NCHoosier32

i don't see Green being the leader. seems like that would not be ideal.

seems like this would have been aimed at me, so this is what i'll say... it doesn't make me feel better to attribute last year to anything in particular. i'm doin fine. my opinion is that we under performed and didn't have good team chemistry. seemed obvious on the offensive end. you are right that i and we don't know much for certain, but there were a ton of rumors about where the behind the scenes stuff was coming from. usually when there's that much smoke, there's at least a little fire. who knows? maybe it's Archie's fault? my personal opinion is more the behind the scenes stuff. nope, i don't have anything personal against any of the guys, but think some are better teammates than others. injuries? sure. okay. i still say that almost all teams face injuries and we had our core guys most of the time. banged up, sure. i still think we had plenty of talent on the floor for most games to look a lot better than we did. sorry this is an Armaan Franklin thread and this seems a little out of place, but wanted to give my response a go.

i'm the guy who always sticks with the best 5 guys need major minutes. it's an old school mentality i realize. coaches at all levels try to script subs more, not wear guys down, etc., etc. i still say these guys are in college and in their prime. they don't need much rest in games. talent matters. once you establish who your best 5 are, they need to play a lot of minutes. then give 6-8 good solid minutes too. 9-10 play sparingly in a close game. everyone else can sit during a close game. i like Coach K's model. he has a bench full of McD's AA that don't get in the games because he only plays 8 guys big minutes.

i still have to think 100% that behind the scenes stuff accounted for the horrible team play. this team was too talented to look so out of sorts. i'm sure some of the rumors are not true, and some are probably true, but exaggerated, etc., etc., but team chemistry was so so bad. i always thought it involved Smith and Green, but admittedly, i could be completely wrong.

admittedly i didn't watch much of the McD's game, but he didn't look impressive with those guys did he? i thought he looked a little out of sorts from what i saw.

kinda gotta think something dirty is going on at Memphis?

Why not more talk about Quinones? Doesn't it look fairly good for us right now? I may have missed something though? Is Watford pretty much a no at this point?

yeah. when it was introduced to me in my high school, they called it double deck bid euchre. we shortened it to double deck. it's literally the only card game i have liked to play over the last 30 years.

it is. 2 euchre decks. bid similar to spades, but obviously spades is not always trump. i can't play regular euchre any more. it's too simple. in double deck or bid, you can make a lot happen even with bad hands.

every once in a blue moon we agree Rico! do you play double deck euchre? that's the only game i like to play these days.

too bad more parents won't get that this is them.

and led in points, rebounds, assists, and steals, but i'm open to who you think is better than those 7. they missed a combined 19 games i believe, but that also includes Green's suspension, so probably make that 15 and Romeo missing the NIT, but i guess we can count that. so 15 missed games from 7 guys. our leading scorer played every game. 2nd leading scorer only missed the last 3. 3rd missed mainly due to suspension. 4th missed 1. 5th missed none. 6th missed 3. i don't know. admittedly i haven't researched the other programs, but would think in a 35 games season others are very similar.

again, definitely a solid debate, but i think it's extremely tough to say unequivocally that he would be in front of Morgan, Langford, Phinessee, Green, Smith, Durham, or Davis?

yeah, there's talent for sure if we gel. Phinissee, Green, Hunter, Smith, TJD? a lot of potential punch there. really like what Davis can do as well. Brunk seems like a nice piece and of course Durham. Thompson might be good enough to play a decent role as #9? i have no idea about the Frankiln kid. does he have potential to contribute right away?

nope. HUGE difference. actually exactly my point. if Langford or Morgan were out for most of the year, then i would 100% say that the problem was injuries. the point i am arguing is that someone said our whole problem was injuries. i don't think we had all that much worse of injury problems than most college programs over the course of an average year.