USA Predicts . . .

[stever20]

For Creighton most fans are predicting somewhere between 2 and 4 OOC losses. I personally think it is possible that we could go undefeated, but I see 3 losses as the most likely scenario.

Might have underestimated, not sure who's in your tournament either, but I didn't think it was anyone good. I saw @ Nebraska and vs. Oklahoma as the two losses. I suppose @ Tulsa too, so probably should've said 3 instead of 2, but again I'm saying should for all of these comparing who they're playing vs. how good I think the team is. So while for instance keeping with Creighton they could loose to Ole Miss, I expect them to be good enough to win that game.

I think if they beat Ole Miss they would get Cincy. Very possible one of those are losses...

Heck just look at Georgetown. We could have 2 losses just in Atlantis. Florida/Wisconsin and then one of UNC/Oklahoma/and UCLA. Then figure in Kansas and could easily have 3.

[R to the OB]

For Creighton most fans are predicting somewhere between 2 and 4 OOC losses. I personally think it is possible that we could go undefeated, but I see 3 losses as the most likely scenario.

Might have underestimated, not sure who's in your tournament either, but I didn't think it was anyone good. I saw @ Nebraska and vs. Oklahoma as the two losses. I suppose @ Tulsa too, so probably should've said 3 instead of 2, but again I'm saying should for all of these comparing who they're playing vs. how good I think the team is. So while for instance keeping with Creighton they could loose to Ole Miss, I expect them to be good enough to win that game.

In the Tournament is MTSU, Cincy, and Ole Miss, so not great competition.
I see Nebraska and Oklahoma as two losses with a third loss to Tulsa, in the tournament, or at UNT (it's tough because it's a few days before Christmas and just after finals) because of the team's youth.
But again as I said earlier, I think it is possible to win every game. There's no game on their schedule that I would say is 100% chance to lose.

[HoosierPal]

Butler on the bubble but not Providence? Maybe I'm a homer but that seems nutty

A lot of lazy journalists just expect Butler to go back to the Horizon league days.

I appreciate the optimism of the USA journalists, but alas, I fear the posters on this board, who voted my Bulldogs 9th, have more knowledge than they do. We have a seasoned starting five, but then a severe drop off. We have only 10 on scholarship, including three untested freshmen. Of the seven lettermen, one is already hurt and any contributions he can provide will be a plus. So minus the five starters, we only have Aldridge as a reliable veteran off the bench. Already looking forward to 2015-2016 season.

[SJHooper]

Just unreal the hype SHU is getting for IW hahaha…do they think he's Stephen Curry? When's the last time a team in the Big East with such little experience made the tourney? I feel like lots of people will have egg on their face with this SHU love affair by mid season. If they are making the tourney then IW basically has to be a 1 and done and tear through the Big East. I think SJU, Xavier, PC, G'Town, Nova, all easily have a better shot making the tourney than SHU. Inexperience more times than not leads to failure or mediocrity. Not instant success.

[hoyahooligan]

For Creighton most fans are predicting somewhere between 2 and 4 OOC losses. I personally think it is possible that we could go undefeated, but I see 3 losses as the most likely scenario.

Might have underestimated, not sure who's in your tournament either, but I didn't think it was anyone good. I saw @ Nebraska and vs. Oklahoma as the two losses. I suppose @ Tulsa too, so probably should've said 3 instead of 2, but again I'm saying should for all of these comparing who they're playing vs. how good I think the team is. So while for instance keeping with Creighton they could loose to Ole Miss, I expect them to be good enough to win that game.

I think if they beat Ole Miss they would get Cincy. Very possible one of those are losses...

Heck just look at Georgetown. We could have 2 losses just in Atlantis. Florida/Wisconsin and then one of UNC/Oklahoma/and UCLA. Then figure in Kansas and could easily have 3.

Well how I view it for Creighton that Cincinnati will take a huge step back this year, so I think Creighton can win against both Ole Miss and Cinci.

As for Georgetown I think our most likely routes in Atlantis are: Loss to Florida, Win against UAB, win against the team we play for 5th place: Likely UCLA or Oklahoma. Or Beat Florida lose to Wisconsin, beat who ever we see in the third place game again likely UCLA or Oklahoma. No matter who we face I think we go 2-1 in Atlantis and then Kansas as a likely loss. But I wouldn't be surprised to beat kansas and only have one OOC loss.

[SJHooper]

I think 4 is the least amount of teams we get in yearly. So I think that's the over under line. Anything less than that would be failure, anything more than that success. I think going forward we'll be getting 5 in pretty regularly and 6 on occasion.

I think you're nuts, but man I hope you're right. Unless G'Town, Xavier, Nova, Marquette, Creighton, etc. go back to the days when they were ALL ranked and very relevant nationally at the same time, I think that's a pipe dream. I'd love to see it though. I just don't think there are enough cupcakes in our conference to ever have 5 in consistently. We would need to import like 4 awful programs to beat up on for that to be more realistic.

[stever20]

It'll be interesting. Those tournaments can turn so quickly(see Xavier last year in Atlantis as a prime example).

[Bill Marsh]

If it's 4 but the seeds are what this is- 3,10,10, 12 in PIG that's a failure.

If it's 4 but the seeds are say 2,3, 7, 10- that's a success.

Wins matter,not seeds. If everyone wins their first round games and they get at least 2 teams to the Sweet Sixteen, that's a success regardless of the seeds.

But the better the seeds you are the more of a chance of winning those games.
3 seed- 102-18 in rd of 64 games- and then 61 times advance to the sweet 16.
10 seed- 47-73 in rd of 64 games- and then 22 times advance to the sweet 16.

to act like seeds don't matter is frankly a joke. If you are the better seeds, you have more of a chance to actually win.

When all is said and done,and it's time to evaluate any team's season, no one looks back and says where did you get seeded? A team is based on how many games it won and where it finished.

I'm sorry that's such a hard concept for you to grasp. No one is arguing that a higher seed doesn't put a team in a more favorable position for a win, but that means absolutely nothing if the team doesn't actually get the win. Every year we get all those 12-5 upsets. No one is looking back at those 5-seeds who lost and praising them for getting a 5-seed. Nope, they're dissing them for losing to a 12 seed. Everyone remembers that Wichita State, VCU, and Butler had big runs through the tournament in recent years. No one is remembering where they got seeded in the first round. Nor are they using that first round seed to downgrade their accomplishment.

Got it now?

[Irishdawg]

Butler on the bubble but not Providence? Maybe I'm a homer but that seems nutty

A lot of lazy journalists just expect Butler to go back to the Horizon league days.

I appreciate the optimism of the USA journalists, but alas, I fear the posters on this board, who voted my Bulldogs 9th, have more knowledge than they do. We have a seasoned starting five, but then a severe drop off. We have only 10 on scholarship, including three untested freshmen. Of the seven lettermen, one is already hurt and any contributions he can provide will be a plus. So minus the five starters, we only have Aldridge as a reliable veteran off the bench. Already looking forward to 2015-2016 season.

Sporting News also has them finishing 5th this year. I'm in agreement with the others on this board though, and I think Butler, while they should be better defensively with Jones, Barlow and Woods likely taking up 3 of those starting 5 spots (at least at the start of the year), they'll likely be pretty similar offensively as last season. Losing Brown will help there (actually on both ends of the court), but losing Marshall will hurt and Jones, while he is a very good to elite defender, is really just an average offensive player, so it's tough to say they've added anyone that really will help them out on that end of the floor. I feel their freshmen are much more capable than last year's of physically competing, but will probably need a year (and in Wideman's case maybe a little longer) to come into their own, at least on the offensive end of the court.

I also think Aldridge is a heckuva kid and a great representative of the team, but if Barlow goes down or gets in foul trouble, we're in big trouble, regardless if he's a Senior or not.

I'm in agreement with Chalmers that Providence should be better than Butler just based on overall talent and I think Cooley has been able to get just as much, if not more out of the players he has than Miller (in an admittedly extremely small sample-size of a career). Dunn's going to have to stay healthy this year though, and that's been a big question mark during his career thus far. As good as Cartwright could be, it would be really tough to think as a freshman he could step in and get the job done right away.

[HoosierPal]

I appreciate the optimism of the USA journalists, but alas, I fear the posters on this board, who voted my Bulldogs 9th, have more knowledge than they do. We have a seasoned starting five, but then a severe drop off. We have only 10 on scholarship, including three untested freshmen. Of the seven lettermen, one is already hurt and any contributions he can provide will be a plus. So minus the five starters, we only have Aldridge as a reliable veteran off the bench. Already looking forward to 2015-2016 season.

Sporting News also has them finishing 5th this year. I'm in agreement with the others on this board though, and I think Butler, while they should be better defensively with Jones, Barlow and Woods likely taking up 3 of those starting 5 spots (at least at the start of the year), they'll likely be pretty similar offensively as last season. Losing Brown will help there (actually on both ends of the court), but losing Marshall will hurt and Jones, while he is a very good to elite defender, is really just an average offensive player, so it's tough to say they've added anyone that really will help them out on that end of the floor. I feel their freshmen are much more capable than last year's of physically competing, but will probably need a year (and in Wideman's case maybe a little longer) to come into their own, at least on the offensive end of the court.

I also think Aldridge is a heckuva kid and a great representative of the team, but if Barlow goes down or gets in foul trouble, we're in big trouble, regardless if he's a Senior or not.

I agree with most of what you say, except that I believe we will miss Brown. The only bench player who can possibly stretch the floor will be Etherington. And he only averaged 2.0 ppg last year with IU. It is hard to pencil Etherington in for even high single figure scoring. Brown hit 30 three pointers, and was a threat every time he touched the ball. Without Brown, we HAVE to have Austin contribute at least as much as Brown did last year at 6.8 pg.

Etherington hasn't shown in three years that he can make it through a season reasonably healthy, and as you know he is already injured. I for one believe we will miss Brown immensely.

I think we will miss Fromm's leadership more than most think. When he lost his starting job, he kept his head in the game and provided stability off the bench. He also could stretch the floor, particularly for a big man. I'm not sure who will fill his slot.

I totally agree with Aldridge being a good citizen and great teammate.