# Conference USA Preview



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

1. Cincinatti - Lots of incoming talent. Robert Whaley could be the best big man in the conference, and wing James White could develop into the best player. Nick Williams will start in the backcourt. The newcomers should blend nicely with returnees like Jason Maxiell, Field Williams, Chadd Moore, and Eric Hicks. The issues here are a potentially volatile mix of players with character issues, outside shooting, and who plays the point. Though the Bearcats are probably a year away - if this team blends, it could end up with a #1 seed in the NCAA tournament. 

National Ranking: 5-15

2. Marquette - Losing Dywane Wade and Robert Jackson isn't going to be easy - no matter who comes in to replace them. But there are plenty of pieces here for Tom Crean to work with. Floor general Travis Diener, sweet spot up shooter (ask Missouri) Steve Novak, and well-rounded big man Scott Merrit are the centerpieces. Crean will have the task of integrating some interesting returnees and a very talented incoming class into the picture. Newcomers Dameon Mason (on the wing) and rock-solid JC transfer Robert Jackson (doing the dirty work down low) could make the difference for this team. 

National Ranking: 20-25

3. Charlotte - This might seem like a stretch, but this team has a lot of talent, a lot of youth, and a lot of depth. Demon Brown needs to play like a true PG this year, but he's a threat to score 30 every time out. Brendan Plavich is the outside shooter that the Niners need last season. Eddie Basden is an athletic, improving wing that does all the little things. Charlotte is set low, with standout frosh Curtis Withers back, and highly regarded freshman C Martin Iti incoming. Add Calvin Clemmons, CJ Pigford, and Butter Johnson into the mix, and the 49ers have more frontcourt options than anybody in the conference. 

National Ranking: Borderline top 25 

4. Memphis - Memphis has lost their top 3 frontcourt players, but I don't expect a dramatic dropoff from this team. The overall athleticism of this team is outstanidng. It all starts with veteran guards Antonio Burks, Anthony Rice, and Scooter McFagdon. Burks is one of the better PG's in the conference, and could have a breakout year. Freshman WF Sean Banks is going to make an impact right away. How much of one, and whether he can keep himself out of trouble off the court, could decide how successful this team is. There isn't much in the post, but incoming freshman Almany Thierro and Ivan Lopez have talent. This is a team that might have to fight to make the NCAA tournament, but should be there in the end. 

5. Louisville - Rick Pitino isn't the only high-profile coach losing several top players, but the Cardinals might have the most trouble replacing their stars from a year ago. Fransisco Garcia is an incredible shooter for his size, but does he get open looks now that he's getting full attention from defenses? Either freshman Brandon Jenkins or natural 2-guard Taquan Dean will be taking over for Reece Gaines, though neither will be able to bring to the table what his predecessor did. Incoming JC transfer Nate Daniels has the ability to create for himself, but JC standouts are always a risky proposition. This team is thin down low as well, with the talented but shaky Kendall Dartez and JC standout Nouha Diakite being the main options. Louisville is till a team that will likely make the tournament, but I dont't agree with the top 25 rankings that many publications have handed this team. 

6. UAB - Mike Anderson hopes to build on last year's strong finish, and lead the Blazers to the NCAA tourney. He might jsut have the talent to do it. PG and defensive catalyst Mike Bush is gone, but undersized scoring dynamo Morris Finley is back. Finley will stretch defenses all season long. JC transfers Donell and Ronell Taylor will be major factors in the backcourt. Demario Eddins looks like a star in the making at the wing. Gabe Kennedy was alone in the post last season, and may end up without much help again this season. As long as UAB's incoming post recruits can help even a little bit, this team should be a tourney contender. 

7. St Louis - Brad Soderberg can coach, and has a bit of talent. Reggie Bryant should develop into the go-to guy. There is actually some size on the blocks, as well. Is there enough talent here? 

8. Southern Miss - A lot of returning talent here, led by last year's surprise double-double machine, PF Charles Gaines. Lots of room for improvement, but also essentially the same cast from last year's disappointing team. 

9. DePaul - Dave Leitao 
has definitely turned the corner with this program - shockingly fast. However, don't expect the actual results will come for another year or two. This team will rely too heavily on a group of freshman that is talented, but not ready to take over just yet. 

10. East Carolina - Nice core of returning players, but this program is still light years away from the upper half of the division. Moussa Badiane could be the league's best shotblocker, and incoming frosh Japhet McNeil has some talent at the point. 

11. Houston - Andre Owens is the only notable returnee for a program that has lost a lot of talent over the past two seasons. The newcomers aren't anything to write home about. 

12. South Florida - The cupboard is really, really bare this time. Jimmy Baxter is a go-too option, and frosh big man Konimba Diawarra has some hype. Other than that, Robert McCollum has his hands full.

13. TCU - Last year's group underachieved, and this year's group is minues three double-digit scorers. Top scorer Corey Santee is back, but Neil Dougherty really needs frosh big man Femi Inbikunle to be ready now, which he isn't. 

14. Tulane - Yep, that's the sounds of crickets chirping. Good luck...


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

Moved to CUSA


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

Why did you move this?

There aren't any regular C-USA posters here, but there are plenty of people reading the main forum. How the C-USA lines up this season is a very relevant national topic. 

I don't want to spend 45 minutes writing up a post and not have anybody read it.


----------



## Natty Dreadlockz (Jul 21, 2003)

Good post blabla... I agree that your post should be in the main hoops section... This board averages bout 6 post's a week... Alumn why you be trippin?... There are plenty of thread's like this in the college hoops section include'n some from our big 12... Peace


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

This is our POLICY, I still left it as a re-direct on the Main forum. Posters stll can check it via the Central but end up here. If you look at the policy http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16189&forumid=94



> In the future, when you post, and it can bring up a good discussion, The moderators will keep it in the general discussion board for a couple days then we will have a re-direct link to the respectable conference forum. In the past, the thread was to be moved without a re-direct link. Now with the re-direct link, posters still can access the thread via the General Discussion thread.
> 
> If it is a slow thread, or little replies, the moderators will move it to the respectable conference forum with no re-direct link in the general discussion forum.


our goal is to get the Confernece board active, and this is one way of doing it. As what the policy says, users can still access the threads via the main boards. 

However, for this case, I will move it back since I did moved it before the couple day rule, but this weekend it will be moved to CUSA forum. 

Eagle, show me some that is relevent to the Big 12. I do not show anything.


----------



## Natty Dreadlockz (Jul 21, 2003)

> Eagle, show me some that is relevent to the Big 12. I do not show anything.


My point is this... There have been irrelevent thread's in the main forum's... And you know it... Ya gotta agree in some way, cuz your move'n a bunch of threads as we speak... Look... I understand your reason's for bein such a control freak wit the thread's... But... These boards are meant to stimulate convo's and debate's between member's right?... If one of the members suggest's a few new idea's, listen to them... Don't take it as a personal attack... You could easily take their question's to the right peep's before ya start postin bbb.net admin rules... Try and take the ribbin and constructive criticism wit a grain of salt dirty... Last time I checked... No mod on this board is the "PERFECT...TO THE LETTER OF THE RULES MOD"... Peace


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kansasalumn</b>!
> This is our POLICY, I still left it as a re-direct on the Main forum. Posters stll can check it via the Central but end up here. If you look at the policy http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16189&forumid=94
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, but moving every post that has anything to do with a specific conference out of the main board is not the way to attract posters to these boards. 

I am not a C-USA fan, and will not be regularly posting in the C-USA board. Neither are 99% of the people that come here right now, or 99% of the people who would open my post, read it, and perhaps respond to it.

There is no C-USA fan base right now o these boards. There is a solid fan base of people who like to discuss college bball topics from across the nation. Moving posts to other, less active boards is completely hindering this discussion. 

I was going to post an entire series of conference previews, but I really don't see the point, if each one is going to be stashed away on boards that can't generate any discussion in the first place.



> Originally posted by <b>Eagle</b>!
> Look... I understand your reason's for bein such a control freak wit the thread's... But... These boards are meant to stimulate convo's and debate's between member's right?...


Exactly my point...


----------



## JuniorNoboa (Jan 27, 2003)

Thanks for keeping this on the main board. I enjoyed the preview, and would not went looking for in the conference boards. I have better things to do then go on the 10 homer conference boards, which are so utterly bias.


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Eagle</b>!
> 
> My point is this... There have been irrelevent thread's in the main forum's... And you know it... Ya gotta agree in some way, cuz your move'n a bunch of threads as we speak... Look... I understand your reason's for bein such a control freak wit the thread's... But... These boards are meant to stimulate convo's and debate's between member's right?... If one of the members suggest's a few new idea's, listen to them... Don't take it as a personal attack... You could easily take their question's to the right peep's before ya start postin bbb.net admin rules... Try and take the ribbin and constructive criticism wit a grain of salt dirty... Last time I checked... No mod on this board is the "PERFECT...TO THE LETTER OF THE RULES MOD"... Peace



If you want to chat about this, Lets do this by PM's

We are Off topic on hand, lets get back to this thread about, the CUSA Preview


----------



## kansasalumn (Jun 9, 2002)

I am sorry for all the hoopla on what this has become. Hey, here is an idea, I copy this to the CUSA forum. 

There is a reason why we have confernce forums. It is where we discuss things about the conference. 

Update on the policy. 

If the thread on the main forum have a little or no activity it will be moved to the confernce forum after a couple days. 

If the thread like this one has activity for more than two days, it will be on the main forum until it (A)slows down or (B)more than a week and half, then it will be moved to the confernce. 

I see you points about going to each conference is a drag, but it is a great place to chat about a specifc confernece type things.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

Personally, I just don't see this policy as facilitating discussion. For a specific conference board to thrive, it's going to take fans from that conference becoming regular posters. 

I love college basketball. All college basketball. Not just the big ten, which is my "local" board. Other than the A-10 board, people like me are your biggest group of fans. (well, there's the SEC football fans, which ARE allowed to post about football on a basketball board...but I won't go there).

I just don't understand why you would want to limit discussion amongst your national fanbase, in order to promote discussion amongst a fanbase that doesn't exist on this site right now. 

If you get a good national board going, eventually the conference boards are going to get more posts. But it needs to be the fans from the specific conferences voluntarily increasing post volume. Until this happens, it doesn't matter how many posts you move. And you'll be losing your nation-wide posters at the same time. 

I just see this post moving policy as a hinderance to the growth of the college boards. And this is a shame, because I really like the people and the discussion here.


----------



## NovaNiner (Sep 24, 2003)

Nice preview. As good as anything I've read in any of the preseason publications.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Good work Blabla. 

I hope you continue your major conference previews. I am about to write quite a few of them for the mid-major conferences. I hope you guys enjoy them.


----------



## xubrew (Dec 17, 2002)

kansasalum is right about trying to stimulate growth for all of the conference forums as well. how about leaving it hear for awhile and let the thread generate some responses from all of us, and then when we begin to advertise the cusa forum on the team boards, we move it over there?? 

the logic behind this is that new posters who are fans of cusa teams will see it in the cusa forum and it will give them a reason to register and share their opinions on it. however, for now, it'll stay here as everyone else has suggested. 

wadaya think??


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>xubrew</b>!
> kansasalum is right about trying to stimulate growth for all of the conference forums as well. how about leaving it hear for awhile and let the thread generate some responses from all of us, and then when we begin to advertise the cusa forum on the team boards, we move it over there??
> 
> the logic behind this is that new posters who are fans of cusa teams will see it in the cusa forum and it will give them a reason to register and share their opinions on it. however, for now, it'll stay here as everyone else has suggested.
> ...


Thank you for actually addressing the issues that this thread has brought up. Until this post, I have felt like the views of the national posters (including myself) have basically been disregarded, without much of a second thought. 

One last time. Where would the NBA boards be if every post about a specific team was moved to it's respective team forum? 

The general NBA board is the hub of basketballboards.net. The team forums would not thrive without it. People start debating with fans of different teams in the main forum, and end up posting at their team forum. I would not be here if I couldn't post about Kevin Garnett on the general NBA forum. 

The same will apply here in the college forum. There are better communities out there for nearly every team/conference that means anything. It's our general basketball discussion that is a unique experience. 

I don't care what you do with my posts on the national board, after they are posted. If you want to copy and paste them into their respective forums, go right ahead. 

I'm not going to stop posting on the college forums if you continue to move my posts, but I was nearly there until your post, xubrew. I feel very strongly that it's not a policy that's going to improve this place, and I know many of the national board people agree with me. 

Does any of this make sense?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I just have one suggestion for you blabla. If you write previews, you can't just write up a whole bunch of stuff for one team and then write a sentence for the bottom team. That is almost like you don't care who they are. If you are going to write a preview you should have knowledge of every single team and write about it or it not really a preview you know.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

> f you write previews, you can't just write up a whole bunch of stuff for one team and then write a sentence for the bottom team.


You're telling me how I can and can't write previews? Hah!

I guess if I didn't adequately appease all those Tulane fans who are flocking in droves to the C-USA board, you can delete my post. You're the moderator.

I'm not a C-USA fan. I am a darn knowledgeable college basketball fan, who has first-hand knowledge about every school in the conference. I have visited message boards, watched games, and done my research. I've written my preview from a national perspective (=more attention to the better schools). I'm sorry if that doesn't meet your requirement for what a conference preview should look like. I won't post another one.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I just made a suggestion. 

If that was the case you would have been better off just writing them for individual teams. 

That's all I was saying.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>newmessiah10</b>!
> I just made a suggestion.
> 
> If that was the case you would have been better off just writing them for individual teams.
> ...


A suggestion isn't "you can't" or "you can" do this or that. Don't tell me how to write. 

You are complaing about my preview being too nationally-oriented...

The very definition of irony!


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>blabla97</b>!
> 
> 
> A suggestion isn't "you can't" or "you can" do this or that. Don't tell me how to write.
> ...


Then why even list the other teams if you aren't going to write anything about them, because according to you other people wouldn't be interested in them.


----------



## Jonathan Watters (Jul 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>newmessiah10</b>!
> 
> 
> Then why even list the other teams if you aren't going to write anything about them, because according to you other people wouldn't be interested in them.


Where in the world do I say that other people wouldn't be interested in them? It's certainly not in the post that you're replying to...

I'm a college basketball fan giving my opinion on college basketball. Nothing more. Just because I type up my thoughts about a conference doesn't mean I'm trying to set myself up as the freakin' C-USA messiah...

This is beyond ridiculous...


----------

