Joe Lunardi's way too early Bracketology has a potential rematch with Houston in the Sweet 16. With the addition of Phelps, Payne, and Wilcher, I'd expect the Aggies to start the 2024-25 season ranked and as a contender in the SEC.
Post Reply
1 of 1
Way too early Bracketology - No. 5 seed Texas A&M
2,629 Views |
26 Replies |
Last: 14 days ago by Method Man
LukeEvangelist
Joined:
May 5, 2023
Posts:
2,184
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Just booked my hotel for Cleveland.
I uh, hope it works out.
AggieCVQ said:
I uh, hope it works out.
If not there will be somebody playing in Cleveland to watch. Plus I have never been to Cleveland and I hear it has many great things to do. Like ….
Please not Houston again.
I usually don't dignify these but I do think next season will be much better than the season after. This is it.
Big run this year -> everyone sees the playing time we have to offer -> huge transfer class next year -> era of Aggie dominance is upon us
I mean it could happen for sure. It's just a lot less obvious of a path. Part of what makes us good is the unity. Losing a lot.
Lol. Based on recent history, we ain't getting nothing close to a 5 seed.
I know a lot about a little, and a little about a lot.
Anything below a three seed should be grounds for termination.
#resources
#resources
We were a 7 a whole one season ago?
5 seed or bust!
We could be a 1 seed or miss the tourney. No one knows jack at this point. Jmo. The portal additions appear to be positive.
I know we are losing Boots, but it's also realistic to expect existing players to take a leap with more development in the offseason.
A lot is going to depend on a few players doing that in some aspects of their game.
A lot is going to depend on a few players doing that in some aspects of their game.
Also, and to preface this, I really like Boots. He's a good player, there's no question. But a bit like losing Dexter the year before or Q before that, a program on solid footing should be losing and replacing those kinds of players every year. He's not some kind of generational talent.
Wade is a different story, those players don't come along very often and he's going to be tough to replace not only from a production standpoint but from a court presence/vibes standpoint also. He's one of the top... what, 2-3 players in school history already and he's still got another season?
Wade is a different story, those players don't come along very often and he's going to be tough to replace not only from a production standpoint but from a court presence/vibes standpoint also. He's one of the top... what, 2-3 players in school history already and he's still got another season?
Bob bob bob....you're sending out a homing beacon to the Wade haters with that last sentence.bobinator said:
Also, and to preface this, I really like Boots. He's a good player, there's no question. But a bit like losing Dexter the year before or Q before that, a program on solid footing should be losing and replacing those kinds of players every year. He's not some kind of generational talent.
Wade is a different story, those players don't come along very often and he's going to be tough to replace not only from a production standpoint but from a court presence/vibes standpoint also. He's one of the top... what, 2-3 players in school history already and he's still got another season?
(He's #3 overall to me FYI)
Bring 'em on, this might be the debate of the offseason, going into his senior year, what would Wade need to do to be the GOAT? Do his individual stats even matter or does it all come down to whether or not the team makes the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament and/or wins an SEC Championship? (Law didn't win a conference title, but of course did make the Sweet 16 in 2007.)
Needs to beat a team with Kevin Durant on it in Austin.bobinator said:
Bring 'em on, this might be the debate of the offseason, going into his senior year, what would Wade need to do to be the GOAT? Do his individual stats even matter or does it all come down to whether or not the team makes the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament and/or wins an SEC Championship? (Law didn't win a conference title, but of course did make the Sweet 16 in 2007.)
Win some big regular season games against highly ranked opponents, team success in the tournament including individual success in the those games, shoot > 40%.bobinator said:
Bring 'em on, this might be the debate of the offseason, going into his senior year, what would Wade need to do to be the GOAT? Do his individual stats even matter or does it all come down to whether or not the team makes the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament and/or wins an SEC Championship? (Law didn't win a conference title, but of course did make the Sweet 16 in 2007.)
At a minimum, lead us to a Sweet 16 appearance for starters. If Wade were to lead us to an Elite 8 or beyond, it would be really difficult not to consider him a GOAT. When you're one of the last few teams standing, the stories write themselves. Those teams get an unlimited amount of national exposure. Perceptions typically trump stats in the sporting world so I don't think stats will matter as much.bobinator said:
Bring 'em on, this might be the debate of the offseason, going into his senior year, what would Wade need to do to be the GOAT? Do his individual stats even matter or does it all come down to whether or not the team makes the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament and/or wins an SEC Championship? (Law didn't win a conference title, but of course did make the Sweet 16 in 2007.)
I think if we make the Elite Eight then he's got it wrapped up. That's part of Law's mystique is that he led us to the Sweet 16 which we hadn't been to in like 30 years at the time, so certainly if Taylor does something like that then I think it's a done deal.
I think the question for me is can he reach GOAT status without that, or does he have to have that also.
If we, say, make the sweet 16 with him averaging 20 pts and 4 assists per game, does that get him close?
One thing I think hurting him is that a lot of his epic performances have come in losses. He tends to not really just straight up completely take over games unless we get pretty far behind although he did drop 30+ on Kentucky twice last season in wins.
The other thing is that he just hasn't been on a team as good as Law's last team yet. If we put together a three-seed type season which includes some huge wins (especially if we beat Texas), then maybe he can get there without a second weekend NCAA Tournament game.
I think the question for me is can he reach GOAT status without that, or does he have to have that also.
If we, say, make the sweet 16 with him averaging 20 pts and 4 assists per game, does that get him close?
One thing I think hurting him is that a lot of his epic performances have come in losses. He tends to not really just straight up completely take over games unless we get pretty far behind although he did drop 30+ on Kentucky twice last season in wins.
The other thing is that he just hasn't been on a team as good as Law's last team yet. If we put together a three-seed type season which includes some huge wins (especially if we beat Texas), then maybe he can get there without a second weekend NCAA Tournament game.
That certainly is a good question to keep in mind as the season plays out. If he couldn't get us to the 2nd weekend, then I think most would hang that over his head and the reason to keep him out of the GOAT conversation. Similarly, if he was in a 3 seed type team and still couldn't get over the Sweet 16 hump, then the disappointment would hang a cloud over the GOAT conversation as well.
Of course I'm saying this would be the popular sentiment because there's very few of us who would actually have that conversation, but I'd say most would say Acie is the GOAT.
Regardless, it's good conversation now and next year as well (unless we reach the Elite 8 and beyond).
Of course I'm saying this would be the popular sentiment because there's very few of us who would actually have that conversation, but I'd say most would say Acie is the GOAT.
Regardless, it's good conversation now and next year as well (unless we reach the Elite 8 and beyond).
Being the leader of a successful team is the measure. Go look at Bernard King's stats.
I mean King's teams were absolutely horrible, but the team success factor is an interesting one.
Wade's been on three teams that were all at least pretty good (by our standards). One that narrowly missed the NCAA Tournament his freshmen season, and two that did make it, both being single digit seeds.
So Wade's first three teams were all significantly better than Law's. Law was on the famously 0-fer-conference '04 team, the '05 NIT team, and the '06 12-seed team.
But yes, Law's senior year was one of the best two seasons in school history (depending on what you think of the 2016 team. But that's what's at the heart of the question here, can being on a pretty good team for four years trump being on one REALLY good one?
Wade's been on three teams that were all at least pretty good (by our standards). One that narrowly missed the NCAA Tournament his freshmen season, and two that did make it, both being single digit seeds.
So Wade's first three teams were all significantly better than Law's. Law was on the famously 0-fer-conference '04 team, the '05 NIT team, and the '06 12-seed team.
But yes, Law's senior year was one of the best two seasons in school history (depending on what you think of the 2016 team. But that's what's at the heart of the question here, can being on a pretty good team for four years trump being on one REALLY good one?
We have already won more big games with Taylor than we did with Law pretty much any way you slice those numbers. For example, if you go by wins over top 10 teams its 5 with Taylor vs 3 with Law. I think another reason Law is more highly regarded in that general area is that it was him hitting memorable big shots at the buzzer in a couple of those games.
We haven't won a second round game but yeah. More opportunities too.?