[RagingTireFire]

I thought that the reason we had coaches was to teach and develop talent.

[jcmanson]

We have coaches to develop talent, talent can’t be taught.

[paradox]

Freshman or not, if these guys got game, we'll be good.

I agree with you dox, but that’s still a big IF. Given that the conference will be down quite a bit next year, we could get hot for 3 games and win the tourney. We should, at least, be getting better as the season progresses.

Sure, it a big IF, until this team actaully hits the hardwood.

What we have going for us is an unusual combination of talent and charactor with this incoming group.

Also, McKay says that this is his first ever top-50 class. When we factor in that Sanders wasn't a part of that rating and Floyd was an unknown and not even rated.... Even Curry's rating was based on his 12ppg as a junior and not his 20-plus as a senior point guard, and prior to the hype surrounding Steph's final-8 appearance. Also, Johnny Stephene is a redshirt freshman who was not a part of this class. Factor all of this in, and I think that we look pretty good going into next year.

[LUconn]

But you can't teach and develop talent. You've either got or you don't.

I don't even know what to say to this. You can't develop talent? What? You can't develop talent? This is so unbelievably incorrect I'm really am not sure what to say. Have you ever heard the term "project"? You know, those guys that are bascially worthless at basketball, but have real atributes that can't be taught like athletiscm and height? Have you also heard of practice? Players routinely do this to get better at basketball.

[paradox]

Yea, there are projects, but that's not what we're talking about here.

My understanding is that the players coming in next year are ready to play now. So, the idea of project or phases of development isn't expected to apply very strongly in this case.


Also, in case you didn't get the gist of my original statement: I can't teach you how to be talented if you don't have any, and as a result, I can't develop or advance what's not there.


..

[RagingTireFire]

My understanding is that the players coming in next year are ready to play now.

Based on what?

[paradox]

That, my friend is a huge secrect


In the end, it's just perception and opinion, like most things. But I will say this as one who has been around here for a long time. This has the marking of something special and unique, in my perspective.

The only thing that I felt this strongly about was Richmond & Burks back in the late 90's. Of course, our coach was Hank back then, and neither player actually ended up playing here.

[SuperJon]

My understanding is that the players coming in next year are ready to play now.

Smitty was ready to play when he got here, but he really didn't break out and become a great player until his junior year.

[RagingTireFire]

The only thing that I felt this strongly about was Richmond & Burks back in the late 90's. Of course, our coach was a fraud back then, and neither player actually stepped foot on campus.

I see what you're trying to say but this doesn't really help you.

Look, I'm not saying that we can't have a good team next year. It's asking a lot of a true freshman to adjust to college life -- particularly at Liberty -- and be a solid contributor to the team in his first year. To ask that of at least 4 of them is nearly unheard of.

[paradox]

The only thing that I felt this strongly about was Richmond & Burks back in the late 90's. Of course, our coach was a fraud back then, and neither player actually stepped foot on campus.

I see what you're trying to say but this doesn't really help you.

Look, I'm not saying that we can't have a good team next year. It's asking a lot of a true freshman to adjust to college life -- particularly at Liberty -- and be a solid contributor to the team in his first year. To ask that of at least 4 of them is nearly unheard of.

Nothing's really unheard of. The fab-5 won an NCAA title with five starting freshman and an assistant interim coach.

Also, didn't Ohio State come up pretty big playing mostly freshman, two years ago?

If our class turns out to be good and beyond big south level, then why can't we compete and even win?

...

[TDDance234]

Nothing's really unheard of. The fab-5 won an NCAA title with five starting freshman and an assistant interim coach.

Also, didn't Ohio State come up pretty big playing mostly freshman, two years ago?

If our class turns out to be good and beyond big south level, then why can't we compete and even win?

...

Those are some big names. Oden and company were the biggest of the high-major recruits. Our freshman are going to be solid players but let's be realistic--there was a reason they are in the Big South and not the Big Ten/ACC. We may compete for the Big South but nationally, we have no shot--this year, anyway. If these guys play above their heads and really gell, who's to say what can happen in 2-3 years.

[jmdickens]

The only thing that I felt this strongly about was Richmond & Burks back in the late 90's. Of course, our coach was a fraud back then, and neither player actually stepped foot on campus.

I see what you're trying to say but this doesn't really help you.

Look, I'm not saying that we can't have a good team next year. It's asking a lot of a true freshman to adjust to college life -- particularly at Liberty -- and be a solid contributor to the team in his first year. To ask that of at least 4 of them is nearly unheard of.

Nothing's really unheard of. The fab-5 won an NCAA title with five starting freshman and an assistant interim coach.

Also, didn't Ohio State come up pretty big playing mostly freshman, two years ago?

If our class turns out to be good and beyond big south level, then why can't we compete and even win?

...

The Fab5 never won a title....lost in the championship though

[RagingTireFire]

Nothing's really unheard of. The fab-5 won an NCAA title with five starting freshman and an assistant interim coach.
...

Uh, no. They didn't. In fact, it was their lack of poise and experience that did the Fab-5 in. Also, Fisher was a interim head coach in 1989 when he took Michigan to the title thanks to an unbelievable performance from Glen Rice.

Nothing against the guys that we're bringing in here but the level of talent of a freshman in the Big Ten is more than significantly different than the talent level of a freshman in the Big South.

[Sly Fox]

I don't think 'Dox was implying that would be winning any national titles. But he was saying that in today's watered down collegiate game that a major infusion of freshman talent can have much more of an impact than a decade or so ago.

And for the record, several of our recruits had legitmate offers from major conference programs and they signed with us by choice because of an affinity for our school and coaching staff.

[paradox]

Nothing's really unheard of. The fab-5 won an NCAA title with five starting freshman and an assistant interim coach.
...

Uh, no. They didn't. In fact, it was their lack of poise and experience that did the Fab-5 in. Also, Fisher was a interim head coach in 1989 when he took Michigan to the title thanks to an unbelievable performance from Glen Rice.

Nothing against the guys that we're bringing in here but the level of talent of a freshman in the Big Ten is more than significantly different than the talent level of a freshman in the Big South.

Ok, my memory mixed two different teams into one. But, the point is still valid, the fab-5 made it all the way to the national title game. DePaul, as a mid-major, went far one year with a freshman dominated line-up. And we have Ohio State as well.



The point is, you can win with freshman. We certainly have a real chance in a very weak big south next year.

[LUconn]

but you're just listing exceptions to the rule. There are probably 1000 freshman in D1 bball every year and there are maybe 1 or 2, if that, in any given conference that step up and make an immediate impact. We need 3, at minimum to.

["R" i "]

My understanding is that the players coming in next year are ready to play now.

Smitty was ready to play when he got here, but he really didn't break out and become a great player until his junior year.

LARRY BLAIR.

The ultimate green light.

[Cider Jim]

I don't think 'Dox was implying that would be winning any national titles.

Sly, please don't speak for Paradox: let him dream and sip the

In future generations, when people talk about the "Fab Five" it will be a reference to the 2008-09 Liberty team, not Michigan.

[SuperJon]

but you're just listing exceptions to the rule. There are probably 1000 freshman in D1 bball every year and there are maybe 1 or 2, if that, in any given conference that step up and make an immediate impact. We need 3, at minimum to.

Exactly. That OSU team wouldn't even have been at OSU if it wasn't for the new rules.

[paradox]

I don't think 'Dox was implying that would be winning any national titles.

Sly, please don't speak for Paradox: let him dream and sip the

In future generations, when people talk about the "Fab Five" it will be a reference to the 2008-09 Liberty team, not Michigan.

Actually, Sly got the gist of what I was saying, which was: we can be compete for a conference title this year, even with the freshman.

Please Cider, I'd rather you NOT speak for me, if you think I'm implying that we're competing for a national title

[jcmanson]

we can be compete for a conference title this year, even with the freshman.

Agreed.

[paradox]

but you're just listing exceptions to the rule. There are probably 1000 freshman in D1 bball every year and there are maybe 1 or 2, if that, in any given conference that step up and make an immediate impact. We need 3, at minimum to.

I get what you're saying. But, the comparison holds up in context. I was responding to someone who suggested that it would be impossible to win anything with three freshman starters. I was simply pointing out that there have been successful teams that have won with as many as five freshman starting.

I understand that those teams were exceptional, but we're just trying to win a very weak big south, and on a down year at that.

LU took the big south in '04, with a walk-on playing point, and a pair of freshman scorers. Also, Gabe Martin played a very large role as well. This year we have MVP canidate Anthony Smith, Junior Sammy Jackson, and two dependable guards in Ohman & Anderson in the mix as well.



I think position by position, we look pretty good.

[Rocketfan]

Nothing's really unheard of. The fab-5 won an NCAA title with five starting freshman and an assistant interim coach.
...

Uh, no. They didn't. In fact, it was their lack of poise and experience that did the Fab-5 in. Also, Fisher was a interim head coach in 1989 when he took Michigan to the title thanks to an unbelievable performance from Glen Rice.

Nothing against the guys that we're bringing in here but the level of talent of a freshman in the Big Ten is more than significantly different than the talent level of a freshman in the Big South.

Ok, my memory mixed two different teams into one. But, the point is still valid, the fab-5 made it all the way to the national title game. DePaul, as a mid-major, went far one year with a freshman dominated line-up. And we have Ohio State as well.

Just to clarify for your memory. The Fab-5 have been erased from the NCAA record books.

[Rocketfan]

we can be compete for a conference title this year, even with the freshman.

Agreed.

Your guys are drunk. I can't wait to see the "how many games will we win" thread once our schedule is posted.

[jcmanson]

Not drunk. Our season may be very up and down next year. We could have times that we don’t look like we are even a d1 team, but look at the rest of the conference- very weak. All we have to do is get hot at the right time for just 3 games. By the end of the season these freshman, as the saying goes, “won’t be freshman anymore.” I’m not expecting a championship, but wouldn’t be surprised one iota.

I also wouldn’t be surprised if we finished 10-20 and below .500 in the league.