The debate for third place is open.

Discuss the MVC hoops season here.

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby WSUbballer » September 2nd, 2011, 1:55 pm

As DJA pointed out, we know our own weaknesses more than any other outside fanbase. People complain when people are homers here and now people are complaining when objective, humble opinions are made. I guess it's a lose-lose in your eyes, at least regarding CU and WSU fans.

WSU and CU players will both go into season knowing they are the likely frontrunners. And it won't be message board "targets" determining their fate.
User avatar
WSUbballer
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: August 7th, 2010, 9:35 pm

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby WSUbballer » September 2nd, 2011, 1:57 pm

I must've missed it somewhere. Where have WSU or CU fans said that their teams were "unbeatable" or "untouchable"??? All I've seen from those fanbases is that those two appear to be the best positioned for the top two preseason picks.
User avatar
WSUbballer
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: August 7th, 2010, 9:35 pm

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby valleychamp » September 2nd, 2011, 2:09 pm

Oh, I don't know baller, maybe it is comments like: "Combined, UNI, ISUB, MSU and UE have 2 players, and MAYBE as many as 4 total that MIGHT start for CU. That kind of discrepancy is not going to make for a competitive season."

Or maybe it is the whole idea of the thread, "the race for 3rd is open, because the top 2 are too good".


Not that I wholeheartedly disagree with some of those ideas, but I'm just pointing out to you that there have been plenty of people here who are of the opinion that CU and WSU are untouchable at this point.
UNI FIGHT
User avatar
valleychamp
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1836
Joined: August 17th, 2010, 3:02 pm

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby WSUbballer » September 2nd, 2011, 2:39 pm

I reread the entire thread from start to finish. The first person to drop the word "untouchable" or 'unbeatable" was you Champ. Nobody else even remotely implied that, let alone posted that.

The original poster even retracted a bit in his second post and explained the point of the thread, stating that because it has been implied that CU and WSU will be the two clear picks for the PRESEASON top 2, so that left a large pool of teams for 3rd for grabs. Again, I'm assuming most everyone is talking about preseason rankings going into the year.I've seen one poster, a WSU one, pump up CU perhaps a bit over the top. ONE poster. And from a talent standpoint, he may not be that out of line. The coaching aspect is not factored in is the way I took it. I think it's at least a valid discussion point and I don't think many would disagree that Creighton has more talent and experienced players at this point than the other teams that poster mentioned.

Don't worry, champ. The final standings aren't determined by a 3rd place thread on MVCfans. But it is a valid discussion process. I think you are bit oversensitive and are putting words into posters' mouths who think teams like UNI, ISUB, MSU, UE have more question marks than a WSU or CU at this time.

Keep everything in perspective.
User avatar
WSUbballer
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: August 7th, 2010, 9:35 pm

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby MoValley John » September 2nd, 2011, 3:24 pm

valleychamp wrote:Oh, I don't know baller, maybe it is comments like: "Combined, UNI, ISUB, MSU and UE have 2 players, and MAYBE as many as 4 total that MIGHT start for CU. That kind of discrepancy is not going to make for a competitive season."

Or maybe it is the whole idea of the thread, "the race for 3rd is open, because the top 2 are too good".


Not that I wholeheartedly disagree with some of those ideas, but I'm just pointing out to you that there have been plenty of people here who are of the opinion that CU and WSU are untouchable at this point.


Define untouchable. If by untouchable, you mean that they will go undefeated against everyone else and split the head to head, no, they aren't untouchable. But I don't see them losing more than three to five conference games. 15-3 and 13-5 would probably be good for first and second in the league. Looking simply at what they have coming back and what they have brought in, they do look that good. That still isn't to say that either or both of them couldn't collapse, or an unknown couldn't step up and run the table, either. It just mneans looking at the past and trying to predict the future, these two teams stand out.

And yes, Baller, Merle Hay freaking rules!!! It's the best mall on the planet, period. They have Maid Rite AND are anchored by Sears, you can't get better than that. Moreover, here's a little known fact, Mall of America in Minneapolis was modeled after Merle Hay.
There are three rules that I live by, never get less than 12 hours sleep, never gamble with a guy who has the same first name as a city and never get involved with a chick with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Stick to that and everything else is gravy!
User avatar
MoValley John
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: August 11th, 2010, 5:46 pm

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby glm38 » September 2nd, 2011, 5:33 pm

valleychamp wrote:Oh, I don't know baller, maybe it is comments like: "Combined, UNI, ISUB, MSU and UE have 2 players, and MAYBE as many as 4 total that MIGHT start for CU. That kind of discrepancy is not going to make for a competitive season."

Or maybe it is the whole idea of the thread, "the race for 3rd is open, because the top 2 are too good".


Not that I wholeheartedly disagree with some of those ideas, but I'm just pointing out to you that there have been plenty of people here who are of the opinion that CU and WSU are untouchable at this point.


+1
User avatar
glm38
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: July 3rd, 2011, 2:00 pm
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby glm38 » September 2nd, 2011, 5:41 pm

WSUbballer wrote:I reread the entire thread from start to finish. The first person to drop the word "untouchable" or 'unbeatable" was you Champ. Nobody else even remotely implied that, let alone posted that.


Really? How is this statement not implying or even coming close to implying that CU is untouchable at least by all of the MVC teams other than WSU.

Combined, UNI, ISUB, MSU and UE have 2 players, and MAYBE as many as 4 total that MIGHT start for CU. That kind of discrepancy is not going to make for a competitive season."

That statement was made by 2livewsu not by Champ?????
User avatar
glm38
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: July 3rd, 2011, 2:00 pm
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby WSUbballer » September 2nd, 2011, 5:59 pm

glm, do you skim through posts and only let certain things sink into your head or do you actually read them word for word very carefully? I'm thinking it's not the latter based on your last post.

Reread my entire post again. I said the FIRST person to drop the "untouchable" garbage was champ. This is fact. I also stated that one WSU fan was pumping up Creighton a bit too much. That is also fact. And that's where your quote is referenced. I also went on about that there was some validity with the WSU poster and his post based on a purely talent perspective.

Again, please read entire posts before jumping the gun. Otherwise, it just makes you look rushed, and it makes you appear to have some kind of personal angst against me, where you're just looking for things out-of-context in my posts to jump on me with.

Read first, trigger-happy respond less.
User avatar
WSUbballer
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: August 7th, 2010, 9:35 pm

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby glm38 » September 2nd, 2011, 7:59 pm

First I have no angst again you or WSU fans at all. And I could say the same things about some of your posts. Just because I don't agree with some of what you say doesn't mean I have any kind of vendetta.

And second to the point: I wasn't referencing you stating champ made the 1st post regarding CU's prowess. I was referencing your own next statement:

"Nobody else even remotely implied that, let alone posted that".

Is 2livewsu "nobody"? And I'm not the only one that disagreed with your opinion or his? So why the hostile post?

Please correct me if I'm wrong. If not let's just call it a day. I'm ready for the season to get going.
User avatar
glm38
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2621
Joined: July 3rd, 2011, 2:00 pm
Location: Springfield, MO

Re: The debate for third place is open.

Postby Khan4Cats » September 4th, 2011, 9:34 am

DoubleJayAlum wrote:
Khan4Cats wrote:This is probably the reason we're seeing CU and WSU fans picking the other for first. They don't want that target that seems to be too heavy for everyone.


Or, they see their team more than everyone else and therefore are better positioned to see the warts.


That is a valid point. Of course, I partly made that comment in jest, partly because this is really the first time I've have seen the message board crowd trying hard to argue that some other team should be the top pick because of their warts rather than arguing how their team would be able to overcome them. It's actually kind of amusing.

Personally, I know that UNI had many questions coming into the season, but believe that they will get positive answers on those questions. I don't see any team as unbeatable in the conference for them. I understand why people will pick them in the second tier and I am fine with that. I also believe strongly in this team and anything less than wearing white on Friday in St. Louis will be disappointing and I'm not going to to try and argue why they should be a Thursday team.
Khan4Cats
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: August 8th, 2010, 8:59 am

Previous

Return to Missouri Valley Conference Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 8 guests