Wichita BU game thread

[BirdsEyeView]

Congrats on your return to the Top 25 today Shocker fans.

Your defeat of Bradley may have dropped your RPI, but in the eyes of those voters you moved up.

[Cdizzle]

1. I was just picking a random conference that is P5 and within your geographic area as a reference point. No major point or consideration to the Big 12....I just picked a conference.

2. Star ratings is equivalent to the reason they rank teams right now in the top 25. It's an abitrary way to show value over others, regardless of its merit or it's apparent value right now. They are talking points and areas to boast. In the recruiting world, some 5* pan out as being what they were ranked, while others are not. Some 2* become the level of a 5* (no idea what Ron Baker was, but his development proved whatever his star ranking to be way off).

All I was trying to say is recruiting and developing the talent to regularly compete for 18 games in a conference that has mostly top end talent. You are not recruiting to Drake's level. You are recruiting to (Insert P5 Conference team here) talent.

3. Let's not get off subject here by directing the topic to Kansas. Sorry I referenced that specific team. I know WSU hates that fan base more than any others.

1. Fair enough. There may be slightly fewer reasons, but WSU isn't going to end up in any of the P5 conferences. It just isn't going to happen. I think it's more likely that concussions/safety destroy football completely and we retool the entire collegiate athletics market before that happens.

2. Yeah, a lot of it is semantics. Not sure I completely buy the Top 25 rankings comparison though. Those are based (at least somewhat) on results from play at this level. Recruiting rankings are based a lot on recruiting services, AAU nonsense, and if you were offered by Kentucky.

3. The point I was trying to make was less aimed at KU (though I took my fair opportunity of a shot) and more that WSU has shown it can compete consistently with teams at the top of power conferences. Creighton (your comparison, not mine) has most certainly not.

[BirdsEyeView]

1. I was just picking a random conference that is P5 and within your geographic area as a reference point. No major point or consideration to the Big 12....I just picked a conference.

2. Star ratings is equivalent to the reason they rank teams right now in the top 25. It's an abitrary way to show value over others, regardless of its merit or it's apparent value right now. They are talking points and areas to boast. In the recruiting world, some 5* pan out as being what they were ranked, while others are not. Some 2* become the level of a 5* (no idea what Ron Baker was, but his development proved whatever his star ranking to be way off).

All I was trying to say is recruiting and developing the talent to regularly compete for 18 games in a conference that has mostly top end talent. You are not recruiting to Drake's level. You are recruiting to (Insert P5 Conference team here) talent.

3. Let's not get off subject here by directing the topic to Kansas. Sorry I referenced that specific team. I know WSU hates that fan base more than any others.

1. Fair enough. There may be slightly fewer reasons, but WSU isn't going to end up in any of the P5 conferences. It just isn't going to happen. I think it's more likely that concussions/safety destroy football completely and we retool the entire collegiate athletics market before that happens.

2. Yeah, a lot of it is semantics. Not sure I completely buy the Top 25 rankings comparison though. Those are based (at least somewhat) on results from play at this level. Recruiting rankings are based a lot on recruiting services, AAU nonsense, and if you were offered by Kentucky.

3. The point I was trying to make was less aimed at KU (though I took my fair opportunity of a shot) and more that WSU has shown it can compete consistently with teams at the top of power conferences. Creighton (your comparison, not mine) has most certainly not.

Agreed on the Top 25 comment, probably a better comparison to the PRESEASON Top 25 (an estimate just like recruiting rankings).
Also, agreed on Creighton. They just come to mind given the conference affiliation similarities.

Good back n forth here CDizzle. A lot more cordial and easy with you than someone else in your fan base on this site.

[Stickboy46]

1. I was just picking a random conference that is P5 and within your geographic area as a reference point. No major point or consideration to the Big 12....I just picked a conference.

2. Star ratings is equivalent to the reason they rank teams right now in the top 25. It's an abitrary way to show value over others, regardless of its merit or it's apparent value right now. They are talking points and areas to boast. In the recruiting world, some 5* pan out as being what they were ranked, while others are not. Some 2* become the level of a 5* (no idea what Ron Baker was, but his development proved whatever his star ranking to be way off).

All I was trying to say is recruiting and developing the talent to regularly compete for 18 games in a conference that has mostly top end talent. You are not recruiting to Drake's level. You are recruiting to (Insert P5 Conference team here) talent.

3. Let's not get off subject here by directing the topic to Kansas. Sorry I referenced that specific team. I know WSU hates that fan base more than any others.

1. Fair enough. There may be slightly fewer reasons, but WSU isn't going to end up in any of the P5 conferences. It just isn't going to happen. I think it's more likely that concussions/safety destroy football completely and we retool the entire collegiate athletics market before that happens.

2. Yeah, a lot of it is semantics. Not sure I completely buy the Top 25 rankings comparison though. Those are based (at least somewhat) on results from play at this level. Recruiting rankings are based a lot on recruiting services, AAU nonsense, and if you were offered by Kentucky.

3. The point I was trying to make was less aimed at KU (though I took my fair opportunity of a shot) and more that WSU has shown it can compete consistently with teams at the top of power conferences. Creighton (your comparison, not mine) has most certainly not.

The bolded part is always a funny topic. There have been instances that when a player signs with a lower school (WSU has had this happen with Keyser), the player instantly gets downgraded. Keyser went from a 4 star recruit to a 3 star recruit the day after he committed to WSU. I thought that was kind of funny.

[mvcfan]

1. I was just picking a random conference that is P5 and within your geographic area as a reference point. No major point or consideration to the Big 12....I just picked a conference.

2. Star ratings is equivalent to the reason they rank teams right now in the top 25. It's an abitrary way to show value over others, regardless of its merit or it's apparent value right now. They are talking points and areas to boast. In the recruiting world, some 5* pan out as being what they were ranked, while others are not. Some 2* become the level of a 5* (no idea what Ron Baker was, but his development proved whatever his star ranking to be way off).

All I was trying to say is recruiting and developing the talent to regularly compete for 18 games in a conference that has mostly top end talent. You are not recruiting to Drake's level. You are recruiting to (Insert P5 Conference team here) talent.

3. Let's not get off subject here by directing the topic to Kansas. Sorry I referenced that specific team. I know WSU hates that fan base more than any others.

1. Fair enough. There may be slightly fewer reasons, but WSU isn't going to end up in any of the P5 conferences. It just isn't going to happen. I think it's more likely that concussions/safety destroy football completely and we retool the entire collegiate athletics market before that happens.

2. Yeah, a lot of it is semantics. Not sure I completely buy the Top 25 rankings comparison though. Those are based (at least somewhat) on results from play at this level. Recruiting rankings are based a lot on recruiting services, AAU nonsense, and if you were offered by Kentucky.

3. The point I was trying to make was less aimed at KU (though I took my fair opportunity of a shot) and more that WSU has shown it can compete consistently with teams at the top of power conferences. Creighton (your comparison, not mine) has most certainly not.

The bolded part is always a funny topic. There have been instances that when a player signs with a lower school (WSU has had this happen with Keyser), the player instantly gets downgraded. Keyser went from a 4 star recruit to a 3 star recruit the day after he committed to WSU. I thought that was kind of funny.

Don't forget that when Austin Reaves signed on for an OFFICIAL Visit with the Shockers that he instantly received phone calls from Indiana, Vanderbilt, Missouri, and other P5 schools. Then the Shockers got his commitment while he was still under the radar. Respect his happening.

[tribecalledquest]

Right now Wichita is where Bradley wants to be. In the mid to late 90's Bradley was where Wichita wanted to be. In the mid to late 80's they both pretty close to where they wanted to be.

Wichita and Bradley are schools that need to be and should stay in the Missouri Valley Conference. I do understand, however, that the Koch Brothers power over everything WSU changes the dynamic some.

[Cdizzle]

I do understand, however, that the Koch Brothers power over everything WSU changes the dynamic some.

Yeah. So, this, like most things people are led to believe about the Koch's, is way off base.

[tribecalledquest]

I do understand, however, that the Koch Brothers power over everything WSU changes the dynamic some.

Yeah. So, this, like most things people are led to believe about the Koch's, is way off base.

Not from what I have heard. And I trust my source.

Chris Jans--Koch employee. Basketball program consultant. $100,000/year. Every program has someone like this right?

The poor Koch Brothers. Always misunderstood

[Cdizzle]

I do understand, however, that the Koch Brothers power over everything WSU changes the dynamic some.

Yeah. So, this, like most things people are led to believe about the Koch's, is way off base.

Not from what I have heard. And I trust my source.

Chris Jans--Koch employee. Basketball program consultant. $100,000/year. Every program has someone like this right?

Every program can hire a consultant. More than 1 has hired Jans. I do not know of Jans' other employment status outside of basketball,nor the terms of said employment but last I heard he did live in Wichita, where many people work for Koch.

Perhaps Bradley should look into hiring a consultant. They could use the help.

[tribecalledquest]

Bradley needs a lot of things the Shockers currently have. No doubt.

That wasn't the point of the discussion. You seemed to be downplaying the role/influence the Koch Family has on athletics/basketball at Wichita State. I was saying they play a rather large role.

Bradley sucks right now. I'm not disputing that.