LittleBrave
Active member
Unless I'm interpreting it wrong, I see it earlier in the thread.
For the 1st time, I'm not on the same page as you B4L. What's up with that?
-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
2 more players next season?
- Thread starter real fan
- Start date
Unless I'm interpreting it wrong, I see it earlier in the thread.
For the 1st time, I'm not on the same page as you B4L. What's up with that?
LittleBrave
Active member
Players make up the program, so my answer would be both.
You can't just let a guy go who has been loyal to the team that has invested so much and has contibuted regularly. I want him to stay for those reasons, even if he doesn't meet everyone's standards. I'm sure Geno will not play him according to how he produces on the court. JP, TP, and NW will earn more P.T. if he doesn't, but he is quite capable.
Braves4Life
New member
Unless I'm interpreting it wrong, I see it earlier in the thread.
For the 1st time, I'm not on the same page as you B4L. What's up with that?
If you're referring to wily's post above I don't see that as hope that Egolf comes back so we can clear his scholarship for next season. I see the statement as him hoping Egolf comes back by the end of the season so (as I said previously) he could "finish out his career in style". I chose to see his remark in a positive light..... Maybe that was wrong. :?
I think you nailed it right here, Bradley is a D-1 Basketball program, and these players are heavily compensated for their services, AND provided with the tools to make the academic side of college very easy. Scholarships AS RULED BY THE NCAA are NOW [they were NOT before] allowed to be offered for more than one year, unless we broke the rules everyone on the team, should be operating on a year by year scholarship basis. I have no problem with cutting a player who is not performing (I am not talking about WE specifically here). If GF has any question about a young man's skill or heart, he MUST feel free to let that player go. Yes, our graduation rates might take a hit, but I would rather take the hit there than lose a roster spot to a player who doesn't want to be here.
People have different opinions on what we owe players. I think that I personally automatically owe them 110% support on and off the court, so long at the university and the coach supports them. If the coach or university decides that someone needs to leave, then I might support that player on an individual basis depending on the situation. Most of the time, I follow the advice in my signature, but, I (and most of you) earned my way into the Bradley family, and I think that most of us will choose to support players leaving for one reason or another, but I am not sure that we are bound to support them.
Last edited:
Future Walk-On
New member
So you guys really think WE will provide no help to our interior next year?
You want that to be all on JP, TP (an unproven JUCO), Devon, and Nate?
I just feel more comfortable bringing WE back for numerous reasons. WE would have started this year and next IMO.
Unless you know of a better player that is available next year..orrr you want to bring in a freshman you think would be better in the end.
You want that to be all on JP, TP (an unproven JUCO), Devon, and Nate?
I just feel more comfortable bringing WE back for numerous reasons. WE would have started this year and next IMO.
Unless you know of a better player that is available next year..orrr you want to bring in a freshman you think would be better in the end.
Right, WE will offer more for next season than any freshman or JUCO we could go and get at this point; especially in terms of leadership.
B
buschsquirrel2011
Guest
Disagree on the production standpoint and leadership is impossible to quantify--I would never want someone back just because of "leadership" which is one of the most overtalked about things in sports.
Remember...this will be an Egolf who has had 2 knee reconstruction surgeries and has been about a 7 ppg, 5 rpg guy for his career. I would be willing to bet Tyshon Pickett eclipses those #'s next year.
Will would not be a center or backup one in this system, he is more suited to play forward and is a good shooter from 15 feet, was hoping he would be able to make it back by mid-Jan. as he could help us a lot as far as experience, size and shooting, he will be a better player in this system because I believe he will not be playing out of position.
Braves4Life
New member
For BU's sake I sure hope so.
the coaching staff at Illinois would disagree with you.
Future Walk-On
New member
You can argue he won't be the BEST interior player on the roster....but I think I would take him over DH and NW
need more than 3 Bigs
need more than 3 Bigs
B
buschsquirrel2011
Guest
A coaching staff that is clearly on the hot seat as well.
Methinks Sammy's 25 points last night played a much bigger role than any "leadership" intangibles he provided. It's amazing how good of "leaders" players become as their scoring or rebounding numbers increase.
There you go playing "what if" games again! See your post in the Sammy thread.;-)
wow.... just wow... Anybody and I mean anybody whom has seen Sammy play since his sophomore year here knew that Sammy provided leadership to his team. You either have a personal schadenfreude against SM and or JL, or don't know anything about team sports.
B
buschsquirrel2011
Guest
When did I ever say Sammy didn't provide "leadership"?? Sure he was a "leader" at Bradley--I guess anyway. I think that stuff is overblown and nearly impossible to quantify.
But I am guessing Bruce Weber would prefer 25 points and "leadership" over 3 points and "leadership"....don't you agree? My point was this...his value to Bradley had a heck of a lot more to do with his ability to play well, score points, run the offense etc. than his "leadership".
I'm not saying the "leadership" wasn't there at BU, and that it wasn't there in the game against Maryland. But the "leadership" played second fiddle, big time, to the actually production of the court. That's my point.
Give me a non "leader" who averages 20 ppg versus a "leader" who scores 2 ppg any day.
I don't understand what Jim Les has to do with any of this anyway. Why would you even bring that up?
Lastly, I am quite confident of my grasp of team sports. I don't feel I need to discuss my team sport qualifications with you but thanks for your concern.
Well...again... From this post, I question your grasp of TEAM sports! Is Sammy a person who will average 20 ppg? Certainly not. Sammy is a person who will make the teammate who does average 20 ppg and who is not a leader a BETTER player. At least for us, Sammy was a player who you wanted to have the ball during crunch time in game situations. (the Illinois and USC victories are great examples) I am not an Illini fan, but after watching last year's team, I think that Bruce Webber was looking for a player like Sammy to stabilize his team.
Future Walk-On
New member
Well yeah. I was saying simply a big not center, we all suffered through watching will play the five. However next year wouldnt he have to play some five to back up Prosser when he is out that is unless NW is ready to go
I expect Nate to be backup unless we come across a jr.college player that decides to come to BU. I also think Will can contribute a lot if he gets a chance to play the correct position .