relative..... but very creepy that u can find all that stuff out...

OK......Im goin to hold you to it though...

Some very good preseason pics I think.....However, I am concerned with the placement of one team in particular.....Many of you have placed EMU very low in the ranks, I am thinking that they are a team you better not sleep on this year!  I have heard that they have a lot of potential to finish somewhere in the top 3!

Quote from: HSCfan on June 30, 2008, 02:07:06 PM
TFA,

Luckily, teams will always play their rivals twice in a season. Hampden-Sydney will always play Randolph-Macon and VWC twice, so no worries about that!

6-5FAN,

Thankfully, other posters on the board understand that I was simply making a point using traditional finishes. I have already been on record saying that I see EMU as a spoiler pick this year and, as Scotty will confirm, mentioning that teams had better watch out for Lynchburg due to the lethal Wooldridge/Echols combo.

Also, it appears that the Vick/Shaver combo will be back in action, with a little twist!
http://www2.hsc.edu/athletics/basketball/2008_09/news_releases/shaver_hire.html

I uderstand, and as an ODAC fan I see some of the traditional weaker teams getting stronger and more competitive and I just think it is important that other people realize that.  I honestly feel that there is not one team that can be looked at as an easy win or a definite lose.  The teams of the past that you looked at as "well lets just try to make this lose respectable" are gone.  However I am only one person with my own oppinions.

  ONE QUESTION?     If you say you do see EMU as a sleeper and the Lynchburg combination of Echols/Woolridge dangerous, then how do you as well as other members of this blog see the ODAC standings looking like at the end of this upcoming season?

Correction......RMC, VWC, and Guilford

Quote from: HSCfan on June 30, 2008, 08:19:21 AM
Very true, Brian. The ACC type schedule definitely throws a wrench into the equation. Whereas I can understand the move to this alternative schedule, there is one thing that is blatantly absent from this system. When you have teams playing "unbalanced" schedules (i.e. some teams may have to play tougher schedules, perhaps playing R-MC, VWC, and Guilford twice while another gets Randolph, LC, and EMU twice instead) you should allow ALL 11 teams into the conference tournament. Division I conference do this (The ACC, etc.) to account for the potential inbalance of scheduling. If you do not allow all teams into the tournament, a team that faced a much tougher schedule could be penalized.

Now I know the initial argument will be that the cream should rise to the top. But you cannot dispute the fact that some teams will face an uphill battle playing a much tougher conference slate. Now, I understand that the scheduling rotates every two years, but this will continue to be an issue until the ODAC allows for the three "play-in" games like Division I conferences with unbalanced grids (6 v 11, 7 v 10, and 8 v 9 earlier in the week, maybe a Tuesday or Wednesday before the tourney begins).

And the references to Randolph, LC, and EMU are only for demonstration purposes, no jabs intended!

No sense in saying no jabs intended.  You knew what you were saying when you posted Randolph, LC, and EMU as the weaker teams and RMC, Guilford and HSC as the tougher teams.  This may be the way all these teams were seen before but more than likely its not going to stay that way.  The "weaker teams" such as EMU are not going to be so weak from what I have seen.