MBB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference

[algernon]

The NCAA doesn't do any individual awards. We do not do a player of the year.

Pat ... Does the NCAA still do an All-American team, as they did in 2000, when Grimes was South Region POY and on the NCAA First Team?

[steelyglen]

Algernon...your picks are fine with the exception of Wansley...remember one of the guidelines said that their eligiblity had to have already expired.

> for your picks to count you gotta put them in some kind of order...but if not don't worry about it.

[eagleslam]

jttiger...

Here are some facts about the last 11 seasons. 

1994-95.......... 16-9 (1st Team All-American Dan Rush was a stud)

1995-96........... 18-10 (NCAA appearance, after losing star Craig Tutt in the first exhibition of the season)

1996-97............ 21-8 (ODAC Finals; NCAA Sweet 16.  Keep in mind this was when you had to win 2 games to get that far.  Both were on the road.)

1997-98........... 10-14
1998-99............ 10-15 (down years, but H-SC and R-MC were pounding everyone at this point and time.  Also, every program goes through this.  The phantom foul against Williford haunts me to this day, though I apologize to Steely for bringing it up!!)

1999-2000............ 17-8
2000-2001............ 19-7
2001-2002............ 17-9 (3 years with some guy named Williford, a 1st Team All-American)

2002-03........... 14-12
2003-04............ 13-13
2004-05............ 17-9 (Again, a three time first team ODAC member in Easterling.)

Steely would need to verify this, but I believe Brad Harrington got 1st Team All-ODAC during the 1996-97 and 1997-98 seasons, which means yet again, BC recruited talent on reputation.

That is a 172-114 record the past 11 seasons, an average of 15.6 wins and 10.3 losses.  Now, that also takes into account a bad run from 1997-98 and 1998-99.  Again, Macon had an incredibly good teams then.  Teams that were better than some, if not all, teams now.  Sydney had great teams, better than any ODAC school now.  That does help prove your point, but no one compares to H-SC the past 10 years.  Macon had a run in the late 90s, slipped a couple of years when Mike Rhoades first took over, and is now back on track.  VWC is just starting to get where H-SC has been for years, and where Macon was and has gotten back to as far as REPUTATION goes.  If you want to mention reputation, VWC's has had one where they lose games they should not and never reach their potential.  Please do not take offense JWW, but that's how it was for a while.  An ODAC Championship does a lot to change it, but it's not going to change it entirely.

Since the 1999-2000 season, BC has a record of 97-58, for an average of 16.1 wins and 9.6 losses.  And let's not forget, in 2002-03, Macon and Sydney beat everyone in the ODAC.  Both were 17-1, so compared to them, everyone was bad.  No one had the reputation those teams had.

Again, comparing H-SC and R-MC over the past 5-6 seasons is like comparing apples to oranges.  Absolutely no argument there.  If you want to say H-SC gets better players based on their reputation, fine.  But, what am I asking for?  Stop living in the freaking past.  BC's is not too shabby, as I have pointed out.  Compared to H-SC, not so much, but whose is?  Stop basing predictions based on reputation.  I must admit, I had worries about the BC-EMU game back in December.  I didn't base anything on the last 18 games bwteen the two, merely what I knew about THIS YEAR'S version at the time they played.  Predictions should not be based on the past five years because the games themselves, as you stated, are not.  They should be based on what is playing now between the two.

Just curious, but the record over the past 6 seasons was how surprising to you?  What about over the last 11, especially with the two NCAA year's?  My guess is it's much better than you thought, otherwise I gotta believe you would have given "more respect based on reputation".  If not, you're a hard guy to please.

[Tigerfan]

I don't want to intervene in your peeing contest, but I have a slight correction, Eagleslam.  BC was not in the 96-97 championship game.  That game featured H-SC hammering LC by 30.  The big game was the semi-final the day before between H-SC and Roanoke, which ended with a bit of a melee as students from both sides hit the floor after an intense game.  Which brings up another criticism of your essay on BC basketball - you give deserved credit to the H-SC and R-MC teams of the time, but ignore a very big dog.  During the seasons of 96, 97 and 01, Roanoke was the team to beat in the ODAC, and the Maroons were also H-SC's main rival in 95 and 00. 
It strikes me that the Eagles have had several teams over that time which were one player/position away from being really good.  There would be a hole in the lineup, like point guard during the Easterling years, that kept them from hitting the top (which makes the Durrette knee injury so tragic).   

[jttiger]

but no one compares to H-SC the past 10 years.Posted by: eagleslam

Eagleslam
IF that is the case then why are you giving me these FACTS! You want the same treatment as HSC by an HSC fan? But you admit yourself there is no comparison. I don't care what BC has done over the past 15 years, if  it doesn't compare to HSC, then what we are discussing. THIS ISN'T EVEN MY ARGUMENT! We are so far off the subject.

Eagleslam, Bridgewater went to the sweet sixteen in 96 that was great, but since then they have had some 17 win seasons and one 19 win season. Why? Like tigerfan said BC has had some great and I mean great players but they have been a few players short of a championship team. Last year HSC went 17-10 with all freshmen and yet that was very abnormal season for HSC! But from your stats a very normal season for BC>  Maybe that is why Algernon was not ready to give your team the benefit of the doubt for this season!

The fact is HSC has had the players to go to Championship games and win. (No gloating intended just facts!) HSC was known to bring in a great freshmen class last year. If I heard that I would naturally believe it were true based on pass seasons. Bridgewater,  although it might not seem fair to you must earn a little more than word of mouth to gain that same respect. That is how most every person on this board looks at our conference.  Why would you expect Algernon to give the Eagles the same treatment, HE IS NOT EVEN A FAN!!!! Just because you say they have some great players?

LIKE I SAID BC HELD THEIR OWN WITH RMC, THEY COULD MORE THAN LIKELY BEAT HSC TOMORROW! IF THEY DO AND THEN CONTINUE TO WIN SOME BIG GAMES WITH CONSISTANCY IN THE TOURNAMENT> then you can get on everybody else and say "I Told you so!"

[ladyeagle]

im not gonna get too far into it.  all i gotta say is:  BC can beat HSC.   HSC better not expect an easy game.

[Tigerfan]

With the exception of Algernon, I doubt if anybody associated with H-SC expects an easy game at Nininger Hall. BC always works the ball for high percentage shots, rebounds well and plays a generally disciplined game.  If Kaase gets in foul trouble and maybe the shots aren't falling too well on the road, the Tigers could walk away with an L.  If they get the W, the Tigers will have to work and grind pretty hard - they haven't shown the capability to blow anybody out.

[mybleedinghands]

im not gonna get too far into it.  all i gotta say is:  BC can beat HSC.   HSC better not expect an easy game.

if HSC goes in thinking its going to be an easy W then they deserve to lose. I mean, look at how well us hornets played them in HSC earlier this year!

[jeloesel]

< should have added, "...and we all know the Hornets are stingless this season."

[eagleslam]

tigerfan...

Thanks for the correction.  It was the 1996 ODAC Finals where BC lost to Roanoke.


jttiger...

I do not expect either you, or Algernon, nor any other H-SC poster to say, "Wow.  BC's record really compares to that of the Tigers'."  Nor should you.  All I expect you to do is be fair.  I don't expect Algernon to give anyone the benefit of the doubt, because he rarely, if ever, gives anyone but H-SC the benefit of any doubt.  Just look at the records and realize BC has brought in good players and continues to.  A lot of their problems have been injuries.  Like I said, Criag Tutt went down.  The past three seasons, CW Durrette went down.  Four season altering injuries in the past 10.  Forty percent of the time, the Eagles have been without a point guard, and still have the personel to do what they have done.  Must have pretty damn good players.  Great ones, like you said. 

Why is it so hard to believe that BC couldn't have brought in some pretty damn good players this year?  Or ones that can be great?
They have OBVIOUSLY brought in players that can put up records that, as I said before, a lot of ODAC schools would love to have, and that is without a bunch of championships and without a "pure point guard" because of injuries.  Seems like to me that that shows just how good BC was, could have been, and the probability they brought in damn good players now.  If you don't see it that way, that is entirely up to you, just like it is Algernon's, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

[mybleedinghands]

Algernon...your picks are fine with the exception of Wansley...remember one of the guidelines said that their eligiblity had to have already expired.

> for your picks to count you gotta put them in some kind of order...but if not don't worry about it.

Okay, i'll attempt to put some sort of order and replace Wansley! The only ones on here I have seen more than once or twice is Wansley and Easterling, so i'll do the best i can

1. Jeff Monroe, HSC
2. Justin Call, E&H
3. Jared Mills, RMC
4. Kyle Williford, BC
5. TJ Grimes, HSC
6. Ron Yuhasz, VWC
7. Robby Pridgen, RC
8. Brad Dunleavy, RC
9. Ricky Easterling, BC
10. Dennis Brown, LC

[Pat Coleman]

The NCAA doesn't do any individual awards. We do not do a player of the year.

Pat ... Does the NCAA still do an All-American team, as they did in 2000, when Grimes was South Region POY and on the NCAA First Team?

The NCAA did not do an All-American team in 2000 either. You're probably thinking of the NABC team, where the top player in each region is an automatic first-teamer ... and the first team is therefore eight people.

[algernon]

The NCAA did not do an All-American team in 2000 either. You're probably thinking of the NABC team, where the top player in each region is an automatic first-teamer ... and the first team is therefore eight people.

Yeh, that's exactly what I was thinking of ... and it was funny to have a first team of 8 people!

Steelyglen .... Sorry that I missed the eligibility thing regarding Wansley.  When I have more time, I'll post a new Top Ten for POPC, excluding Wansley.

Eagleslam .... I'm going to ignore your "benefit of the doubt" statement as another attempt to provoke argument.  I'm not even part of your fight and, honestly, can't even figure out what it is.

Tigerfan .... I don't necessarily expect an easy game at Nininger Hall this afternoon, even though I'm hoping for one... ...  While my prediction is that the Tigers will win by 13, I am quite certain it could go either way.  No game is over before it is played.  The Yellow Jackets' experience in the first game of the 2004 tournament is evidence of that.  However, what's more important than my expectation is that of the players ... and I have no doubt that none of them are expecting an easy game.

I've got to leave shortly to make the trip to Bridgewater.  Fortunately, it's a nice day for the drive!

[stevie4544]

I have been reading this site for a long time and i had to chime in concerning the best players debate.  You all make valid points, but you are forgetting one factor. WINS. You must put a winner with less impressive stats over a player that never won anything with better stats. All of these players were/are obviously talented and were capable of putting up numbers.  However, not all could win.  A great example is Justin Call.  Call averaged a boatload of points on a painfully mediocre team. Had he played for sydney or macon during his tenure, his numbers would have been way down, but he would have won about 50 more games.  I think he would have been considered one of the best the conference had ever seen if he would have gone somewhere like that.  To average 15 instead of 20 and win almost every game is the mark of a true player. Thus, one must take the landmark players from the dominate odac teams (sydney 03, macon 02,03) before they even consider anyone else.  Jared mills averaged about 15 points a game for his career: a far cry from call's 20+, but I consider mills a far better player as far a legacy is concerned, because all he did was help that team to a number of #1 rankings.  You must consider those who sacrifice statistics for winning

[yj424]

eh...just call me kid-  really nice color scheme in your standings.