Tiger1983
BBA
Posts: 35,183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 2033
I Root For: Tigers - GTG!
Location: The enemy’s lair
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 12:48 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: Pardon me for this drive-by. Here's the 247Sports basketball rankings for the 2018 class, as of June 20th. Only incoming freshmen are counted.
AAC
28. Memphis
59. Wichita State
65. Cincinnati
67. USF
74. Tulane
106. ECU
111. Houston
114. UConn
117. SMU
131. Temple
145. UCF
MWC
50. Nevada
71. UNLV
76. Boise
87. Fresno
88. SDSU
90. SJSU
116. CSU
119. New Mexico
N/A: Utah State, Wyoming, Air Force
https://247sports.com/Season/2018-Basket...amRankings
Thanks. Please note that Tulsa is also N/A, although they have added players per April 2018 Source.
2018 Tulsa Signing Class
Chris Barnes
6-4 • Guard
Compton, Calif. (Compton HS/UTEP/Angelina College)
Simon Falokun
6-8 • Forward
Houston, Texas (Alief Taylor HS/Dawson CC)
Peter Hewitt
6-10 • Forward
Mountain View, Calif. (Saint Francis HS/UC Davis/Las Positas College)
Reggie Jones
6-6 • Guard/Forward
Marion, Ind. (Marion HS/Western Michigan)
Will sit out the 2018-19 season per NCAA transfer rules and have two years of eligibility remaining …
Zeke Moore
6-7 • Guard
St. Louis, Mo. (Riverview Gardens HS/Saint Louis/Southwest Illinois CC)
|
|
06-25-2018 07:33 AM |
|
Billy Bob Bearcat
Special Teams
Posts: 606
Joined: Nov 2017
Reputation: 18
I Root For: UC
Location: The Dirty South
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 01:13 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: My school, UC Santa Barbara, has an incoming class currently ranked #66. We would be second in the MW - and fourth in the AAC, sandwiched between Cincinnati and USF
As an aside, UCSB and UC are both amongst the suitors for Kenyon Martin Jr.
UC hasn't actually given Kenyon Martin Jr an offer.
They have scouted him and he is linked to the school because of his name, but I am not sure the coaching staff actually wants him.
|
|
06-25-2018 08:32 AM |
|
Tiger1983
BBA
Posts: 35,183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 2033
I Root For: Tigers - GTG!
Location: The enemy’s lair
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:32 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote: (06-25-2018 01:13 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: My school, UC Santa Barbara, has an incoming class currently ranked #66. We would be second in the MW - and fourth in the AAC, sandwiched between Cincinnati and USF
As an aside, UCSB and UC are both amongst the suitors for Kenyon Martin Jr.
UC hasn't actually given Kenyon Martin Jr an offer.
They have scouted him and he is linked to the school because of his name, but I am not sure the coaching staff actually wants him.
Is it a mistake to turn down the 3* son of one of Cincy’s all-time greats?
|
|
06-25-2018 08:39 AM |
|
Huskypride
New Kid on the Block
Posts: 2,575
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 154
I Root For: Competitive FB
Location: Worcester
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:39 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:32 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote: (06-25-2018 01:13 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: My school, UC Santa Barbara, has an incoming class currently ranked #66. We would be second in the MW - and fourth in the AAC, sandwiched between Cincinnati and USF
As an aside, UCSB and UC are both amongst the suitors for Kenyon Martin Jr.
UC hasn't actually given Kenyon Martin Jr an offer.
They have scouted him and he is linked to the school because of his name, but I am not sure the coaching staff actually wants him.
Is it a mistake to turn down the 3* son of one of Cincy’s all-time greats?
Just because he is the son of a great doesn't mean that he will live up to the expectations.
|
|
06-25-2018 08:48 AM |
|
HuskyU
Big East Overlord
Posts: 22,802
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 1182
I Root For: UCONN
Location: The Big East
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
|
|
06-25-2018 08:53 AM |
|
Knights_of_UCF
Heisman
Posts: 5,980
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 88
I Root For: UCF
Location:
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
yup, and its more important to compare actual results -- recruiting means nothing until it is played out on the court. AAC still wins no matter how you slice it compared to mwc (or any other g4).
|
|
06-25-2018 08:57 AM |
|
Tiger1983
BBA
Posts: 35,183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 2033
I Root For: Tigers - GTG!
Location: The enemy’s lair
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:48 AM)Huskypride Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:39 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:32 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote: (06-25-2018 01:13 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: My school, UC Santa Barbara, has an incoming class currently ranked #66. We would be second in the MW - and fourth in the AAC, sandwiched between Cincinnati and USF
As an aside, UCSB and UC are both amongst the suitors for Kenyon Martin Jr.
UC hasn't actually given Kenyon Martin Jr an offer.
They have scouted him and he is linked to the school because of his name, but I am not sure the coaching staff actually wants him.
Is it a mistake to turn down the 3* son of one of Cincy’s all-time greats?
Just because he is the son of a great doesn't mean that he will live up to the expectations.
Apparently, Martin, Jr does not have an option to tackle perceived expectations and the question is should he be allowed the option. I do not know the answer, but I perceive some PR value in offering. He is a legimate prospect given his three star rating.
|
|
06-25-2018 09:00 AM |
|
Huskypride
New Kid on the Block
Posts: 2,575
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 154
I Root For: Competitive FB
Location: Worcester
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:57 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
yup, and its more important to compare actual results -- recruiting means nothing until it is played out on the court. AAC still wins no matter how you slice it compared to mwc (or any other g4).
Of course no programs in the MWC maybe beside unlv. Will be able to out recruit or recruit of the same level as the AAC top brands over a 4-5 year span. It just not possible.
|
|
06-25-2018 09:01 AM |
|
Tiger1983
BBA
Posts: 35,183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 2033
I Root For: Tigers - GTG!
Location: The enemy’s lair
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
Agree it would be a good indicator. I also think transfers should be part of the evaluation, if possible.
|
|
06-25-2018 09:01 AM |
|
pesik
Legend
Posts: 26,442
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 817
I Root For: Houston
Location:
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 01:13 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: My school, UC Santa Barbara, has an incoming class currently ranked #66. We would be second in the MW - and fourth in the AAC, sandwiched between Cincinnati and USF
As an aside, UCSB and UC are both amongst the suitors for Kenyon Martin Jr.
you noted the flaw in that argument, it only includes freshmen
houston has 2 4star transfer
uconn is only low becuase it is taking in 2 touted grad tranfers
the list could go on
houston's sole freshmen recruit is a top 100 4star
|
|
06-25-2018 09:24 AM |
|
slhNavy91
Heisman
Posts: 7,850
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
Thanks. I was going to open with the disclaimer that my remarks on the relative recruiting rankings was all football not basketball. As a Navy fan, following basketball recruiting can be low ROI.
But I was going to ask, can't basketball recruiting be a LOT more variable year-to-year? Shouldn't we look at a five year?
For football, I reviewed Bill Connelly's 2-year and 5-year recruiting rankings (which he factors into preseason projected S&P+) https://www.sbnation.com/college-footbal...2018-class
and my overall depiction of 1 (CUSA, MAC) or 2 (mwc) G4 teams even being within the AAC top 8 held.
|
|
06-25-2018 09:27 AM |
|
jdgaucho
All American
Posts: 4,271
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 108
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 09:01 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
Agree it would be a good indicator. I also think transfers should be part of the evaluation, if possible.
In our case, a 4-5 year window wouldn't be accurate.
Since our coach is now beginning year two, it's only been since he took the job that we've been getting 3* and 4* recruits and/or transfers.
|
|
06-25-2018 11:00 AM |
|
jdgaucho
All American
Posts: 4,271
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 108
I Root For: UCSB
Location: Big West Land
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 09:24 AM)pesik Wrote: (06-25-2018 01:13 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: My school, UC Santa Barbara, has an incoming class currently ranked #66. We would be second in the MW - and fourth in the AAC, sandwiched between Cincinnati and USF
As an aside, UCSB and UC are both amongst the suitors for Kenyon Martin Jr.
you noted the flaw in that argument, it only includes freshmen
houston has 2 4star transfer
uconn is only low becuase it is taking in 2 touted grad tranfers
the list could go on
houston's sole freshmen recruit is a top 100 4star
UCSB has at least one 4 star transfer as well (two if you count DeVearl Ramsey was a 4* Rivals recruit, but is listed elsewhere as a 3*). We have a consensus 3* transfer.
At least for one year, our recruiting is AAC-like.
|
|
06-25-2018 11:11 AM |
|
Tiger1983
BBA
Posts: 35,183
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 2033
I Root For: Tigers - GTG!
Location: The enemy’s lair
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 11:00 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: (06-25-2018 09:01 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
Agree it would be a good indicator. I also think transfers should be part of the evaluation, if possible.
In our case, a 4-5 year window wouldn't be accurate.
Since our coach is now beginning year two, it's only been since he took the job that we've been getting 3* and 4* recruits and/or transfers.
Similar to how a doctor uses several indicators (eg, temp, blood pressure, weight) to assess the health of a patient, so too are more than one indicator helpful to access the overall health of conference recruiting.
|
|
06-25-2018 11:35 AM |
|
gulfcoastgal
All American
Posts: 4,299
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 400
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
Agree, but it is interesting to note turning points in programs which are obviously easier to locate in hindsight be they upward or downward. Many want to cite the returning to the mean argument which holds true, but often minimizes current trends in favor of historical data. IMO, the CFP era and the bleed over to other sports could be one of those delineating moments in time. On a program by program basis, the admin (sports friendly or not) plays a key role in trajectory.
|
|
06-25-2018 12:01 PM |
|
HuskyU
Big East Overlord
Posts: 22,802
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 1182
I Root For: UCONN
Location: The Big East
|
RE: MWC vs AAC
(06-25-2018 11:00 AM)jdgaucho Wrote: (06-25-2018 09:01 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: (06-25-2018 08:53 AM)HuskyU Wrote: If you want to compare conference recruiting, a 4-5 year average recruiting ranking probably tells a better story. Some years, programs have all transfers or just a single recruit, which results in a poor/non-existent ranking. Other years, classes are so big that they have an atypically high ranking.
Agree it would be a good indicator. I also think transfers should be part of the evaluation, if possible.
In our case, a 4-5 year window wouldn't be accurate.
Since our coach is now beginning year two, it's only been since he took the job that we've been getting 3* and 4* recruits and/or transfers.
Looks like we got ourselves another agenda-driven non-AAC fan...
|
|
06-25-2018 12:04 PM |
|