Kalika France coming from the Terps, a great player from Spain, and one-third of that original great recruiting class, plus all our returners. Katie has had the surgery she needed to keep from playing in pain, and they're all working their butts off. I can't imagine why anybody would think we aren't going to be good. We are at LEAST #9. By the end of the season we are going to be a lot higher. You heard it here first.

bballfan2005

Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 3:27 pm :::

Quote:

we have Kalika France coming from the Terps

She hasn't played competitive basketball in almost a year and has a history of knee problems. I'd be cautiously optimistic about her chances of helping the team if I'm a Boilermakers fan.

_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!

Mathies to LA 2013

IndyPurduefan

Joined: 25 Oct 2005
Posts: 1319
Location: Indianapolis, IN

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 3:43 pm :::

lola528 wrote:

IndyPurduefan wrote:

Quote:

They've got three returning starters and have upgraded their coach. The Boilers will be fine.

lola, I LOVE your optimism. I'm a pessimist by nature, so I truly hope you are dead on with your assessment!!!

_________________
Go Boilers!!

desafiada6

Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 409

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 4:15 pm :::

lola528 wrote:

Hmmm, great might be a stretch lola...I'm not quite ready to say "a lot higher" than #9 but I think they'll do a lot better than most people think. The pessimist in me wants to come out but I'm resisting. Wink

_________________
BOILER UP!

pilight

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 4:21 pm :::

Quote:

LeNoir isn't expected to be back in time for the start of the conference season. Her injury puts her on the shelf until January. The Pac-10 season starts in December

Last I read she was expected back in late December.

Quote:

They had Humphrey last year and barely finished ahead of KY. I don't see anything that makes Georgia any better than last year, losing Baker is going to be very hurtful.

Quote:

Strange that you hold mid-majors to a different standard than majors. Virginia hasn't gotten any further than GW & TCU did last year since Diana Taurasi was in high school. GW has matched or outperformed Virginia in March in each of the last four seasons. Yet somehow you've reached the conclusion that Virginia should be ranked higher and GW lower.

Quote:

You say that like Pondexter is nothing. She won't be easily replaced. I'd say Campbell, for one, is also more than just a body.

Quote:

Cal may be "overrated", but they've got a good number of talented young players returning. Unlike Washington, a team that relies on contribution from one player, Cal has two or three key contributors on which it can rely. In this Pac-10, Washington is no higher than #5.

I'm skeptical of Cal. Maybe their road struggles were just because they were relying so heavily on freshpersons, but I'd like to see a little more before I start pumping them up.

Quote:

choosing a depleted Baylor team to finish second to Oklahoma is just plain stupid. Texas A&M and Texas will finish higher in the Big 12 South ALONE, and then you have to look at Kansas State and Iowa State in the Big 12 North. Clearly you didn't...

I looked. A&M is the most likely candidate. Texas will suck again. Neither Iowa State nor Kansas State could beat quality teams a year ago, their records were very deceiving. They won't have to beat many quality teams to be competitive in the B12, but I think it's clear that neither team is ready for prime time.

Quote:

They [Arizona State] play in the Pac-10 and have finished Top 3 in the league for two straight seasons.

They had Kovesdy and Denson those seasons. The P10 is going to be stronger this year than it has been for some time.

Quote:

A senior-laden FSU team played UNC, Duke, and Maryland once each...and got blown out every single game. How do you expect a young FSU team to fare any better? If anything, they'll fare worse because the guard play just isn't there.

I don't expect them to beat Maryland, UNC, or Duke. I don't expect anyone in the ACC to do that. Check the schedule, FSU plays each of them only once again. I do think they'll be better than the rest of the ACC.

Quote:

It's not always about coaching, pilight. A coach does have to have capable athletes to win. Right now, Utah doesn't have that.

They've got enough to win the MWC, and by the end of the year they'll be capable of winning a tournament game.

_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home

dtsnms

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 4:55 pm :::

Quote:

Quote:
Hartford is returning most of a second round NCAA team, that puts them in the 20's.

Obviously, someone on the ESPN board disagrees with that statement. An American East fan, nonetheless.

An incorrect or ill-informed America East fan. Rizzotti liberally used her bench, and returns 7 players that played at least 10 minutes per game last year. Yes, Erika Messam was chosen AE POY but she really was not even the best player on her team.

Danielle Hood was first team All Conference, was 5th in the conference in scoring and shot 55% from the floor. She was invited to the U20 tryouts, and this past summer, in discussing local hoops, Diana Taurasi commented that the girl was for real. I'll trust that endorsment. Erica Beverly was AE Freshman of the Year, scored 10.5 ppg, was 2nd in the conference in rebounding, and 3rd in blocks, while shooting 55% also from the floor.

Ikea Witt and Danielle Wexler replace Messam, both averaged 28 mpg, and had Assist to TO of about 1.5:1.

Lisa Etienne is eligible (PSU transfer) who never should have left CT, and should do very well, and the Hawks have a 6'4 center from Rochester NY coming in too.

Plus one of the best young coaches in the country, who thrives on defensive pressure, and the only tough road games are Michigan State and Connecticut (which is technically a home game).

They should be stronger than last year. Strong enough to go Top 20? We'll have to see. They sure opened eyes at last year's tourney, didn't they?

Grumps

Joined: 22 Sep 2004
Posts: 1054

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 6:11 pm :::

Quote:

They had Humphrey last year and barely finished ahead of KY. I don't see anything that makes Georgia any better than last year, losing Baker is going to be very hurtful.

Tasha had to play the five last year because they had no post players to speak of due to injuries...This year she should be able to move to the 4 or maybe even the 3 at times...They should be 2nd or 3rd in the SEC...

Grumps

bballfan2005

Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 7:32 pm :::

Quote:

Last I read she was expected back in late December.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/northern_california/15392252.htm

Quote:

Guard Camille LeNoir also will be out until mid-January because of a hip injury

Quote:

They had Humphrey last year and barely finished ahead of KY. I don't see anything that makes Georgia any better than last year, losing Baker is going to be very hurtful.

They had an injured Humphrey last season. Also, she played out of position at the 5. With more post options available to Landers, Humphrey should move out to the four this season. Geez, do you even follow the SEC?

Quote:

Oh gee...I thought preseason prognostications were based on how a team is expected to perform during the 2006-07 season, not based on how they performed in the past. Your logic doesn't make sense. Hell, USC's only been to the Round of 32 the past two seasons yet you have them ranked #7. Gotta love the discrepancies.

Quote:

You say that like Pondexter is nothing.

Did I? Or is that just how you interpreted my statement, which clearly said that the only significant loss suffered by Rutgers is Pondexter? Damn...learn to interpret better.

Quote:

She won't be easily replaced.

No shit. I implied that.

Quote:

I'd say Campbell, for one, is also more than just a body.

Not to me. Her production can be covered by Vaughn.

Quote:

I'm skeptical of Cal. Maybe their road struggles were just because they were relying so heavily on freshpersons, but I'd like to see a little more before I start pumping them up.

How about actually paying attention to the conference this season? That'll help.

Quote:

I looked. A&M is the most likely candidate.

Then why aren't they ranked? Who did they lose of significance? No one.

Quote:

Texas will suck again.

No they won't. They won't win 30 games or anything like that, but they'll be much-improved over a year ago. They'll be 3rd in the entire conference.

Quote:

Neither Iowa State nor Kansas State could beat quality teams a year ago, their records were very deceiving.

Again, what does last year's record have to do with projected results for this season? Aren't we projecting as opposed to reflecting? Geez pilight, get a friggin' clue.

Perhaps Kansas State couldn't beat a quality team because it was...a young team? Maybe? Losing Wecker, Mahoney, and Koehn can be considered "huge losses". Iowa State had a stretch where they were without their only point guard (injury).

Quote:

They won't have to beat many quality teams to be competitive in the B12, but I think it's clear that neither team is ready for prime time.

So, "prime time" = pilight's Top 25?

Quote:

They had Kovesdy and Denson those seasons.

And they have still have Emily Westerberg, Brianna January (who should be much improved this season) and bring in the dynamic Dymond Simon. What's your point?

Quote:

The P10 is going to be stronger this year than it has been for some time.

Only because you have USC and Washington ridiculously overrated. Rolling Eyes

Quote:

I don't expect them to beat Maryland, UNC, or Duke.

Having said this, you believe they haven't improved and could actually be worse than last year. They weren't even competitive against those teams WITH three seniors and a junior in the starting line-up.

Quote:

I don't expect anyone in the ACC to do that.

Because you don't watch the games and know nothing about the conference. If you did, you'd know how close each team came to losing games to teams they shouldn't lose to.

Quote:

Check the schedule, FSU plays each of them only once again.

No shit, I've checked the schedule and am confident that they won't win more than 8 ACC games this season. The personnel just isn't there.

Quote:

I do think they'll be better than the rest of the ACC.

You think a lot of things that turn out to be completely false. I sure hope you don't spend too much $$ on lottery tickets. You clearly don't know the ACC. It's obvious from your posts. Any argument you bring up in favor of FSU is weak, weak, weak. Trust me. I know a whole lot more about the ACC than you do.

Quote:

They've got enough to win the MWC, and by the end of the year they'll be capable of winning a tournament game.

Prove it.

_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!

Mathies to LA 2013

bullsky

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
Posts: 20310

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 7:40 pm :::	Reply

Texas A&M not ranked? In the words of Fergie... OH SHIT! _________________ "Don't do something until you get it right, do it until you can't do it wrong." - Geno Auriemma

pilight

Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66922
Location: Where the action is

Back to top

Posted: 09/14/06 7:44 pm :::

bballfan2005 wrote:

So says the poster who said this a year ago...

Quote:

I figured that Maryland would start a rookie PG. I hope they're patient and don't expect too much this first year (like a serious championship push) because they will be thoroughly disappointed.

http://boards.rebkell.net/viewtopic.php?p=84215&highlight=#84215

Yeah, obviously you're an ACC expert... Rolling Eyes

_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home

Display posts from previous:

	RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 1 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum