do you really believe this top 5 talk?

[steve dave]

Just seems like being a top 5 team would mean that you have been recruiting like a top 5 team...

Means we were recruiting like a top 5 team 2 to 4 years ago.  

We really only recruited like a top 5 team for one year.  And only 2 of those guys are left.

Samuels counts imo

Who are we counting here?  

CK
JP
JS
WJ
RM
DS

That's five guys who were Rivals top 100 types, right?

I was refering to _33 saying we only recruited top 5 for one season and only 2 of those guys are left.  I mentioned Samuels should be the third as he was that class with Pullen and Sutton (though he was only eligable second semester and sat out).  

[_33]

Just seems like being a top 5 team would mean that you have been recruiting like a top 5 team...

Means we were recruiting like a top 5 team 2 to 4 years ago.  

We really only recruited like a top 5 team for one year.  And only 2 of those guys are left.

Samuels counts imo

Who are we counting here?  

CK
JP
JS
WJ
RM
DS

That's five guys who were Rivals top 100 types, right?

I was refering to _33 saying we only recruited top 5 for one season and only 2 of those guys are left.  I mentioned Samuels should be the third as he was that class with Pullen and Sutton (though he was only eligable second semester and sat out).  

Yeah forgot about him.  Pretty sure JP and JS weren't even in the rivals top 150 let alone top 100.  They had nothing to do with us recruiting like a top 5 team that year.  They just turned out to be good.

[PowercatPat]

Just seems like being a top 5 team would mean that you have been recruiting like a top 5 team...

Means we were recruiting like a top 5 team 2 to 4 years ago.  

We really only recruited like a top 5 team for one year.  And only 2 of those guys are left.

Samuels counts imo

Who are we counting here?  

CK
JP
JS
WJ
RM
DS

That's five guys who were Rivals top 100 types, right?

I was refering to _33 saying we only recruited top 5 for one season and only 2 of those guys are left.  I mentioned Samuels should be the third as he was that class with Pullen and Sutton (though he was only eligable second semester and sat out).  

Yeah forgot about him.  Pretty sure JP and JS weren't even in the rivals top 150 let alone top 100.  They had nothing to do with us recruiting like a top 5 team that year.  They just turned out to be good.

Ya, neither were top 150. Our starting lineup next season could consist of 4 top 150 recruits. That's assuming Judge and McGruder start.

[yosh]

the 4 classes that made up the elite 8 team had 5 former 5 star players and 10 total top 100s in at least one of the three major recruiting services.     (yes I realize many of the high level recruits weren't actually on the elite 8 team)

[yosh]

Just seems like being a top 5 team would mean that you have been recruiting like a top 5 team...

Means we were recruiting like a top 5 team 2 to 4 years ago.  

We really only recruited like a top 5 team for one year.  And only 2 of those guys are left.

Samuels counts imo

Who are we counting here?  

CK
JP
JS
WJ
RM
DS

That's five guys who were Rivals top 100 types, right?

I was refering to _33 saying we only recruited top 5 for one season and only 2 of those guys are left.  I mentioned Samuels should be the third as he was that class with Pullen and Sutton (though he was only eligable second semester and sat out).  

Yeah forgot about him.  Pretty sure JP and JS weren't even in the rivals top 150 let alone top 100.  They had nothing to do with us recruiting like a top 5 team that year.  They just turned out to be good.

Pullen was top 100 ESPN.  Clemente was top 100 Scout.

[jtksu]

What was the class with wally and rod ranked?  Seems like it was pretty high.  Also, don't guys that turn out to be good (even though they were not highly ranked) count as good recruiting?  Or are the only good recruits the ones that were highly ranked in high school?

[CNS]

What was the class with wally and rod ranked?  Seems like it was pretty high.  Also, don't guys that turn out to be good (even though they were not highly ranked) count as good recruiting?  Or are the only good recruits the ones that were highly ranked in high school?

Iirc, Wally's class was top 20, maybe top 15

[yosh]

What was the class with wally and rod ranked?  Seems like it was pretty high.  Also, don't guys that turn out to be good (even though they were not highly ranked) count as good recruiting?  Or are the only good recruits the ones that were highly ranked in high school?

The only real suprise recruit was Samuels, and he was offset by Jason Bennett.  Outside of those guys, everyone was more or less what they were expected to be.

[jtksu]

Seems like Pullen is playing better than his rankings would have suggested.

[michigancat]

Seems like Pullen is playing better than his rankings would have suggested.

jt:  shut up.  thx.

[fatty fat fat]

well, looks like the dorks got a hold of this thread.

 

[CHONGS]

I do.  until I see otherwise, this should be a top 8 team.

feel free to get excited!

[Pete]

I do.  until I see otherwise, this should be a top 8 team.

feel free to get excited!

2 seed.  Again. 

[jtksu]

For some reason, I'd almost rather be a 2 than a 1. 

[michigancat]

For some reason, I'd almost rather be a 2 than a 1. 

The reason is you're dumb.

[jtksu]

Rusty, you should look into changing your birth control method.  There are several on the market that can greatly alleviate  your monthly periods.

[CHONGS]

for the record I would rather be a one seed, but then again I am not stupid

[yoga-like_abana]

I believe the top 5 talk as long as we play good early in the year.  which usually doesnt happen. even then though we will be losing to top 10 teams.

[steve dave]

for the record I would rather be a one seed, but then again I am not stupid

I gotta admit, I'm with chingon here.  Take that with a grain of salt though because I'm pretty smart.  

[yoga-like_abana]

for the record I would rather be a one seed, but then again I am not stupid

I gotta admit, I'm with chingon here.  Take that with a grain of salt though because I'm pretty smart.  

wow odd I agree as well, great minds think a like?
also facts talk 
Since 1985 No. 1 seeds have won 14 championships, No. 2 seeds have won four

[sys]

Seems like Pullen is playing better than his rankings would have suggested.

jt:  shut up.  thx.

 

he's right.


michigan is also wrong about not recruiting like a top 25 team.  they are doing that.

[jtksu]

Well, I'm a goddamn genius and I say I'm not sure how well our team would play with the pressure of a 1 seed.  Since it doesn't really offer much of a strategic advantage, maybe a 2 seed would be better for the team KSU will have next year. 

[steve dave]

Well, I'm a goddamn genius and I say I'm not sure how well our team would play with the pressure of a 1 seed.  Since it doesn't really offer much of a strategic advantage, maybe a 2 seed would be better for the team KSU will have next year. 

Based on what?  Our guys are battle tested. 

[hatingfrancisco]

Well, I'm a goddamn genius and I say I'm not sure how well our team would play with the pressure of a 1 seed.  Since it doesn't really offer much of a strategic advantage, maybe a 2 seed would be better for the team KSU will have next year. 

Based on what?  Our guys are battle tested. 

I think sometimes people miss the KITN.  That's when you get posts like JT's.

[jtksu]

Guess I just like that chip on their shoulders thing they have going on.  Once you move up into that top echelon it's hard to keep that edge.  Teams that are ranked that highly every year tend to go about things in a different way.  I'm not saying we couldn't handle it, just kinda thinking out loud a bit.