Winning 20 on paper

[Billy Don]

If UC can win 1 of these 4 games, Memphis,XU,UAB or UNLV they would be 10-3 for the first 10 wins. Then in the Big East 2 from St Johns, 2 from Providence, then Rutgers,DePaul,S Florida, WV,Seaton Hall and 1 game in the Big East playoff you got 20. Simple

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

If UC can win 1 of these 4 games, Memphis,XU,UAB or UNLV they would be 10-3 for the first 10 wins. Then in the Big East 2 from St Johns, 2 from Providence, then Rutgers,DePaul,S Florida, WV,Seaton Hall and 1 game in the Big East playoff you got 20. Simple

Not simple at all. But it's time to get 20 W or close to it again.

[mboston67]

2 from Providence will not be easy.

[qsilvr2531]

We could drop one or two of those games if we are counting postseason wins, as 18 wins would probably get us into the NIT and then two wins in the NIT gets us 20.

[ralph1950]

If UC can win 1 of these 4 games, Memphis,XU,UAB or UNLV they would be 10-3 for the first 10 wins. Then in the Big East 2 from St Johns, 2 from Providence, then Rutgers,DePaul,S Florida, WV,Seaton Hall and 1 game in the Big East playoff you got 20. Simple

UC's team is a national title contender, 20 wins is no problem.

[jlr1523]

UC's team is a national title contender, 20 wins is no problem.

Just say no to DRUGS. What are you on Ralph? :)

[BasketBySteveLogan]

Don't sleep on Florida State in Vegas.

Heard Mick was on Ch 5 the other night... said Yancy looks great. He is really tryin to step it up and has really good "basketball sense."

Combine that with how huge he is, plus his dunking prowess, and you gotta be excited about that

[the_dude]

UC's team is a national title contender, 20 wins is no problem.

Ralph is one of the following:

A. Being serious and is delusional
B. Joking, but it never was funny and it's getting less funny every time.
C. Intentionally being annoying

I don't know about anyone else but I am tired of seeing these posts here. All joking aside, it's getting old.

[BearcatCJR23]

Ralph1950..........simply put, you have issues man.

[TmacGoCats]

The position that Ralph1950 takes is an interesting one.............He says these outlandish things in hopes that they come true........and if they do he will say, "see, told you so"

But if these things don't come true, then he plays it off as he was joking all along.

[Billy Don]

UC's team is a national title contender, 20 wins is no problem.

I just figured it out! Nancy is paying you under the table for every post you make. Only thing it could be.

[Scheids21]

C: Trying to be annoying. No doubt about it....then usually when people say that he isnt serious he replies: "are you kidding? With yancy and dion and deonta and John Reik?? Mick has made this team a true national title contender"

[Billy Don]

Don't sleep on Florida State in Vegas.

Heard Mick was on Ch 5 the other night... said Yancy looks great. He is really tryin to step it up and has really good "basketball sense."

Combine that with how huge he is, plus his dunking prowess, and you gotta be excited about that

I thought the same thing about Florida State before I looked them up. Lost 3 seniors and over 40 points from last years team. Picked last in the ACC for this year. Doesn't mean an automatic win but UC's chance's should be good.

[ralph1950]

I just figured it out! Nancy is paying you under the table for every post you make. Only thing it could be.

BH is paying you for every post you make.

[Bp4thebest]

If UC can win 1 of these 4 games, Memphis,XU,UAB or UNLV they would be 10-3 for the first 10 wins. Then in the Big East 2 from St Johns, 2 from Providence, then Rutgers,DePaul,S Florida, WV,Seaton Hall and 1 game in the Big East playoff you got 20. Simple

lol yeah simple.. right.. it's just simple

[Bp4thebest]

Ralph is one of the following:

A. Being serious and is delusional
B. Joking, but it never was funny and it's getting less funny every time.
C. Intentionally being annoying

I don't know about anyone else but I am tired of seeing these posts here. All joking aside, it's getting old.

thank you lol not even a bit funny just a waste of time!

[xlax1306]

I thought the same thing about Florida State before I looked them up. Lost 3 seniors and over 40 points from last years team. Picked last in the ACC for this year. Doesn't mean an automatic win but UC's chance's should be good.

They do have a dominate recruiting class coming in with Chris Singleton, Luke Loucks, Derwinn Kitchen, Pierre Jordan, Xavier Gibson, and Deividas Dulkys. With that said I think we take them down.

[bubbachunk]

Ralph is one of the following:

A. Being serious and is delusional
B. Joking, but it never was funny and it's getting less funny every time.
C. Intentionally being annoying

I don't know about anyone else but I am tired of seeing these posts here. All joking aside, it's getting old.

He is a troll don't feed him. Just put him on your ignore list and you don't have to read his posts.

[jplog]

He is a troll don't feed him. Just put him on your ignore list and you don't have to read his posts.

Good call, now if everyone would quit responding.

[Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick]

If UC can win 1 of these 4 games, Memphis,XU,UAB or UNLV they would be 10-3 for the first 10 wins. Then in the Big East 2 from St Johns, 2 from Providence, then Rutgers,DePaul,S Florida, WV,Seaton Hall and 1 game in the Big East playoff you got 20. Simple
Billy Don, my good man! When you say "on paper", are you discussing "rolling paper"? Because, if you're predicting 20 wins, I'll have some of what you're smoking :D :p :cool:

Serious, though, nothing between 13 and 21 wins would surprise me a bit. Talent, but mostly new and unproven.

[jeffto]

He is a troll don't feed him. Just put him on your ignore list and you don't have to read his posts.You obviously spent too much time in Cincinnati. Most of the rest of the country believes in free speech.

[SLMadiCat]

Free speech does not exist on a private message board.

[Doss]

1. No real point guard
2. PF that has not played in 2 years after being a TX bench warmer
3. Another PF/Center that is a freshman prone to being lazy
4. One center that is 7' but cannot run on a bad foot and cannot jump and lacks coordination
5. Another highly touted 7' center that has never played a college game

Etc., etc.

National Contender this is a team that at best avoids losing on the first day in the BE tourney.


UC's team is a national title contender, 20 wins is no problem.

[Billy Don]

1. No real point guard
2. PF that has not played in 2 years after being a TX bench warmer
3. Another PF/Center that is a freshman prone to being lazy
4. One center that is 7' but cannot run on a bad foot and cannot jump and lacks coordination
5. Another highly touted 7' center that has never played a college game

Etc., etc.

National Contender this is a team that at best avoids losing on the first day in the BE tourney.

You covered the players! How about the coach? Can't pull the trigger or what? :)

[Mick's Da Man]

Ralph was at an Obama rally and heard that UC was a national contender from Obama himself. If Obama said it, it has to be true? Right?

[SLMadiCat]

Ralph was at an Obama rally and heard that UC was a national contender from Obama himself. If Obama said it, it has to be true? Right?

huh???????????????????????

[jbreeds1]

20 wins sounds like fun. I want to go there. I also thought 14 wins last year sounded fun. Never got to go there. Are we really 7 wins better this year as opposed to last? Especially in a league that I consider tougher this year than it was last year.

[Mick's Da Man]

1. No real point guard
2. PF that has not played in 2 years after being a TX bench warmer
3. Another PF/Center that is a freshman prone to being lazy
4. One center that is 7' but cannot run on a bad foot and cannot jump and lacks coordination
5. Another highly touted 7' center that has never played a college game

Etc., etc.

National Contender this is a team that at best avoids losing on the first day in the BE tourney.


Devil's Advocate here:

1. Vaughn is better than Steve Logan who started at PG for UC for 2 years. Vaughn is a first team Big East-er.
2. Mike Williams hasn't played in 2 years in college, but played summer leagues, was MVP of the Deveroes Championship game, and is a former McDAA.
3. Yancy Gates has outplayed Samardo Samuels (projected as Big East frosh of the year) head to head in high school, and has outplayed 5-star Ohio State recruit, BJ Mullens head to head in high school. Often labeled "lazy", Yancy can also turn it on and dominate and has proven this.
4. McClain has been reviewed by others who have seen him THIS YEAR and they say he is much improved.
5. John Riek was a top 10 recruit before coming down with an ACL injury. Top 10 recruits typically are immediate impact players. :D

[bearcatmark]

Devil's Advocate here:

1. Vaughn is better than Steve Logan who started at PG for UC for 2 years. Vaughn is a first team Big East-er.
2. Mike Williams hasn't played in 2 years in college, but played summer leagues, was MVP of the Deveroes Championship game, and is a former McDAA.
3. Yancy Gates has outplayed Samardo Samuels (projected as Big East frosh of the year) head to head in high school, and has outplayed 5-star Ohio State recruit, BJ Mullens head to head in high school. Often labeled "lazy", Yancy can also turn it on and dominate and has proven this.
4. McClain has been reviewed by others who have seen him THIS YEAR and they say he is much improved.
5. John Riek was a top 10 recruit before coming down with an ACL injury. Top 10 recruits typically are immediate impact players. :D

1. Vaughn has better numbers than Steve Logan, but he has never been the ball handler that Steve Logan was nor as good in the open floor. To assume that Vaughn is going to get to Steve Logan levels his last two seasons is a leap of faith. Lo may have been the best player in the country his senior season. I like Vaughn, but Steve was awesome
2. There is that about Mike, but he realyl didn't play much at Texas either. He has yet to prove anything at the college level.
3. Yancy is an exciting prospect, but is by no means can't miss. Once again unproven at the college level
4. McCain is a role player at best this season. My hope is by his junior year he develops into a defensive force who can score 10 and grab 10 boards.
5. When is Reik going to see the floor exactly?

My point is not to be negative, but to say this season could go a number of directions and is an absolute bear to project. I could see UC finishing as low as 12 in the Big East and as high as 5. There is talent, but there are so many questions about this team largely because of how unproven everyone is

[bubbachunk]

You obviously spent too much time in Cincinnati. Most of the rest of the country believes in free speech.

What are you talking about? I am not suggesting ralph should not be able to post but I can suggest that nobody needs to read it. Difference between squelching free speech and not listening to idiots by choice.

[Billy Don]

20 wins sounds like fun. I want to go there. I also thought 14 wins last year sounded fun. Never got to go there. Are we really 7 wins better this year as opposed to last? Especially in a league that I consider tougher this year than it was last year.

Well there were some cream puffs added to the OOC schedule which should produce at least 4 or 5 more wins over last year. I still don't understand why UC lost those last 7 games last year, 3 or 4 of which they should of won, so maybe Mick can get the team to play the whole year this year and win some games late in the season.

[Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick]

1. Vaughn is better than Steve Logan who started at PG for UC for 2 years. Vaughn is a first team Big East-er.

Logan was a first-team all-American :confused:

[Thegreatone]

Devil's Advocate here:

1. Vaughn is better than Steve Logan who started at PG for UC for 2 years. Vaughn is a first team Big East-er.


That is insane. I love Deonta's game but he is a LOOOONG way from Steve Logan who was a top 3 POY canidate his senior year. I hope Deonta can reach that but he isnt there yet.

[jbreeds1]

Well there were some cream puffs added to the OOC schedule which should produce at least 4 or 5 more wins over last year. I still don't understand why UC lost those last 7 games last year, 3 or 4 of which they should of won, so maybe Mick can get the team to play the whole year this year and win some games late in the season.

We had quite a few "cream puffs" last year. Remember Belmont, Bowling Green and Illinois State? Pretty creamy and pretty puffy. Consider we didn't have Jamual Warren for some of those games. But isn't that the same situation we'll be in again this year? Only for the entire season. Oh my, I just made myself depressed.

[TheLivingLegend]

That is insane. I love Deonta's game but he is a LOOOONG way from Steve Logan who was a top 3 POY canidate his senior year. I hope Deonta can reach that but he isnt there yet.

WHy because Deonta hasnt stepped on your foot in bdubs like logan??

At this pace he is way ahead of your boy, mr logan.

[levydl]

We had quite a few "cream puffs" last year. Remember Belmont, Bowling Green and Illinois State? Pretty creamy and pretty puffy. Consider we didn't have Jamual Warren for some of those games. But isn't that the same situation we'll be in again this year? Only for the entire season. Oh my, I just made myself depressed.

At Illinois St. was absolutely not a cream puff. They lost 1 game at home all year, to Drake, who was very good. They were 33rd in the RPI (http://www.kenpom.com/sked.php?&y=2008&team=Illinois%20St.). That was a dumb game to play. If I remember correctly, we signed a contract in 2005 to play them at home in '06 and then at their place in '07. Of course, we know what happened in the interim. We beat them at home in '06, but when Cronin took over, he pushed the game back a year in order to play Temple in Atlantic City. So we had to play them last year. Very tough game.

Our first 6 games last year were against cupcakes. The problem was, without Warren, and with no one really to help Vaughn, we were not only very shorthanded, but we played our first 3 games in 3 straight nights, so there was no time to adjust or improve. Vaughn's a year older and has significantly more talent around him this year. It's not the same situation as last year with Warren out. I don't think we will lose to any of the cupcakes we play this year.

[jeffto]

That is insane. I love Deonta's game but he is a LOOOONG way from Steve Logan who was a top 3 POY canidate his senior year. I hope Deonta can reach that but he isnt there yet.
Keep in mind that Logan wasn't the Logan we all love until his Jr. and Senior years.

I believe he was player of the year in at least one publication.

Here's a question: Logan was allowed to progress slower, surrounded by major talent. Deonta was forced to be the stud from day 1. Does that provide any insight into how Deonta will progress in his last two years? Has he peaked already? Will the reduced pressure to score allow other parts of his game to blossom?

[Doss]

coach, Tony Yates light (good recruiter, not a good coach). If

1. Williams get a 6th year
2. Reik proves out and stays for next year
3. If McClain develops as predicted by many herein (I question)
4. If Cashmere comes back healthy
5. If a coach can end Gates lazy tendencies

And a strong Associate Head Coach is brought in, next year they could be contenders. This year it is just pretending.

You covered the players! How about the coach? Can't pull the trigger or what? :)

[jeffto]

coach, Tony Yates light (good recruiter, not a good coach). If

1. Williams get a 6th year
2. Reik proves out and stays for next year
3. If McClain develops as predicted by many herein (I question)
4. If Cashmere comes back healthy
5. If a coach can end Gates lazy tendencies

And a strong Associate Head Coach is brought in, next year they could be contenders. This year it is just pretending.What a ridiculous post. Exactly what evidence do you have to prove that Mick is "not a good coach"? He certainly out coached your definition of "good coach."

Between you and Huggins, who's the top?:rolleyes:

[SLMadiCat]

And I'm sure he hasn't even seen Gates or Williams play.

[CincyBeerCo]

Keep in mind that Logan wasn't the Logan we all love until his Jr. and Senior years.

I believe he was player of the year in at least one publication.

Here's a question: Logan was allowed to progress slower, surrounded by major talent. Deonta was forced to be the stud from day 1. Does that provide any insight into how Deonta will progress in his last two years? Has he peaked already? Will the reduced pressure to score allow other parts of his game to blossom?

Consensus First Team All-America selection by The Associated Press, Basketball Times, The Sporting News, ESPN.com, CNN/SI.com, NABC and USBWA as a senior...Voted National Player of the Year by FOXSports.com and CNN/SI.com. Recipient of the 2002 Frances Pomeroy Naismith Award as the nation’s top player 6-foot or under...Named Conference USA Player of the Year as a junior and senior...Finalist for the 2002 John Wooden Award...Finished his career ranked second on Cincinnati’s all-time scoring list behind Basketball Hall of Famer Oscar Robertson with 1,985 points and second in assists (456)...Set a school record for free throw percentage (.861), most victories (111) and games played (135)...

Vaughn's stats to this point are better, but those are out of the necessity for him to be the focus. He has the talent to reach Lo like levels, but the drive and leadership qualities (in your face, pushing team mates to get better) are what set Steve apart (that and how the **** he made some of those high arcing tear drop fade-away jumpers w/ 3 defenders in his face). If Vaughn develops as a leader I feel he CAN reach Logan status, but by no means is he there yet.

[SLMadiCat]

Consensus First Team All-America selection by The Associated Press, Basketball Times, The Sporting News, ESPN.com, CNN/SI.com, NABC and USBWA as a senior...Voted National Player of the Year by FOXSports.com and CNN/SI.com. Recipient of the 2002 Frances Pomeroy Naismith Award as the nation’s top player 6-foot or under...Named Conference USA Player of the Year as a junior and senior...Finalist for the 2002 John Wooden Award...Finished his career ranked second on Cincinnati’s all-time scoring list behind Basketball Hall of Famer Oscar Robertson with 1,985 points and second in assists (456)...Set a school record for free throw percentage (.861), most victories (111) and games played (135)...

Vaughn's stats to this point are better, but those are out of the necessity for him to be the focus. He has the talent to reach Lo like levels, but the drive and leadership qualities (in your face, pushing team mates to get better) are what set Steve apart (that and how the **** he made some of those high arcing tear drop fade-away jumpers w/ 3 defenders in his face). If Vaughn develops as a leader I feel he CAN reach Logan status, but by no means is he there yet.

i agree with almost everything you said, but I don't remember Logan being much of a leader is Freshman and Sophomore year. If anything, I think Vaughn has him on that area, to date. We can all only hope Vaughn becomes what Logan became. If he even comes close I'll still be happy.

[levydl]

Consensus First Team All-America selection by The Associated Press, Basketball Times, The Sporting News, ESPN.com, CNN/SI.com, NABC and USBWA as a senior...Voted National Player of the Year by FOXSports.com and CNN/SI.com. Recipient of the 2002 Frances Pomeroy Naismith Award as the nation’s top player 6-foot or under...Named Conference USA Player of the Year as a junior and senior...Finalist for the 2002 John Wooden Award...Finished his career ranked second on Cincinnati’s all-time scoring list behind Basketball Hall of Famer Oscar Robertson with 1,985 points and second in assists (456)...Set a school record for free throw percentage (.861), most victories (111) and games played (135)...

Vaughn's stats to this point are better, but those are out of the necessity for him to be the focus. He has the talent to reach Lo like levels, but the drive and leadership qualities (in your face, pushing team mates to get better) are what set Steve apart (that and how the **** he made some of those high arcing tear drop fade-away jumpers w/ 3 defenders in his face). If Vaughn develops as a leader I feel he CAN reach Logan status, but by no means is he there yet.

I don't ever remember Logan getting in someone's face. He was even keel and a leader by example.

[Mick's Da Man]

Wow. I loved Steve Logan, but my memory of him pales in comparison to Deonta Vaughn.

Vaughn is a better all around player than Logan ever was.

My opinion is based mostly on the fact that Logan played in a weak conference and Vaughn is playing in a super-mega-conference, the best we may ever see in college basketball, and made first team in that conference while playing on a losing team.

We will all just have to disagree.

Edit: Vaughn has accomplished as much (if not more in my opinion) while playing with a supporting talent-challenged losing team in his first two seasons (which Logan didn't contribute much in his first two seasons) as Logan did in his junior and senior years while playing on winning teams that went to the Big Dance.

[levydl]

Wow. I loved Steve Logan, but my memory of him pales in comparison to Deonta Vaughn.

Vaughn is a better all around player than Logan ever was.

My opinion is based mostly on the fact that Logan played in a weak conference and Vaughn is playing in a super-mega-conference, the best we may ever see in college basketball, and made first team in that conference while playing on a losing team.

We will all just have to disagree.

Edit: Vaughn has accomplished as much (if not more in my opinion) while playing with a supporting talent-challenged losing team in his first two seasons (which Logan didn't contribute much in his first two seasons) as Logan did in his junior and senior years while playing on winning teams that went to the Big Dance.

You aren't correctly remembering what Logan contributed as an underclassman on two of the best teams in the country those years.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/player/cincinnati/steve-logan

[jeffto]

Wow. I loved Steve Logan, but my memory of him pales in comparison to Deonta Vaughn.

Vaughn is a better all around player than Logan ever was.

My opinion is based mostly on the fact that Logan played in a weak conference and Vaughn is playing in a super-mega-conference, the best we may ever see in college basketball,Could we stop with all the "super-douper, mega-conference" BS. The conference has zero to do with how good a player is.

How the heck did Larry Bird become so great playing in that podunk conference against nothing competition?

A great player will shine no matter where he plays. Vaughn is good. May eventually be great, but he is no Steve Logan.

[bubbachunk]

Could we stop with all the "super-douper, mega-conference" BS. The conference has zero to do with how good a player is.

How the heck did Larry Bird become so great playing in that podunk conference against nothing competition?

A great player will shine no matter where he plays. Vaughn is good. May eventually be great, but he is no Steve Logan.

You are comparing vastly different times. As over publicized as everything is today big time talent rarely makes it to the little schools anymore. Also Bird was going to play at IU so we know he had the talent whereas Logan developed into a "stud" against generally inferior competition.

point is Bird always had it Logan developed it

[Doss]

He attended St. Edward High School in Lakewood, Ohio where he won a state championship. In his senior year of high school he won Gatorade player of the year.

Steve came as a big time recruit. GATORADE PLAYER OF THE YEAR.

Plus he did not get to mature an extra year like Vaugn, attending a made up prep school named Harmony, because of academic problems.



You are comparing vastly different times. As over publicized as everything is today big time talent rarely makes it to the little schools anymore. Also Bird was going to play at IU so we know he had the talent whereas Logan developed into a "stud" against generally inferior competition.

point is Bird always had it Logan developed it

[tophat]

He attended St. Edward High School in Lakewood, Ohio where he won a state championship. In his senior year of high school he won Gatorade player of the year.

Steve came as a big time recruit. GATORADE PLAYER OF THE YEAR.

Plus he did not get to mature an extra year like Vaugn, attending a made up prep school named Harmony, because of academic problems.

Logan was big in HS, but he wasn't highly recruited. Huggs wasn't going to take him until the PG meltdown vs WVU in the NCAA, which convinced him he needed a good ball handler.

By comparison, I'd say Vaughn compares very favorably to Logan as a 2, but he hasn't yet shown he can play the PG position, which Logan played so well his senior season. As good as Logan was, he probably wouldn't have made 1st team All American if we wouldn't have been ranked so highly. Your performance as a team has alot to do with it.

Your prior post was wrong about Tony Yates. He was neither a good recruiter nor a good coach.

This UC team will suffer greatly from Cash's absence.

[Doss]

At UC he recruited some big names such as Roger McClendon. In 1986 he had a recruiting class ranked #6 in the nation featuring Lou Banks and Levertis Robinson. I think all 3 of those players are in the top 15 or 20 scorers in UC history. A great coach took Banks, Robinson along with Andre Tate, Keith Starks and a football walk on named Sanders and led them to a 20 win season and an NIT appearance.




Logan was big in HS, but he wasn't highly recruited. Huggs wasn't going to take him until the PG meltdown vs WVU in the NCAA, which convinced him he needed a good ball handler.

By comparison, I'd say Vaughn compares very favorably to Logan as a 2, but he hasn't yet shown he can play the PG position, which Logan played so well his senior season. As good as Logan was, he probably wouldn't have made 1st team All American if we wouldn't have been ranked so highly. Your performance as a team has alot to do with it.

Your prior post was wrong about Tony Yates. He was neither a good recruiter nor a good coach.

[ralph1950]

Well there were some cream puffs added to the OOC schedule which should produce at least 4 or 5 more wins over last year. I still don't understand why UC lost those last 7 games last year, 3 or 4 of which they should of won, so maybe Mick can get the team to play the whole year this year and win some games late in the season.

Funny! How much does BH pay you per post to tear down UC? Mick is one of the best coaches in the USA, this year's UC team is a National title contender.

[Billy Don]

When I made this post I felt UC had a good chance to win 20 games this year. After reading the replys now I'm not so sure. Going through another year of wait until next year isn't what I'm looking foward to. Mick has the players he recruited, who he thinks has talent, so he should be able to win with them. Not like the players he has now are going anywhere soon. If he's going to win he has to win with what he's got. Not much if anything coming in the next 2 years. I don't want to hear wait 3 years.

[Billy Don]

Funny! How much does BH pay you per post to tear down UC? Mick is one of the best coaches in the USA, this year's UC team is a National title contender.
Fans on this board think Mick is a good coach but you need to spread the word. I doubt any other basketball fan in the country thinks Mick with a 24-38 major conference record is one of the best coach's in the USA and UC is a National title contender. So spread the word. Go up to Columbus to all the bars, buy several rounds and tell all of them how great Mick is. After 3 or 4 rounds everybody will agree with you and you won't feel so lonely anymore.

[Scheids21]

When I made this post I felt UC had a good chance to win 20 games this year. After reading the replys now I'm not so sure. Going through another year of wait until next year isn't what I'm looking foward to. Mick has the players he recruited, who he thinks has talent, so he should be able to win with them. Not like the players he has now are going anywhere soon. If he's going to win he has to win with what he's got. Not much if anything coming in the next 2 years. I don't want to hear wait 3 years.

You dont have to wait three years but its completely unfair to say "he has his players so he should win". The core of the guys MC has gotten since he arrived are sophomores and true freshmen. You think 2 years is enough time to build a program up from the ground into a contender? Come on...

[jeffto]

Not much if anything coming in the next 2 years. I don't want to hear wait 3 years.As John McEnroe would say: "Are you SERIOUS???" Not much coming in the next two years??????? How about two very highly regarded recruiting classes with one and two more years of experience.

People with a little basketball knowledge and common sense have been saying that 2010 was the year for UC to really return to the greatness of the Jucker years. Since Jucker left we've been in zero national championship games - regardless of coach. Every coach since Jucker has been a failure!

Mick has done nothing to show himself incapable of winning it all.

If you have to sulk for another rebuilding year - tough! Mick owes you nothing.

Go Bearcats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Billy Don]

[QUOTE=jeffto;36961]As John McEnroe would say: "Are you SERIOUS???" Not much coming in the next two years??????? How about two very highly regarded recruiting classes with one and two more years of experience.

QUOTE]
What I meant was "not much coming in the way of recruits" because the years of 4 or 5 scholarships per year is over for awhile. Hence I said he almost has to win with what he has now. Year 4 of his contract he has to win enough to at least get to the NCAA I think so he gets a contract extension. Hard to recruit with only 2 years left on your contract. Tim Welsh got fired at Providence this year just when he thought he had the players this year to go to the NCAA tournament. Being a bad coach isn't always what get's a coach fired. A losing record at a school will and Mick will have a losing record at UC after 3 years as head coach. Like Mick said " I know if I don't win I'm gone"

[Mick's Da Man]

He attended St. Edward High School in Lakewood, Ohio where he won a state championship. In his senior year of high school he won Gatorade player of the year.

Steve came as a big time recruit. GATORADE PLAYER OF THE YEAR.

Plus he did not get to mature an extra year like Vaugn, attending a made up prep school named Harmony, because of academic problems.

Not the way I remember it.

Logan wasn't recruited very much and was considered this short fat guard from Cleveland. He was top 100 on some sites.

[Billy Don]

Not the way I remember it.

Logan wasn't recruited very much and was considered this short fat guard from Cleveland. He was top 100 on some sites.

I remember it that way also. Logan came within a hair of not being a bearcat. It got down to UC missed on others and Logan was the last man standing. I can't understand why so many fans compare current players to players of the past. Most if not all of the players who are compared were during the Huggins years and most of the fans on this board didn't like anything about the Huggins years or the players. It's not fair to compare current players who haven't done anything so far (win) to players of the past. Some of these current players hopefully will be on a winning team then can be compared to players on past winning teams. UC has the talent to do something this year and being young shouldn't be an excuse. Some of the final four teams had freshmen starters this year. Counting post season (even NIT) 20 wins should be easy. Over 100 teams won 20 games last year so no reason UC shouldn't be one of them. It figures UC will beat someone they aren't supposed to this year so add that game on to the win total. 20 wins just to get some respect if nothing else. Seeing UC with a losing record no matter the reason is hard to take.

[Mick's Da Man]

I remember it that way also. Logan came within a hair of not being a bearcat. It got down to UC missed on others and Logan was the last man standing. I can't understand why so many fans compare current players to players of the past. Most if not all of the players who are compared were during the Huggins years and most of the fans on this board didn't like anything about the Huggins years or the players. It's not fair to compare current players who haven't done anything so far (win) to players of the past. Some of these current players hopefully will be on a winning team then can be compared to players on past winning teams. UC has the talent to do something this year and being young shouldn't be an excuse. Some of the final four teams had freshmen starters this year. Counting post season (even NIT) 20 wins should be easy. Over 100 teams won 20 games last year so no reason UC shouldn't be one of them. It figures UC will beat someone they aren't supposed to this year so add that game on to the win total. 20 wins just to get some respect if nothing else. Seeing UC with a losing record no matter the reason is hard to take.


Strangely enough, I think we agree somewhat. Weird.

Anyway, here's how I see things this year, and using last year as a comparison:
UConn had a very talented but young team last year that early in January, UC hung with to the tune of a one point game, if I remember correctly. They replayed eachother later in February and we got blown out by around 40.

It's called "ceiling". UConn had a high ceiling for development last year and continued to improve until March. UC's ceiling was low last year and they peaked early because their talent level was far less than the rest of the Big East.

This UC team has a much higher ceiling last year and should develop, like UConn's team last year, all the way to March.

So, just because we're young and inexperienced, there is no reason this team won't develop into a pretty good team, because they have talent. And there should be no rookies come late January.

[jeffto]

Most if not all of the players who are compared were during the Huggins years and most of the fans on this board didn't like anything about the Huggins years or the players. Not true. Most of the fans on here love the Huggins years and the players. They just don't like them used as comparisons in an attempt to denigrate Mick and his players. There are two or three posters here who constantly feel the need to put down Mick and say how great things would be if Huggins were still around. He's not. Get over it.

[bearcatmark]

Frankly I am stunned at the lack of respect Steve Logan gets from some "Bearcat fans" on this board. He's one of the best players in UC history. He led a UC team to a 1 seed and a conference title (playing in a strong CUSA...and yes it was strong that year). It's not what the Big East is now but there were some very good teams.

Logan did everything you could ask. He was a great ball handler, got people involved and knew how to win games. Vaughn has a long way to go to get anywhere close to that level (and that is no knock on Vaughn who has been the bright spot on bad teams). Lo was a better ball handler, better at creating for himself, and better down the stretch of games. Vaughn can develop all that... who knows what we will be saying two years from now. But to belittle Logan the way some fans are and continue to belittle players and the success we had in basketball pre-Mick is absolutely sad.

[SLMadiCat]

Frankly I am stunned at the lack of respect Steve Logan gets from some "Bearcat fans" on this board. He's one of the best players in UC history. He led a UC team to a 1 seed and a conference title (playing in a strong CUSA...and yes it was strong that year). It's not what the Big East is now but there were some very good teams.

Logan did everything you could ask. He was a great ball handler, got people involved and knew how to win games. Vaughn has a long way to go to get anywhere close to that level (and that is no knock on Vaughn who has been the bright spot on bad teams). Lo was a better ball handler, better at creating for himself, and better down the stretch of games. Vaughn can develop all that... who knows what we will be saying two years from now. But to belittle Logan the way some fans are and continue to belittle players and the success we had in basketball pre-Mick is absolutely sad.

First, I think there was really only one person belittling Logan, and you know who that is. Second, even if someone thought Logan wasn't as good as Vaughn, it wouldn't make them less of "Bearcat Fans". Logan was one of my favorite players of all time, but keep in mind that Logan was not the Logan we all grew to love until his Junior year. Vaughn, for as much as he has already done, will only be a Junior this year.

Funny thing though, I don't recall your posts sticking up for the people that belittle the current coach and the current team. Yet it is "absolutely sad" that someone belittles the previous era. Why is that? Maybe I just missed those posts. I apologize if I did.

[bearcatmark]

I don't know that Logan wasn't Logan, just that Logan was a freshman and a sophomore playing on great teams (as a sophomore the best team UC has had since the 1960s...a team that could have won a national title witha healthy kmart). Logan contributed plenty to those teams, but sure he was a role player at that point...which made sense that is what he had to be.

You think Vaughn would have been any more than a solid role player off the bench on those teams? Really?

Again no knock on Vaughn who may end up being one of my favorite Bearcats of all time... the situation he walked into and what he has done for this University is absolutely special.

To me the difference between people saying negative things about the current Bearcats is it is harder to refute until we see proof otherwise. I have consistently said I think this is the first year where we can get any reall gauge on the direction of the program. I don't really have a win/loss expectation. I think we need to see development of the young guys. We need to see improvement throughout the season (something that happened last year and then faded down the stretch). I get annoyed with people making snap judgments on where the program is now and I do point out that its impossible to make any real judgment on Cronin and the direction of the Bearcats until we see it on the court (both positve and negative).

I think I am pretty balanced on where the program is now...but the results of the teams and players of the past speak for themselves and it pains me to hear Bearcat fans absolutely piss on those results

[bearcatmark]

Back to the topic on hand. If we win 20 games this season I will be very impressed and very excited about the programs direction moving forward. I think we may have the talent on hand, but we are young, unproven and playing in an absolute Beast of a conference. 20 wins would be a big time season for these guys.

[Kindog202]

Not true. Most of the fans on here love the Huggins years and the players. They just don't like them used as comparisons in an attempt to denigrate Mick and his players. There are two or three posters here who constantly feel the need to put down Mick and say how great things would be if Huggins were still around. He's not. Get over it.

One of the best posts I've seen in a while. My thoughts exactly...

[SLMadiCat]

I don't know that Logan wasn't Logan, just that Logan was a freshman and a sophomore playing on great teams (as a sophomore the best team UC has had since the 1960s...a team that could have won a national title witha healthy kmart). Logan contributed plenty to those teams, but sure he was a role player at that point...which made sense that is what he had to be.

Well, IMO, Logan wasn't nearly as good as a Freshman or Sophomore as he was as a Junior or Senior. I realize the team he was on, but he was a completely different player. His Freshman year he was overweight and out of shape. Again, IMO, Logan developed into a great player because he realized the work that he needed to put in.

You think Vaughn would have been any more than a solid role player off the bench on those teams? Really?

He would have been a different player. Vaughn was forced to do stuff most other players aren't. I don't know if he'll end up being a better or worse player because of it. No one knows. But I do think that effects how someone develops. If you just compare stats, Vaughn to this point is better than Logan. Again, Logan as a Junior or Senior was much better than Vaughn at this point. I hope Vaughn becomes better than Logan b/c that means Vaughn will be an absolute stud.

Again no knock on Vaughn who may end up being one of my favorite Bearcats of all time... the situation he walked into and what he has done for this University is absolutely special.

To me the difference between people saying negative things about the current Bearcats is it is harder to refute until we see proof otherwise. You may be right, but the cheap shots are beyond "negative things". I think negative things about the previous era are difficult to refute, such as going to the NCAA so many times in a row had something to do with the conference they were in, etc. No one knows if it is true or not but I at least think it's a valid argument.

I think I am pretty balanced on where the program is now...but the results of the teams and players of the past speak for themselves and it pains me to hear Bearcat fans absolutely piss on those results

I really don't see too many bearcat fans pissing on those results.

[SLMadiCat]

Back to the topic on hand. If we win 20 games this season I will be very impressed and very excited about the programs direction moving forward. I think we may have the talent on hand, but we are young, unproven and playing in an absolute Beast of a conference. 20 wins would be a big time season for these guys.

I agree, 20 wins would be big time. I don't see it happening though, especially without a PG.

[tophat]

At UC he recruited some big names such as Roger McClendon. In 1986 he had a recruiting class ranked #6 in the nation featuring Lou Banks and Levertis Robinson. I think all 3 of those players are in the top 15 or 20 scorers in UC history. A great coach took Banks, Robinson along with Andre Tate, Keith Starks and a football walk on named Sanders and led them to a 20 win season and an NIT appearance.

McClendon was the only blue chipper he got who was untainted, and Yates got him solely because of the relationship he'd cultivated with the family in Champaign (where Yates was coaching for Ill).

As for the 86 class, I don't recall what their rating was (#6 sounds like a stretch), but I know they were all prop 48 kids that weren't recruited heavily. In addition to them not being qualifiers, there were other reasons Yates got them: He got Robinson from ML King, which was his only pipeline. He got Banks who had a bad reputation in HS and as a result other programs laid off him (UL didn't want him, even though he went to the same HS that produced Wagner and Thompson). Keith Starks wasn't highly recruited and wasn't that good. With these caveats, the 86 class was the closest thing Yates ever had to a good class. Yates' recruiting was a disaster.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

McClendon was the only blue chipper he got who was untainted, and Yates got him solely because of the relationship he'd cultivated with the family in Champaign (where Yates was coaching for Ill).

As for the 86 class, I don't recall what their rating was (#6 sounds like a stretch), but I know they were all prop 48 kids that weren't recruited heavily. In addition to them not being qualifiers, there were other reasons Yates got them: He got Robinson from ML King, which was his only pipeline. He got Banks who had a bad reputation in HS and as a result other programs laid off him (UL didn't want him, even though he went to the same HS that produced Wagner and Thompson). Keith Starks wasn't highly recruited and wasn't that good. With these caveats, the 86 class was the closest thing Yates ever had to a good class. Yates' recruiting was a disaster.

UC got McClendon (primarily) for 2 reasons. He wanted to study Engineering. UC has a good Engineering program and UC coaches would "allow" him to major in that. Other coaches preferred an "easier" major.

And UC was the only school where the coaches would allow McClendon to have facial hair. I'm not making that up. Other coaches wouldn't allow it.

The Sonny Cox connection at MLKing landed several players for UC. Vert, Romell Shorter, Laurent Crawford. Almost Marcus Liberty too.

Keith Starks chose UC over UCLA - he was indeed THAT good.

[the_dude]

He is a troll don't feed him. Just put him on your ignore list and you don't have to read his posts.

You can ignore another user? I did not know you could do that on this forum...

Ralph, I have read your last ridiculous comment, I bid you a fond farewell. I suggest others do the same.

[Mick's Da Man]

Frankly I am stunned at the lack of respect Steve Logan gets from some "Bearcat fans" on this board. He's one of the best players in UC history. He led a UC team to a 1 seed and a conference title (playing in a strong CUSA...and yes it was strong that year). It's not what the Big East is now but there were some very good teams.

Logan did everything you could ask. He was a great ball handler, got people involved and knew how to win games. Vaughn has a long way to go to get anywhere close to that level (and that is no knock on Vaughn who has been the bright spot on bad teams). Lo was a better ball handler, better at creating for himself, and better down the stretch of games. Vaughn can develop all that... who knows what we will be saying two years from now. But to belittle Logan the way some fans are and continue to belittle players and the success we had in basketball pre-Mick is absolutely sad.

I haven't read any of the posts since yours, so if someone already covered it, sorry.

By saying I think Vaughn is better than Logan, doesn't mean Logan wasn't a good/great player.

But what makes your opinion so much better than mine or someone else's who thinks Vaughn is already better than Logan?

1. Vaughn IS AS GOOD if not better than Logan. Vaughn has done it his frosh and soph years. Logan emerged his junior and senior years.
2. The Big East if better than CUSA ever was, even if CUSA was good Logan's senior year.

Gosh, I don't want to insult you, but #1 and #2 are automatic truths in my book.

They were/are both great players.

[jeffto]

1. Vaughn IS AS GOOD if not better than Logan. Vaughn has done it his frosh and soph years. Logan emerged his junior and senior years.
2. The Big East if better than CUSA ever was, even if CUSA was good Logan's senior year.

Gosh, I don't want to insult you, but #1 and #2 are automatic truths in my book. Sorry, but those are just your opinions - not necessarily truths. I don't think you'd get much argument on #2, but while Vaughn's stats are better than Logan's were after two years, the situations and roles are largely different. Logan was surrounded by more experienced, talented players. Vaughn was the only offense. Of course his stats are going to be better.

We're in trouble if Vaughn's % of the scoring doesn't go down this year. Let's hope he becomes what Logan ended up being - a player who could, almost by himself, deliver a win. That's why Logan was great. And that's why, despite the stats, Vaughn is not yet as good as Logan.

[SLMadiCat]

I haven't read any of the posts since yours, so if someone already covered it, sorry.

By saying I think Vaughn is better than Logan, doesn't mean Logan wasn't a good/great player.

But what makes your opinion so much better than mine or someone else's who thinks Vaughn is already better than Logan?

1. Vaughn IS AS GOOD if not better than Logan. Vaughn has done it his frosh and soph years. Logan emerged his junior and senior years.
2. The Big East if better than CUSA ever was, even if CUSA was good Logan's senior year.

Gosh, I don't want to insult you, but #1 and #2 are automatic truths in my book.

They were/are both great players.

And you are entitled to your opinion, but you may be the only person on any UC board who thinks Vaughn is better than Logan. He may be when it's all said and done but not yet.

[SLMadiCat]

Let's hope he becomes what Logan ended up being - a player who could, almost by himself, deliver a win. That's why Logan was great. And that's why, despite the stats, Vaughn is not yet as good as Logan.

In defense of Vaughn, he already has single handily delivered wins, and he has come close on several occasions. Remember the first UConn game? Vaughn had 34 points and the next highest scorer for UC was 7. One of the most remarkable single game performances I've ever seen.

[jeffto]

In defense of Vaughn, he already has single handily delivered wins, and he has come close on several occasions. Remember the first UConn game? Vaughn had 34 points and the next highest scorer for UC was 7. One of the most remarkable single game performances I've ever seen.No need to defend Vaughn. He's loved by all. It's just that IMO he's not as good as Logan yet. I hope he gets there, but them are some mighty big shoes to fill. (Figuratively). :)

[BamaCat]

While 20 wins would be great...a winning season and a little respect from others outside the Cincinnati area would be fine in my book. Has anyone noticed that the so called "experts" seem to think the Cats will not do well this season? The Cats did better than expected in the Big East last year. However, even though Mick had a good recruiting class...the "experts" seem to think that the team's standing in the Big East will be at the bottom of the conference. Thats crazy!

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

While 20 wins would be great...a winning season and a little respect from others outside the Cincinnati area would be fine in my book. Has anyone noticed that the so called "experts" seem to think the Cats will not do well this season? The Cats did better than expected in the Big East last year. However, even though Mick had a good recruiting class...the "experts" seem to think that the team's standing in the Big East will be at the bottom of the conference. Thats crazy!

2008 was a clear improvement over 2007 but not acceptable, going forward.

The "experts" seem to put UC about 10th in the Big East, not at the bottom.

I want to see 20 W or close to it, not just more W than L this year.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

And you are entitled to your opinion, but you may be the only person on any UC board who thinks Vaughn is better than Logan. He may be when it's all said and done but not yet.

Vaughn's frosh and soph numbers are about DOUBLE what Logan did as frosh and soph. But Logan "blew up" as junior and senior. Hopefully Vaughn will, too.

[SLMadiCat]

Vaughn's frosh and soph numbers are about DOUBLE what Logan did as frosh and soph. But Logan "blew up" as junior and senior. Hopefully Vaughn will, too.

I know. Read my posts, I point that out.

[Mick's Da Man]

UC got McClendon (primarily) for 2 reasons. He wanted to study Engineering. UC has a good Engineering program and UC coaches would "allow" him to major in that. Other coaches preferred an "easier" major.

And UC was the only school where the coaches would allow McClendon to have facial hair. I'm not making that up. Other coaches wouldn't allow it.

The Sonny Cox connection at MLKing landed several players for UC. Vert, Romell Shorter, Laurent Crawford. Almost Marcus Liberty too.

Keith Starks chose UC over UCLA - he was indeed THAT good.

I will back you up on this. I attended UC back in the early 80's and went to nearly all of the games at the Coliseum. I had a girlfriend who's father worked for Arthur Anderson and we hit their private box alot.

It was a top 10 recruiting class (if not better) for Yates. I clearly remember hearing that. But Tony was known as a great recruiter, mediocre game coach.

McClendon is one of the greatest UC Bearcats that few remember. I watched singlehandedly beat a far superior Denny Crum-lead Louisville team. And yes, McClendon was also very smart and chose UC partially for the Engineering school.

I actually went and watched Keith Starks play many times in high school because I knew UC was recruiting him. Frankly, I wasn't that impressed at the time (high school), but he ended up being a decent player.

Finally, yes UC almost landed Marcus Liberty.

[Mick's Da Man]

Logan was surrounded by more experienced, talented players. Vaughn was the only offense. Of course his stats are going to be better.

We're in trouble if Vaughn's % of the scoring doesn't go down this year. Let's hope he becomes what Logan ended up being - a player who could, almost by himself, deliver a win. That's why Logan was great. And that's why, despite the stats, Vaughn is not yet as good as Logan.

No offense, but it's stupid to say Vaughn is the only offense, when Logan pretty much was to, aside from Stokes, his senior year. Logan and Stokes had to score, just like Vaughn and John Williamson had to score or we were sunk. Completely the same situation, except Vaughn is playing in a conference that is 4 times as hard, hands down.

Vaughn has already delivered multiple wins. In fact, you could attribute all of the Big East wins the last 2 years to Vaughn. :D

That's why Vaughn is great and Logan was great. :cool:

[jeffto]

No offense, but it's stupid to say Vaughn is the only offense, when Logan pretty much was to, aside from Stokes, his senior year. Logan and Stokes had to score, just like Vaughn and John Williamson had to score or we were sunk. Completely the same situation, except Vaughn is playing in a conference that is 4 times as hard, hands down.

Vaughn has already delivered multiple wins. In fact, you could attribute all of the Big East wins the last 2 years to Vaughn. :D

That's why Vaughn is great and Logan was great. :cool:If the situations are so similar and each had to carry his team, how can Vaughn be great if his teams had more losses? Last I checked we lost a lot of non-conference games too.

I think we'll see how great Vaughn is this year. If this supporting cast lives up to expectations, Vaughn may yet prove your point. I certainly hope so.

[Billy Don]

If the situations are so similar and each had to carry his team, how can Vaughn be great if his teams had more losses? Last I checked we lost a lot of non-conference games too.

I think we'll see how great Vaughn is this year. If this supporting cast lives up to expectations, Vaughn may yet prove your point. I certainly hope so.

If Vaughn's numbers go up this year that probably means UC as a team is in trouble. The offense went through Vaughn last year with it seemed like half the plays having Adam H go to the top of the key and set a screen for Vaughn. Of course with your big man at the top of the key setting a screen he can't rebound. I think Warren will be missed this year, if not by the fans, at least by Vaughn. If Vaughn's numbers stay the same or go down that's probably good for the team because it means 2 or 3 of the other players are scoring. If UC is to win 20 games, no way is Vaughn going to be a one man gang. Need to run some offensive play's for some other players and not just for Vaughn.

[jeffto]

If Vaughn's numbers go up this year that probably means UC as a team is in trouble. The offense went through Vaughn last year with it seemed like half the plays having Adam H go to the top of the key and set a screen for Vaughn. Of course with your big man at the top of the key setting a screen he can't rebound. I think Warren will be missed this year, if not by the fans, at least by Vaughn. If Vaughn's numbers stay the same or go down that's probably good for the team because it means 2 or 3 of the other players are scoring. If UC is to win 20 games, no way is Vaughn going to be a one man gang. Need to run some offensive play's for some other players and not just for Vaughn.I agree 100%. I said in a different post that if his numbers don't go down, we're in trouble. Vaughn can still become as good as Logan, but he better not be a one-man-band.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Should average 20 ppg (or close to it) in 2009 and 2010.

Logan did that in 2001 (25-10, Sweet 16) and 2002 (31-4, #1 seed) with very good results.

[ralph1950]

UC proved today they are 9 points better than Kansas, and John Reik did not play, he was at the game, he is quite an imposing human being. This team, with Reik, is a National Title contender.

[Mick's Da Man]

Should average 20 ppg (or close to it) in 2009 and 2010.

Logan did that in 2001 (25-10, Sweet 16) and 2002 (31-4, #1 seed) with very good results.


Logan only had Stokes to compliment him offensively his senior year.

Deonta will have far more weapons this year and next.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Logan only had Stokes to compliment him offensively his senior year.

Deonta will have far more weapons this year and next.

The 2002 Bearcats had plenty of other talented players.

Look back at that roster.

[SLMadiCat]

Should average 20 ppg (or close to it) in 2009 and 2010.

Logan did that in 2001 (25-10, Sweet 16) and 2002 (31-4, #1 seed) with very good results.

Very good results? hmmm...sweet 16 and second round loss are not very good results. I guess they did have 20+ wins though, and that is all that matters!

I love Logan though, but the team results were not "very good".