2011-12 Preview

How Will Teams Account for Major Personnel Losses?

Raphielle Johnson — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 09:46:41 -0800

One question that seems to float around college basketball on an annual basis is the "how will they replace..." inquiry. That could apply to just about any player, from a key sub to a starter to a conference player of the year honoree. But the danger of using the word "replace" is that sometimes the departed players is too difficult to account for by simply plugging someone else into their role. According to kenpom.com, these were the top ten players in the country last season in percentage of possessions used:

1 Anatoly Bose (Nicholls St.) 36.7
2 Jimmer Fredette (BYU) 36.4
3 Keion Bell (Pepperdine) 35.7
4 Brandon Bowdry (Eastern Michigan)34.4
5 Adrian Oliver (San Jose State) 33.8
6 Xavier Silas (Northern Illinois) 33.8
7 Will Pratt (Northwestern St.) 33.4
8 Grant Maxey (Jackson State) 33.2
9 Andrew Goudelock (Charleston) 33.1
10 Shawn Lewis (Cal Poly) 32.6

Nine of these players were seniors last season and the tenth (Keion Bell) has since transferred to Missouri, where he will have one year of eligibility in 2012-13 after sitting out this season (11th on the list is Lehigh's C.J. McCollum, one of the better guards in America who gets limited national exposure). But the question for each of these teams is how they go about redistributing the possessions that went to these players.

It goes without saying how important a Fredette or Goudelock was to their team last season, which makes it so difficult to simply say that they need to be "replaced". Attempting to replace a player of this influence can get teams in trouble, so the sooner a program figures out how to make up for the departure the better.

"At first we thought we could just run the same stuff and I was wrong," said College of Charleston head coach Bobby Cremins in a phone conversation last week. "We added some new stuff, went back and forth and then realized that we had to change."

The changes were all about comfort for the Cougars, who not only lost Goudelock but also guard Donovan Monroe (12.4 ppg) and forward Jeremy Simmons (13.3 ppg, 6.2 rpg). Goudelock and Monroe were responsible for 56.5% of Charleston's made three pointers in 2010-11, meaning that the Cougars will need multiple players to step up in that department.

One option: point guard Andrew Lawrence, who gained experience playing with the English National Team during the summer, and 74% of his points last season came from beyond the arc. Coach Cremins noted that Lawrence's experience this summer was a great one, and the starting point guard has the ability to set up teammates in addition to knock down shots. Obviously Lawrence's role will expand, but to expect him to pick up where Goudelock left off would be unfair.

In additon to Lawrence on the perimeter there are three players competing for the starting shooting guard role, with one of those options being Jordan Scott. Scott scored a team-high 23 points in their exhibition win over Queens College and 15 in the win over Limestone, but by no means did that lock up the starting nod, as Nori Johnson and Trevonte Dixon will also get opportunities to produce. In speaking with Coach Cremins he was still looking for improvement from Scott, and as the temperament improves his game should as well.

Charleston will also call on their lone returning starter for offense, and after missing the 2009-10 season due to a knee injury Antwaine Wiggins should be fully recovered. Wiggins averaged 7.9 points and 5.6 rebounds last season, making 51.1% of his two-point attempts and just 35.3% from beyond the arc. That percentage needs to improve if he's to raise his scoring, and that was a point of emphasis for the Cougars.

"He's playing well and trying to become a better shooter [form-wise]," noted Cremins. "He can be an NBA player if his shot improves."

Charleston also has the tough Trent Wiedeman in the frontcourt, but the loss of Willis Hall places a little more pressure on freshman Adjehi Baru, and the Cougars will have a chance to be a factor in the SoCon if the highly-touted newcomer is a factor. Charleston is young and has some big production losses to account for, but the Cougars have plenty back when compared with Colorado.

It's been well-documented the situation that Tad Boyle is in as the Buffaloes begin their first season in the Pac-12. In Alec Burks, Cory Higgins, Levi Knutson and Marcus Relphorde the Buffs lost 75% of their offense from last season's 24-14 team, meaning that there's a strong chance that they won't be able to simply look for guys to replicate the production of that quartet.

"We're not changing our system but adjustments need to be made," said Colorado head coach Tad Boyle. "We've stressed not trying to have a player be one of the departed, but to be themselves and understand why [the departed players] were successful and add to their games."

One player who will need to make this transition is point guard Nate Tomlinson, who had the luxury of being able to get the ball to players such as Burks and Higgins, who could then make a play and score baskets. "Nate has to be more of a playmaker himself and become more aggressive, but not just in terms of scoring," noted Boyle.

Tomlinson accounted for just 3.5% of the Buffaloes' points last season, but look for that number to increase by a substantial amount out of necessity. But he isn't the only player Colorado will call on for points, as a pair of seniors will also need to be involved. Forward Austin Dufault (6.6 ppg, 4.2 rpg) and guard Carlon Brown (Utah transfer) will also be key cogs in the Buffaloes' up-tempo system, and how they execute in their "secondary break" will be something to watch.

"Last year's team was good at taking care of the basketball and we have to continue that," said Boyle when asked what his team will need to do offensively this season. "We have to be patient offensively, and we're having issues with that now. We don't have a Burks or Higgins to make plays in our secondary break."

Can Brown do that? He's got the athletic ability to do so as do freshmen Askia Booker and Spencer Dinwiddie, and sophomore Andre Roberson will also be called upon in the frontcourt. And in Dufault the Buffaloes have a big man who can score either inside or out. Coach Boyle noted that Dufault has to do a good job of understanding his matchup and knowing where his advantage is in order to be successful.

How teams go about accounting for major personnel losses will be something to keep an eye on, not just in the distribution from a numbers standpoint but also in what kinds of sets they run. Teams who could give the ball to a dominant figure and ask him to make a play might have to do more work off the ball to get good scoring opportunities, but the thought of simply replacing a player is a simplistic one. Look out for this in the first month of the season, as how this is handled will shape the seasons of many teams.

Some Other Teams to Watch

Arizona: The Wildcats not only lost a lottery pick in forward Derrick Williams but an assertive point guard in Lamont "MoMo" Jones (transferred to Iona). That means that the Wildcats will be young at the point with either sophomore Jordin Mayes or freshman Josiah Turner, and they don't have a big man on the block that can take the ball and get the team a basket whenever. More will be asked of Solomon Hill on the wing, senior Kyle Fogg is experienced as well and the sooner Kevin Parrom can return the better.

BYU: This one is pretty obvious due to the graduation of Jimmer Fredette, but don't forget about what Jackson Emery brought to the Cougars as well. The good news for Dave Rose is that Charles Abouo and Noah Hartsock return, as does Brandon Davies (suspended for an honor code violation late last season). The Cougars may have to rely more on their big men for points, especially early in the season, and it's going to be interesting to see how they incorporate UCLA transfer Matt Carlino once he's eligible in December.

Connecticut: The Huskies were a young team last year, but losing a player the caliber of Kemba Walker is a big deal, especially with freshman Ryan Boatright sitting per NCAA inquiry. That puts more on the plate of Shabazz Napier, and look for wing Jeremy Lamb to be used at the point on occasion as well. Lamb's best role offensively may end up being one similar to how Richard Hamilton was used during his time in Storrs, as Lamb is also a tough matchup coming off of screens.

Hofstra: Charles Jenkins left Hempstead as the greatest player in the history of the school, so there really isn't a way to simply plug someone into his open spot. Rhode Island transfer Steve Mejia is more of a distributor than scorer at the point, but in shooting guard Mike Moore the Pride have a player capable of assuming that alpha role on offense. Bryant Crowder, Nathaniel Lester and David Imes will also have roles that are larger than they would have been with a player of Jenkins' caliber still on campus.

Jackson State: Losing Grant Maxey, who was responsible for 33.2% of the Tigers' possessions last season, is a tough departure to account for but he's not the only loss for JSU. De'Suan Dixon and Tyrone Hanson were also significant contributors according to Ken Pomeroy's numbers, leaving Jenniro Bush as the main option. Bush was named Preseason POY in the SWAC, and JSU will need that kind of production to account for the loss of four starters.

Kansas: The Jayhawks have to account for the loss of not just the Morrii (Marcus and Markieff) but also Tyrel Reed and Brady Morningstar, their most successful three-point shooters with regards to number of shots made and percentage (Markieff Morris shot 42% from three but on nearly have as many attempts). Junior forward Thomas Robinson will be the primary option on the block, but it doesn't help that guards Tyshawn Taylor and Elijah Robinson have both been suspended already (only for the two exhibition games).

St. John's: Who didn't the Red Storm lose? Other than Malik Stith, who played just 12.2 minutes per game last season, no one of consequence returns from that NCAA Tournament team. But the newcomers are extremely talented, led by junior college transfers Nurideen Lindsey and God'sgift Achiuwa and freshmen Maurice Harkless and Sir'Dominic Pointer. To say the least this thin roster will need to remain healthy, and possible mid-season additions Norvel Pelle and Amir Garrett would be welcomed with open arms.

College Hoops "Roundable": Title Picks Outside of Top 4

Raphielle Johnson — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 08:58:10 -0800

We've finally reached the last question in this five-part series, where some college basketball writers took time to answer who their pick to win the national title is. There was one caveat, however: the pick had to come from outside of the top four that is North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio State and UConn. That led to some interesting choices, so enjoy.

Question: Outside of the generally accepted top four (UNC/UK/Ohio State/UConn) who do you think can win the national title?

Peter Robert Casey, Five-Star Basketball
Sans Singler, Smith and Irving, I still like the Blue Devils. Not literally of course, but Duke should surprise folks. This edition's much younger than traditional Duke teams, but it's a wildly talented bunch. They'll grow up fast in the ACC.

Mason Plumlee's the key upfront, and Duke will rely on his consistency. He's good for 8.5 caroms per outing and offensive efficiency around the basket while Ryan Kelly, a 6-11 junior, can haul in boards and play gritty Coach K-style defense. Miles Plumlee should see rotation minutes in the post and first-year forward Alex Murphy may be a difference-maker.

The question mark around Duke is in the backcourt. Seth Curry, Andre Dawkins and Austin Rivers can all hoist it, but who will step up to create those shots? Tyler Thornton's much more effective on the defensive end, so the onus may be on McDonald's All-American Quinn Cook. If the freshman floor leader can capably fill that void, Duke will be dangerous come March.

Rob Dauster, Ballin' is a Habit
I think Syracuse and Duke are the obvious answers here, but I'll mix it up - Xavier.

Seriously.

They have Tu Holloway, who is the best point guard in the country not named Jordan Taylor. Mark Lyons is better than anyone thinks alongside Holloway in the back court. Brad Redford is a sniper, as is redshirt freshman Justin Martin, and Dez Wells is going to make a lot of fans across the country with his athleticism. And lastly, the Muskies have a very good front line. Kenny Frease is eligible again in the middle while transfers Travis Taylor (who is going to sneak up on people this year) and Andre Walker and junior Jeff Robinson can all play.

Remember where you heard it first!

Brian Ewart, VUHoops.com
Here's the cop-out answer of the day: Duke. The Blue Devils lost a stud at point guard but have Quinn Cook and Seth Curry to help them move on. Austin Rivers is going to be another big contributor for Duke, and they also have all three Plumlees now. They've got plenty of talent anyway, and if I can't pick UConn or UNC, I guess I'll play it like Dickie V.

Troy Machir, Ballin' is a Habit
Butler. Yeah, I said it. Butler. I mean, why the hell not? Sure, they will probably fall off the radar in late-January, but come March, they will be a part of the bracket, and you'd be a fool not to pencil them in to the Final Four, not after the last two years. But in all seriousness, I really like Memphis to do big things this season. They do have an inexperienced team when it comes to the NCAA tournament, but they just have so much talent and athleticism, and I think Josh Pastner could be a legitimate candidate for Coach of the Year. I really think this is the year Memphis comes back into the public eye. If It's not Butler or Memphis, then I'll go with Duke.

Ray Mernagh, NBE Sports
I like Kentucky to win it all. But outside of those four? Syracuse could win it. I also like Baylor and Xavier as sleepers, but right now if I had to pick one team outside of those four it would be the Orange.

Jon Pence, SCACCHoops.com
I've sat here for 20 minutes looking at teams 5-20 and I'm still scratching my head. If that's any indication, the top 4 are definitely a big step ahead of the rest. Syracuse and Duke are the easy answers here, but I want to look past both and go with Ashton Gibbs and the Pitt Panthers. Gibbs is the real deal and could take a page from Kemba Walker and lead Pitt to the title. Jamie Dixon has averaged 27 wins per season in his 8 years at Pitt, mostly with good, but not great talent. This year's roster should be a step up. Gibbs is good enough to lead Pitt to a run in the tourney and Dixon's defense is always among the best in the NCAA, so I'll go with Pitt.

Jon Teitel, CollegeHoops.net
I know that non-BCS AQ teams with a young coach can go very far in March (Butler and VCU) but I just do not think they can go all the way, so I will cross Memphis and Xavier off the list. I also do not like teams who have to replace a ton of talent, so when you lose a trio like Kyrie Irving, Nolan Smith and Kyle Singler (Duke) or Markieff Morris, Marcus Morris and Josh Selby (Kansas), I would forget about them as well.

The past 15 years have demonstrated that it really helps to have a Hall of Fame caliber coach if you want to win the title (Jim Calhoun, Mike Krzyzewski, Roy Williams, Jim Boeheim, etc.), so while I respect Kevin Stallings and Jamie Dixon and their current teams, I am not ready to hand Vanderbilt or Pitt the title just yet.

That narrows it down to a few Top 15 teams that have a great coaches: Syracuse, Florida and Louisville. I think the Gators are going to be a bit guard-heavy this year after losing his entire starting frontcourt (Vernon Macklin, Chandler Parsons and Alex Tyus), so I am tempted to simply pick the winner of the Louisville-Syracuse season series.

However, after recently hearing that Cardinal freshman Wayne Blackshear will miss a decent chunk of the season after suffering a shoulder injury, I will take that as a sign of bad karma and I will pick Syracuse to have the best shot of winning the title.

Ben Weixlmann, Heard This Blog
Man, I have to admit - I really hate questions like this. If I were forced to pick one team right now, I would say Louisville. I think playing in the Big East will provide them with the toughness and challenges to be prepared to make a long run into March. Peyton Siva is a top-notch floor general, and they've got depth to run alongside the gifted Seattle native. Losing Wayne Blackshear for an extended period of time due to a torn labrum won't help their chances, but if he can recover and be back in time for the end of the Big East season, look for them to be primed for a March push.

My Pick
This won't be a popular pick due to their recent March failings, but I'll go with Vanderbilt. Why? In guard John Jenkins they have one of the best shooters in the nation and wing Jeffery Taylor is an outstanding athlete who can get it done on both ends. Festus Ezeli leads a deep frontcourt, and his six-game suspension could work out to be a positive as players such as Rod Odom and Steve Tchiengang stand to receive even more minutes. Add in a talented freshman in Dai'Jon Parker and the Commodores have a good rotation to call on. They'll be right there with Kentucky in the SEC conversation, and as a result avoid those pesky opening matchups that have resulted in them heading home after one game.

Previous Questions

What are your thoughts on conference realignment, and what solution do you have for the issue?

What are your thoughts on the new recruiting rules that the NCAA has put in place? Sufficient or no, and if not what would you like changed?

What are your thoughts on the initiative to raise the value of a full scholarship (adding up to $2,000 to help reach the total cost of attendance)?

Removing North Carolina/Kentucky, what's one game (conference or non-conference) that you're looking forward to watching this season?

College Hoops "Roundtable": Favorite Games This Season

Raphielle Johnson — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:18:31 -0800

The first three questions in this five-part series involved legal matters that have effected college basketball, from conference realignment to the new recruiting guidelines and finally the updated scholarship model. Now comes the fun part: discussing the action that will take place on the floor. This question focuses on games that the panel is looking forward to, removing the December 3rd showdown between North Carolina and Kentucky (who isn't looking forward to that one?).

Question: Removing North Carolina/Kentucky, what's one game (conference or non-conference) that you're looking forward to watching this season?

Peter Robert Casey (Five-Star Basketball)
UConn at Syracuse on February 11th. 'Cuse is on its way out [of the Big East]. Both teams are expected to be inside the Top 10 nationally, and the Huskies and Orange always serve up a great treat. They'll be jockeying for a top-standing in the Big East, and the Dome will be rocking. It's already circled on my calendar.

Rob Dauster (Ballin' is a Habit)
Kentucky-Louisville on New Year's Day is going to be awesome. I'm personally hoping that when Duke and North Carolina play on the last day of the regular season, the ACC title will be on the line. Syracuse-UConn will be awesome as well. I'll be able to attend the Battle of the Boulevard this year -- the rivalry game between Lipscomb and Belmont. Can that count?

Brian Ewart (VUHoops.com)
I really can't wait to see UNC vs. Michigan State in the Carrier Classic. The whole concept is amazing and while Michigan State is coming into the game unranked, I still think it could end up being a very good game.

In the Big East, I'm pretty excited to see UConn and Syracuse go at it. Both are expected to be great teams this year and those two games could have a big effect on the conference title. It will also be interesting to see how UConn fans react to having Syracuse, a team on its way out the conference door, in their house.

Troy Machir (Ballin' is a Habit)
There might not be that many games that we can look to from this far away and already hype up, with UNC/Kentucky being the obvious exception. That being said, I think there are a bunch of games down the road that, if things pan out, could make for fantastic match-ups. I am really looking forward to this season's Maui Invitational, which features the most-loaded field in the tournament's history. I also am looking forward to the annual Crosstown Shootout between Xavier and Cincinnati. The Bearcats have made improvements every year since Mic Cronin took over, and this very well could be the year they reap the rewards of hard work. Likewise, Xavier is one of the deepest teams in the country, and features one of the most exciting guards in the county, Tu Holloway. Plus, I mean, it's a non-conference cross-town rivalry. Both these teams could suck and this game would still be entertaining.

Ray Mernagh (NBE Sports)
There's a lot of games I'm looking forward to, just like the rest of us I'll be that guy that watches a countless number of them over the next five months. One game I'll be at that I'm looking forward to is New Year's Day when Cincinnati comes to Pittsburgh. Cincinnati is getting a lot of love but they need a big win on the road to make me a believer. They will be a veteran group with a gaudy record but how they perform on New Years Day will tell us a lot about how "real" they are.

Jon Pence (SCACCHoops.com)
If you're taking away the UNC/UK game, then I'll go with a matchup that sees Duke go play a true road game at Ohio State in late November. The Blue Devils rarely play true road games, but Duke will get a tough matchup with Ohio State. The fun thing to watch will be Jared Sullinger against Duke's duo of Mason and Miles Plumlee. How will Austin Rivers fare in his first road game? This should be a fun one.

Jon Teitel (CollegeHoops.net)
I will do one of each. Conference game(s) of the year: it is hard to improve upon a buzzer-beater in a one-game playoff to decide who goes to the NCAA Tournament, but after last spring's Harvard-Princeton classic I recommend scanning your satellite to see them play twice in a two-week span (February 11th/24th). Non-conference game of the year: since most non-conference games happen early in the season before teams have a chance to form an identity and share some time together on the court, I am pretty psyched for the late-season Xavier-Memphis match-up (February 4th). Senior Tu Holloway will try to show the NBA scouts that he is better than his 1-8 FG/5 TO performance in last year's NCAA Tournament loss to Marquette, while hometown super-frosh Adonis Thomas should have 20 games under his belt by then.

Ben Weixlmann (Heard This Blog)
What a loaded question. Just because I imagine several folks will pick more obvious answers, I'll try to go outside the box. Because I cover the Atlantic 10, I'm really excited to see Xavier-Memphis. The Musketeers are loaded yet again, and head coach Chris Mack has done an incredible job with his talent in Cincinnati. Memphis head man Josh Pastner is no slouch, either, and his squad figures to be a dark horse Final Four contender. Can't wait for that one on Feb. 4.

My Thoughts
There are some very attractive games on the schedule of both varieties, but if I had to pick one matchup I'm going with either of the two battles between Fairfield and Iona in the MAAC (January 27th and February 24th). The Gaels are have the nation's second-best assist man from last season (Scott Machado) back along with a number of key returnees including "Optimus Prime" (Mike Glover). Add in some talented newcomers in Rashad James and Arizona transfer Lamont "MoMo" Jones and Tim Cluess won't lack for options.

But the same goes for Fairfield under first-year head coach Sydney Johnson, with Derek Needham anchoring the backcourt and transfers Rakim Sanders (Boston College) and Desmond Wade (Houston) ready to go. These two are expected to be the class of the MAAC, meaning that the stakes should be high as well.

Next question: Outside of the generally accepted top four (UNC/UK/Ohio State/UConn) who do think can win the national title?

College Hoops "Roundtable": Thoughts on the New Scholarship Model

Raphielle Johnson — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 18:47:53 -0700

The first two questions in our college hoops "roundtable", where I ask some college basketball writers what their thoughts are on some of the hot topics in the game, centered around conference realignment and the new recruiting rules. This question tackles the concept of the new scholarship model, with the NCAA moving to add up to $2,000 to the value of full scholarships at the discretion of each conference. The governing body has also opened the door for multi-year scholarships, with the current being a one-year renewable setup. The Sun Belt and Metro Atlantic conferences have already said that they will abide by the new rule, and more leagues may fall in line in the near future. Here are some thoughts on the change.

Question: What are your thoughts on the initiative to raise the value of a full scholarship (adding up to $2,000 to help reach the total cost of attendance)?

Peter Robert Casey, Five-Star Basketball
Great. It should probably be more. $2,000 helps defray the rising costs of uncovered living expenses. When you accept a college scholarship, you work your butt off. Make no mistake. A full ride should be a full ride.

Rob Dauster, Ballin' is a Habit
Meh. Its a start. Its a step in the right direction. But $2,000 in a year? Think about how much you spend a year on gas. And all they get is $2,000 a year?

I think we should go to the Olympic model, personally, but whatever ends up happening, I think the players should end up getting more. But given Mark Emmert's stance against giving the players anything as recently as a year ago, I think $2,000 is a good sign.

Brian Ewart, VUHoops.com
I tend to be in favor of it. Power conferences will clearly be going toward that model, while poorer conferences might not, but will that really change the dynamic much? $2,000 isn't really enough money to live like you're in a rap video. Elite recruits will still go to elite programs, but now at least they will get to share in the wealth a little bit.

Troy Machir, Ballin' is a Habit
I don't think players should be paid. Period.

Sure, $2,000 sounds nice now, but wait ten years. I am certain they will start asking for more. Let's say they don't get paid, just a free scholarship like in the past. Guess what, they still get free swag, they still get thousands upon thousands of students and fans bowing at their feet. For four years, they get free room-and-board, a free education, and a celebrity status. After that, then they can get the money, but let's not mix it in to college. it's supposed to be a learning experience. It's suppose to be a place that prepares you for the real world. However, I do believe that the players should be able to market themselves in order to make money. If I guy wants to make money off his likeness by hosting events in the off-season, let him do it.

Ray Mernagh, NBE Sports
I like the $2,000 but if some Low and Mid-Major leagues can do it and others can't it's going to create a problem for those coaches. The high majors should get the 2K IMHO and then some.

Jon Pence, SCACCHoops.com
The $2,000 stipend is a starting point to paying athletes, but it widens the gap from the haves and have nots. Depending on a school's budget, the school may or may not be able to afford the $2,000 amount and it is by no means a requirement. Take for example a recruit deciding between Iowa and Northern Iowa. Iowa might be able to offer the player the extra $2,000 while a smaller budgeted Northern Iowa cannot. Will we see a shift away from the success of mid-major programs due to this change? Possibly.

Jon Teitel, CollegeHoops.net
Hate it. If the president of the student council and the tuba player in the school band have to pay to do their own laundry, then the star PG should as well. I understand if a homesick player wants to go home to see his mother, but if you go to college 3,000 miles away from home (as I did) then you cannot always get what you want. I have heard numerous stories of players who drive around campus in sports cars and rarely go to class, and if you give them $2,000 and hope that they spend it in a correct manner then you are pushing them down a very slippery slope. Someone is already paying for your room, board, tuition and books. In the words of Jack Nicholson from the movie A Few Good Men, "I would rather you just said ‘Thank you,' and went on your way"!

Ben Weixlmann, Heard This Blog
I think this is really a difficult rule to set in place for all NCAA schools. The schools in "Big Six" conferences can easily afford the hit to their already burgeoning revenue stream, but I worry about those schools that can't necessarily find room in their budgets. Then what happens? Do behind-the-scenes staff members get fired to cut expenses? It'll be interesting to see.

My Thoughts
Personally I like the move to attempt to bridge the gap between the value of the scholarship and the total cost of attendance. If you're going to refer to the scholarship as a "full scholarship" shouldn't it be such? What's been interesting in this new initiative is that the first two conferences to say they'd follow the model were the...Sun Belt and the MAAC, and neither of those leagues is pulling in the money that BCS AQ conferences bring in (the Sun Belt does have the advantage of bowl revenues and money for being a part of the BCS). I know many have asked about the "non-revenue" sports and whether or not they should be compensated. My answer: no. If the NCAA wants to use revenue sports to finance the base scholarship for the other sports OK, but the extras? Not on board with that.

Next question: Removing North Carolina/Kentucky, what's one game (conference or non-conference) that you're looking forward to watching this season?

College Hoops "Roundtable": Thoughts on New Recruiting Guidelines

Raphielle Johnson — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 15:10:35 -0700

In advance of the upcoming college basketball season, I recently had the chance to connect with some college basketball writers to discuss some of the hot-button topics in college basketball as well as college sports as a whole. The first question, which can be found here, addressed the impact that conference realignment has had on collegiate athletics. Today's question will deal more with college basketball, and specifically the changes to the recruiting rules made by the NCAA.

Question: What are your thoughts on the new recruiting rules that the NCAA has put in place? Sufficient or no, and if not what would you like changed?

Peter Robert Casey (Five-Star Basketball)
Opening up the contact rules - unlimited texts, emails, calls - was a step in the right direction. Increased contact offers the chance to strengthen player-recruit relationships and gives both parties more opportunities to determine if there's a mutually good fit. Too much contact isn't always perceived in a positive way by kids. But at least now you don't have coaches strategically trying to skirt the limits. As long as it's not abused, I think it works.

I also feel that condensing the July live period was necessary. There were too many games in too many places. The whole thing was tiring and unsightly. Hopefully, though, the new-found time for kids is spent in the gym focused on getting better, while college coaches can have more time at home with their families and back on campus with their teams. Two weekends in April should offer plenty of room for coaches to evaluate talent.
Moving permissible official visits up to January 1st of a prospect's junior year at the schools' expense, seems sensible to me. Hopefully, it cleans up some the dirty behavior that was taking place.

Rob Dauster (Ballin' is a Habit)
I like them. I think that unlimited contact from coaches could end up getting overwhelming, but I think that a coach calling and texting too often will turn a player off from the program. I think bringing April back is important to evaluating the players, and I have no problem with players getting worked out on their recruiting visits or players being allowed to make official visits earlier. Anything that allows a coach to better evaluate a) a player's ability and b) a player's personality and work ethic is a good thing.
If anything is going to be changed, I think I would open July back up to 20 days. Not having coaches on the road isn't going to prevent people from hosting these tournaments and the players from participating. You might as well allow the coaches to be there.

Brian Ewart (VUHoops.com)
I love the new recruiting rules. There is no reason to restrict kids from visiting schools officially or otherwise, so allowing those visits to start during a players' Junior year is a positive step in that direction. It's also great that coaches can evaluate players in April now and that minimal changes were done to the July open period, coaches and players both benefit from having more opportunities for live evaluation.

I'm also not worried about the phone/text rules being changed. Coaches were skirting those rules with "burner" phones anyway. Now they can go ahead and do what they were doing above-board. If a kid is feeling harassed by the calls or texts then it will be counterproductive for a coach to continue. Coaches who use the calls and texts to build a relationship, rather than to harass will benefit -- and so should the recruits, who will have a better idea of who they are committing to play for.

Troy Machir (Ballin' is a Habit)
The recent changes made by the NCAA are an indication that they are actively trying to make things better. The progress they are making may not be substantial, but at least they are showing us that they realize things need to be changes. Most of the NCAA rules are archaic. I believe that the new text/phone call rules will give some of the power back to the recruits. Certainly there is much more that can be changed in regards to recruiting, but I do think this is a good first step in the right direction.

Ray Mernagh (NBE Sports)
I like the fact that the rules allow for a more thorough relationship between recruits and coaches as well as players and coaches. I also like that coaches will have more evaluation time because that will cut down on mistakes by staffs (hopefully) and cause more kids to end up at the right level for them. I hate the fact that the communication is unlimited. I think kids with parents who can monitor it will be fine because they'll set up boundaries the way good HS coaches/parents did back in the day, and if coaches cross those boundaries they'll be out of the running for the kid. But some kids are going to go from a semi-bothersome level of calls to a bombardment of texts/calls. That's not good for anyone, least of all kids that should be allowed to be kids at least a little bit.

Jon Pence (SCACCHoops.com)
The NCAA did a nice job of addressing a problem with runners by allowing coaches to be in contact with players earlier and more frequently. Hopefully this cuts out the need for third parties. The question is what loopholes were opened? One thing that is clear is that NCAA coaches have an innate ability to push the rules to the limit. My only concern is are the players protected from schools badgering them now? The word "unlimited" scares me when it comes to phone calls and texts.

Jon Teitel (CollegeHoops.net)
I am all for harsher recruiting rules: the amount of visits/calls/texts is already ridiculous, so to rescind any limits will make it a total free-for-all. If the NCAA allows a coach to send 1,000 private messages on Facebook to a recruit but prohibits a single message about that same player to be made public, I think such a double standard will just encourage schools to do unseemly things behind the scenes with no repercussions. I have no problem with a coach attending a high school player's games, letting him make an official visit to the college campus, or giving him a few calls/emails during the year. Just keep it in check so that the kid has time to enjoy being a kid instead of a highly-prized commodity. I am also a big believer in deterrence: make the rules clear, the penalties severe, instill some fear, and no agents allowed near.

Ben Weixlmann (Heard This Blog)
At first glance, I liked them a lot. Unlike many others, I don't really worry about the unlimited contact becoming an issue. Kids can choose to ignore whomever they want. After all, they do it already. It will force college coaches to be selective about how often they contact kids. I think bringing in an April period is also a win-win. Players will have more chances to get exposure, and coaches will be able to evaluate their progress more readily.

Off the top of my head, the only gripe I have that isn't currently being addressed is having kids play for AAU teams that aren't even anywhere close to their geographic location. When I see this happening, it really makes me wonder how much pull the shoe companies have, and how much illegal activity is still going on behind the scenes of AAU basketball.

My Thoughts
I like the moves made with regards to contact periods, which in theory should allow for better relationships between coaches and prospective student-athletes. That's been a big issue with regards to only allowing coaches to be out on the road for 20 days in July as well. That essentially put a large portion of the recruiting process into the hands of third parties: be it the more accepted scouting guru or the "middle man" than many feel is the most powerful voice on the grassroots circuit (inaccurate assumption in many cases). It should also help out the kids, as playing 20 days practically non-stop does them no good, and it's not like events weren't staged in periods made off limits by the NCAA. For the phone calls and texts: it probably makes it just as important for both sides to establish clear guidelines on how often they speak which is a good thing.

Next Question: What are your thoughts on the initiative to raise the value of a full scholarship (adding up to $2,000 to help reach the total cost of attendance)?

College Hoops "Roundtable": Thoughts on Conference Realignment

Raphielle Johnson — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 21:52:30 -0700

With the beginning of games that will count towards win/loss records on the horizon (first games are Monday), these final days before the start of the college basketball season seem to be a good time to discuss some of the off-season's hot topics. With that in mind I caught up with some bloggers and writers to see what their thoughts are on topics such as conference realignment, the new rules regarding recruiting and the scholarship model, and some preseason picks as well. First up: conference realignment, a topic that has ruffled feathers throughout the country in addition to putting college basketball "in its place" so to speak.

Question: What are your thoughts on conference realignment, and what solution do you have for the issue?

Peter Robert Casey (Five-Star Basketball)
I'm not an avid proponent of this trend. If realignment is genuinely intended to improve the academic image of an institution or put a struggling school on more stable financial ground, fine. It has merit. But if the motive's purely driven by chasing more television revenue dollars, then it sends the wrong message to kids - er, student-athletes.

From a fan's perspective, it disrupts age-old rivalries and traditions. I'm looking specifically at the Syracuse to the A.C.C. situation. I grew up following the Big East and have a hard time embracing this change. Pitt, fine. But, the ‘Cuse, a Garden staple? It just doesn't feel right.

Then again, this has nothing to do with hoops.

Rob Dauster (Ballin' is a Habit)
I don't like conference realignment. I don't like losing rivalries like Syracuse-Georgetown or Kansas-Missouri or West Virginia-Pitt. I absolutely despise the fact that the Big East will be a shell of its former self, both in basketball and believe it or not, football. But I've accepted it. Changes like this happen fairly often. In less than a decade, we're all going to be talking about how great the ACC is and every writer in the country is going to try their hand at comparing the league to the Big East in its basketball prime.

For a solution? Go back in time and hire smarter administrators. Can we do that?

Brian Ewart (VUHoops.com)
Conference realignment has really blown up the landscape in college sports. I really loved the Big East basketball product and that is sadly going to be forever changed by recent moved. It changes the way we all watch the game.

There is no solution though. Not unless the NCAA or some reincarnation of the College Football Association takes over all television rights for all of college football once again. Taking TV money out of conference hands would make that revenue source independent of conference affiliation and most schools would probably tend to stay where they were.

That won't happen, so the best answer is to hope that it all works out and grows back into something that we all still want to watch.

Troy Machir (Ballin' is a Habit)
On paper, the notion of conference realignment kinda makes sense I guess. But if you have ever studied European History or Government or anything like that at all, then you know that on paper, Communism kinda made sense too. Unfortunately, in practice, both Communism and conference expansion was/is absolutely atrocious.

The only way I would approve of conference realignment is if it was done from a geographical standpoint. Get Marquette and Cincinnati out of the Big East. I dare you to try and convince me that Milwaukee, WI is somehow in the eastern part of the United States. The same goes for Louisiana Tech being in the Western Athletic Conference. If you want to realign conferences, that's fine, but realign them so each conference makes sense from a geographical standpoint. Do you know how difficult it is for the average to below-average fan to process why a school from Tampa, FL is in the same conference as a school from Providence, RI?

Ray Mernagh (NBE Sports)
Conference realignment... has that been a big topic lately? I don't see a solution to the actual realigning but I do know what's worked for me personally as a solution: I've stopped worrying about it. Sorry if that's simplistic and intelligently flawed reasoning, but I just don't give a damn anymore. Let's watch games and let all the cough cough cough academics figure out what's best for the cough cough cough amateur athletes that they employ.

Jon Pence (SCACCHoops.com)
In general, I hate change. I believe in round robin conference play, every team participating in their conference tourney, the traditional 3-point play, and long slow, wet kisses. Sorry, I had a flashback to Kevin Costner's line in Bull Durham. In all seriousness, basketball was an afterthought in conference realignment and we all know it. That said, the solution is to change with the times or get passed by. Look at the Big East, or what's left of it, to see what happens when you sit on your hands. Conferences like the ACC and Big 12 were proactive with realignment and were strengthened by new their new additions.

Jon Teitel (CollegeHoops.net)
I think it has gotten totally out of control and unfortunately I do not see it getting resolved anytime soon. One of the main factors in originally organizing teams by conference was geography, so the concept of a team from Texas or Idaho in the same conference as an East Coast school just does not make a lot of logistical sense. However, I can understand the financial motivation: it is hard to blame a school for trying to seeking out "greener" pastures if it uses that money for the betterment of its entire student body. I think the actual solution is that the marketplace will dictate who goes where. My own solution would be to have kept things the way they were, but that ship has sailed. I would like to see several geographic power conferences spread throughout the country with 8-12 teams each (16 seems a bit excessive) who play each other twice in the regular season, have a conference tournament, and stay put for at least a decade so that some rivalries can develop and continue.

Ben Weixlmann (Heard This Blog)
If I were to describe this situation in one word, I would chose "headache". Rumors continue to fly left and right. Aside from that, as a proponent of mid-majors and smaller schools having the ability to compete for national supremacy, I don't like it in the least. Creating "super conferences" would inevitably create an imbalance in funding for the affiliated programs and leave those on the outside with little chance to keep up.

My Thoughts
I hate realignment. Period. It would be one thing if this "evolution" seemed to be in the best interest of the student-athletes at large, but how much good does this all do for the young men and women who don't play a revenue sport? They surely can't fly charters to every road game, which could ultimately result in more missed class time. "King Football" calls the shots, as the increased inventory that comes with larger leagues allows athletic departments to spend more money on facilities, shinier weights and things of that effect.

Remember the uproar about there being just one Georgetown/Syracuse matchup on this season's Big East slate? How about there not being a meeting, or if they do it gets relegated to December? That's just one example; one could ponder the effects of pending moves (Boise State football to the Big East while their other sports play...where?) for hours on end. The most frustrating thing is how there are so many rules put in place to "save" the student-athletes from themselves, yet there isn't much preventing the school presidents from messing things up. Pretty obvious that some of them could use a little more structure themselves.

Next question: What are your thoughts on the new recruiting rules that the NCAA has put in place? Sufficient or no, and if not what would you like changed?

Jon Teitel's All-Conference Picks, Part Two

Jon Teitel — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 00:14:22 -0700

In the latest installment in our 2011-12 preview series, CHN writer Jon Teitel took some time selecting his preseason all-conference selections for 31 conferences as well as the Independents. Below are the picks for the final 16 conferences, and Part One can be found here.

MAC
G: Trey Ziegler (Central Michigan)
G: Zach Filzen (Buffalo)
F: Justin Greene (Kent State)
F: Julian Mavunga (Miami-Ohio)
F: Jarrod Jones (Ball St.)

MEAC
G: Darrion Pellum (Hampton)
G: Landon Clement (North Carolina Central)
G: Kwame Morgan II (Hampton)
F: Dewayne Jackson (Morgan St.)
C: Kyle O'Quinn (Norfolk St.)

Missouri Valley
G: Colt Ryan (Evansville)
G: Antoine Young (Creighton)
G: Anthony James (Northern Iowa)
F: Doug McDermott (Creighton)
F: Kyle Weems (Missouri St.)

Mountain West
G: Oscar Bellfield (UNLV)
G: Kendall Williams (New Mexico)
F: Garlon Green (TCU)
F: Drew Gordon (New Mexico)
F: Chace Stanback (UNLV)

Northeast
G: Robby Ptacek (Central Connecticut State)
G: Shane Gibson (Sacred Heart)
G: Tyler Murray (Wagner)
F: Ken Horton (Central Connecticut State)
F: Alex Francis (Bryant)

Ohio Valley
G: TyShwan Edmondson (Austin Peay)
G: Jeremy Granger (Eastern Illinois)
F: Kevin Murphy (Tennessee Tech)
F: Leon Powell (Southeast Missouri State)
F: Kenny Moore (Tennessee State)

Pac-12
G: Allen Crabbe (California)
G: Jorge Gutierrez (California)
G: Trent Lockett (Arizona State)
F: Reeves Nelson (UCLA)
F: Josh Owens (Stanford)

Patriot
G: CJ McCollum (Lehigh)
G: Jordan Sugars (Navy )
G: Devin Brown (Holy Cross)
F: Ella Ellis (Army)
C: Mike Muscala (Bucknell)

SEC
G: Dee Bost (Mississippi State)
G: John Jenkins (Vanderbilt)
F: JaMychal Green (Alabama)
F: Terrence Jones (Kentucky)
F: Jeffery Taylor (Vanderbilt)

Southern
G: Ben Drayton III (Georgia Southern)
G: Drew Spradlin (Elon)
G: Omar Wattad (Chattanooga)
F: Omar Carter (Appalachian St.)
F: Jake Cohen (Davidson)

Southland
G: Fred Hunter (Nicholls St.)
G: Melvin Johnson III (UTSA)
F: Jeromie Hill (UTSA)
F: Patrick Richard (McNeese St.)
C: Jereal Scott (Stephen F. Austin)

SWAC
G: Lawrence Johnson-Danner (Texas Southern)
G: Jenirro Bush (Jackson St.)
G: Savalance Townsend (Arkansas-Pine Bluff)
F: Casey Cantey (Alabama A&M)
F: Daniel Broughton (Arkansas-Pine Bluff)

Summit
G: Frank Gaines (IPFW)
G: Reggie Hamilton (Oakland)
G: Nate Wolters (South Dakota St.)
F: Dominique Morrison (Oral Roberts)
F: Alex Young (IUPUI)

Sun Belt
G: Gregg Gant (Florida Atlantic)
G: Fred Brown (UL Monroe)
F: Chase Hallam (Denver)
F: DeJuan Wright (FIU)
C: Augustine Rubit (South Alabama)

WCC
G: Kevin Foster (Santa Clara)
F: Elias Harris (Gonzaga)
F: Rob Jones (Saint Mary's)
C: Robert Sacre (Gonzaga)
G: Matthew Dellavedova (Saint Mary's)

WAC
G: Deonte Burton (Nevada)
G: Zane Johnson (Hawaii)
G: Brockeith Pane (Utah State)
F: Dario Hunt (Nevada)
C: Kyle Barone (Idaho)

Iona's Glover Named Preseason MAAC Player of the Year

Press Release — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:56:02 -0700

Springfield, Mass. - Iona College senior forward Mike Glover has been named the 2011-2012 MAAC Men's Basketball Preseason Player of the Year, as selected by the league's 10 head coaches.

Glover is joined on the first team by Fairfield University junior guard Derek Needham and senior center Ryan Olander, Iona senior guard Scott Machado and Rider University senior guard/forward Novar Gadson.

Glover, who was named to the Preseason Top 50 List for the John R. Wooden Award, ranked 48th in the nation in scoring last season, netting 18.4 points per game for the Gaels. He also tied for 21st place on the NCAA rebounding chart with 10.1 caroms an outing during his junior campaign. Glover proved he was an expert marksman last season, connecting on a conference-high 61 percent of his attempts from the field.

Needham was an All-MAAC First Team selection last season. He ranked sixth in the MAAC in scoring, averaging 14.1 points per outing for the Stags. He also ranked third in the league in assists (4.5 per game), fifth in steals (1.4 per game) and 13th in free throw percentage (70 percent) during his sophomore campaign.

Olander, an All-MAAC Second Team choice last season, was second on the team in scoring as a junior with 10.4 points per game, good for 21st place on the MAAC scoring chart. He also recorded 6.8 rebounds per game (ninth in the MAAC) along with 2.1 blocks (third) an outing for the Stags. Olander owned a 53.2 percent field goal percentage, ranking him second in the league behind Glover.

Machado was a member of the All-MAAC First Team last season. He is the league's top assists leader, dishing out down 7.6 a night for the Gaels, good for second in the nation. Machado also contributed 13.2 points per game (eighth in the MAAC) and netted 67.5 percent of his shots from the charity stripe (15th).

Gadson, a 2010-11 All-MAAC Second Team pick, fin- ished his junior campaign seventh on the MAAC scoring list,netting13.7pointsanightfortheBroncs. Hefinished 15th in rebounding last season, pulling down 5.8 boards per game. Gadson also ranked ninth in the MAAC with his 47 percent field goal percentage.

2011-2012 Preseason All-MAAC Teams

First Team
Derek Needham, Fairfield Jr. G 5-11 Dolton, Ill.
Ryan Olander, Fairfield Sr. C 7-0 Mansfield, Conn.
Mike Glover, Iona Sr. F 6-7 Bronx, N.Y.
Scott Machado, Iona Sr. G 6-1 Queens, N.Y.
Novar Gadson, Rider Sr. G/F 6-7 Philadelphia, Pa.

Second Team
Gaby Belardo, Canisius Jr. G 6-2 San Juan, P.R.
Rakim Sanders, Fairfield Sr. G 6-2 Pawtucket, R.I.
Erik Etherly, Loyola Jr. F 6-7 Alexandria, Va.
Shane Walker, Loyola Sr. F 6-10 Northampton, England
George Beamon, Manhattan Jr. G/F 6-4 Roslyn, N.Y.

Third Team
Kyle Smyth, Iona Jr. G 6-4 River Edge, N.J.
Jeff Jones, Rider Sr. G 6-4 Chester, Pa.
Daniel Stewart, Rider So. F 6-7 Philadelphia, Pa.
Darius Conley, Saint Peter's Jr. F 6-7 Newport News, Va.
OD Anosike, Siena Jr. F 6-8 Staten Island, N.Y.

2011-2012 MAAC Preseason Player of the Year:
Mike Glover, Iona

MAAC Hoops

Iona Tabbed Preseason Favorite

Press Release — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:21:14 -0700

Springfield, Mass. - Iona College, the runner-up in last year's title game, is the preseason favorite to win the 2012 MAAC Men's Basketball Championship, according to the MAAC Pre- season Coaches' Poll.

Iona received eight of the first-place votes and 97 points, followed by last season's preseason pick Fairfield University,which received two first-place votes and 92 points. Loyola University (Maryland) finished in third with 76 points.

Rider University followed in fourth place with 71 points, while defending champion Saint Peter's College took fifth with 52points. Siena College received 44 points to finish sixth, followed by Niagara University (42 points) in seventh, Manhattan College (33) in eighth, Canisius College (25) in ninth and Marist College (18) in 10th to round out the poll.

Last season, the Gaels made their first appearance in the MAAC Championship final since winning the league crown in 2006 and also reached the title game of the 2011 CollegeInsider. com Postseason Tournament. Iona returns three starters from that squad -- preseason All-MAAC First Team picks Mike Glover and Scott Machado and Third Team member Kyle Smyth. Glover, named to the Preseason Top 50 List for the John R. Wooden Award, is the league's top returning scorer(18.4ppg) and rebounder (10.1rpg).

Machado finished second in the nation in assists per game with 7.6 an outing. Smyth averaged 10.1 points per game during his sophomore campaign, connecting on 45.1 percent of his shots from the field and 39.3 percent from three-point range. Second-year head coach Tim Cluess will also look to senior Jermel Jenkins, junior Lamont Jones and sophomore Sean Armand to help lead the Maroon and Gold in their quest for an eighth MAAC Championship.

Fairfield returns four starters and eight letterwinners that helped earn the MAAC regular season title last season. The Stags, who previously registered a league-high scoring defense of 58.3 points per game, will be led by preseason All-MAAC First Team selections Derek Needham and Ryan Olander as well as Rakim Sanders of the Second Team. Needham recorded 14.1 points and 4.5 assists per game during his sophomore campaign, while Olander averaged 10.4 points per game and shot 53.2 percent from the floor.

First-year head coach Sydney Johnson will also rely onthe efforts of juniors Colin Nickerson and Sean Crawford along with sophomores Maurice Barrow and Jamel Fields as the Stags look to earn the program's first MAAC championship title in 15 years.

MAAC Hoops

Jon Teitel's All-Conference Picks, Part One

Jon Teitel — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 23:08:21 -0700

In the latest installment in our 2011-12 preview series, CHN writer Jon Teitel took some time selecting his preseason all-conference selections for 31 conferences as well as the Independents. Below are the picks, which should be interesting to look back on come March.

America East
G: Darryl Partin (Boston University)
G: Chris De La Rosa (UMBC)
G: Gerald McLemore (Maine)
F: Ferg Myrick (New Hampshire)
F: Brian Voelkel (Vermont)

Atlantic 10
G: Tu Holloway (Xavier)
G: Ramone Moore (Temple)
G: Tony Taylor (George Washington)
F: Chris Gaston (Fordham)
C: Andrew Nicholson (St. Bonaventure)

ACC
G: Durand Scott (Miami)
G: Kendall Marshall (North Carolina)
F: Harrison Barnes (North Carolina)
F: Tyler Zeller (North Carolina)
F: Mike Scott (Virginia)

Atlantic Sun
G: Markeith Cummings (Kennesaw State)
G: Ian Clark (Belmont)
F: Torrey Craig (USC Upstate)
F: Isiah Brown (ETSU)
C: Mick Hedgepeth (Belmont)

Big 12
G: Marcus Denmon (Missouri)
G: Scott Christopherson (Iowa St.)
F: Perry Jones III (Baylor)
F: Khris Middleton (Texas A&M)
F: Thomas Robinson (Kansas)

Big East
G: Ashton Gibbs (Pittsburgh)
G: Darius Johnson-Odom (Marquette)
F: Tim Abromaitis (Notre Dame)
F: Kevin Jones (West Virginia)
F: Kris Joseph (Syracuse)

Big Sky
G: Will Cherry (Montana)
G: Charles Odum (Portland State)
G: Damian Lillard (Weber State)
F: Kyle Bullinger (Weber ST)
F: Scott Bamforth (Weber ST)

Big South
G: Matt Dickey (UNC Asheville)
G: Nick Barbour (High Point)
G: JP Primm (UNC Asheville)
F: Al'Lonzo Coleman (Presbyterian)
F: Stan Okoye (VMI)

Big Ten
G: William Buford (Ohio State)
G: Jordan Taylor (Wisconsin)
F: Trevor Mbakwe (Minnesota)
F: John Shurna (Northwestern)
F: Jared Sullinger (Ohio State)

Big West
G: Casper Ware (Long Beach State)
G: Phil Martin (UC Riverside)
G: Orlando Johnson (UCSB)
G/F: James Nunnally (UCSB)
F: TJ Robinson (Long Beach State)

CAA
G: Kent Bazemore (Old Dominion)
G: Bradford Burgess (VCU)
F: Samme Givens (Drexel)
F: Ryan Pearson (George Mason)
F: Quinn McDowell (William & Mary)

Conference USA
G: DeAndre Kane (Marshall)
G: Marcus Jordan (UCF)
G/F Kendall Timmons (Tulane)
F: Arsalan Kazemi (Rice)
F: Cameron Moore (UAB)

Horizon
G: Ray McCallum (Detroit)
G: Trevon Harmon (Cleveland State)
G: Chase Simon (Detroit)
F: Ben Averkamp (Loyola)
F: Khyle Marshall (Butler)

Independents
G: Isaiah Wilkerson (NJIT)
G: Sterling Carter (Seattle)
F: Stephon Carter (CA State Bakersfield)
F: Aaron Broussard (Seattle)
C: Antwan Carter (Longwood)

Ivy
G: Noruwa Agho (Columbia)
G: Zack Rosen (Penn)
F: Keith Wright (Harvard)
F: Ian Hummer (Princeton)
C: Greg Mangano (Yale)

MAAC
G: Derek Needham (Fairfield)
G: Scott Machado (Iona)
F: Mike Glover (Iona)
F: Novar Gadson (Rider)
F: George Beamon (Manhattan)

Next: MAC through WAC