Gamecocks 2025-2026 Season

[JstVisiting]

A quick check of the NET reveals that we've surpassed UConn in Q1 wins and are now tied with Texas at nine. UCLA leads the way with 14, and I'm not going to say what I want to say about them or the B1G.

I'll say what I am thinking and you can agree or not -

Before RT destroyed my love for college baseball, I often complained Clemson had figured out a much better way of scheduling OOC than we did. For a national title contender in that sport, there was a big tier drop of opponents from the top 35 or 40 or so to 45 and below.

Clemson scheduled lots of OOC opponents in the 40-75 range. For a top 5 team, they were functionally not much different than playing someone in the 100's, but MUCH better for computer rankings. It would frustrate me to no end that their coaches understood this, while our coach would schedule the 150 teams*, so we would often find ourselves a few spots behind in the end of year computer rankings, despite a much more impressive performance against peer teams, including Clemson.

In women's basketball, an elite contender faces a "we could lose this" tier drop around 12 to 15 or so, and there is arguably a tier within the top 15, especially if you're playing them at home. A hypothetical conference schedule that provides lots of opponents in the 12-50 range would give many Q1 wins, while providing few of the "uh oh. Better come ready to play!" challenges of a conference schedule with many teams in the 4 to 15 range.

Hypothetically speaking.

* at least we never gave that limited baseball coach another job that required understanding anything more complex than "should I pull that starter?" Could you even imagine!

 

[WBBTakeover]

I'll say what I am thinking and you can agree or not -

Before RT destroyed my love for college baseball, I often complained Clemson had figured out a much better way of scheduling OOC than we did. For a national title contender in that sport, there was a big tier drop of opponents from the top 35 or 40 or so to 45 and below.

Clemson scheduled lots of OOC opponents in the 40-75 range. For a top 5 team, they were functionally not much different than playing someone in the 100's, but MUCH better for computer rankings. It would frustrate me to no end that their coaches understood this, while our coach would schedule the 150 teams*, so we would often find ourselves a few spots behind in the end of year computer rankings, despite a much more impressive performance against peer teams, including Clemson.

In women's basketball, an elite contender faces a "we could lose this" tier drop around 12 to 15 or so, and there is arguably a tier within the top 15, especially if you're playing them at home. A hypothetical conference schedule that provides lots of opponents in the 12-50 range would give many Q1 wins, while providing few of the "uh oh. Better come ready to play!" challenges of a conference schedule with many teams in the 4 to 15 range.

Hypothetically speaking.

* at least we never gave that limited baseball coach another job that required understanding anything more complex than "should I pull that starter?" Could you even imagine!

Yes, you've got the gist of what I'm suggesting. The B1G programs do it well, which is why they have such high NET ratings (year in and year out) for teams that appear to be closer to average. I use Stanford (not an B1G team, of couse) as an example. How is it that they can beat Oregon and Washington, come within 3 points of Tennessee, but can't beat ACC teams that have poorer NETs than they used to have?

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I'll say what I am thinking and you can agree or not -

Before RT destroyed my love for college baseball, I often complained Clemson had figured out a much better way of scheduling OOC than we did. For a national title contender in that sport, there was a big tier drop of opponents from the top 35 or 40 or so to 45 and below.

Clemson scheduled lots of OOC opponents in the 40-75 range. For a top 5 team, they were functionally not much different than playing someone in the 100's, but MUCH better for computer rankings. It would frustrate me to no end that their coaches understood this, while our coach would schedule the 150 teams*, so we would often find ourselves a few spots behind in the end of year computer rankings, despite a much more impressive performance against peer teams, including Clemson.

In women's basketball, an elite contender faces a "we could lose this" tier drop around 12 to 15 or so, and there is arguably a tier within the top 15, especially if you're playing them at home. A hypothetical conference schedule that provides lots of opponents in the 12-50 range would give many Q1 wins, while providing few of the "uh oh. Better come ready to play!" challenges of a conference schedule with many teams in the 4 to 15 range.

Hypothetically speaking.

* at least we never gave that limited baseball coach another job that required understanding anything more complex than "should I pull that starter?" Could you even imagine!

Very charitable to say top 150. Tanner scheduled teams i did not know existed pretty much every year.

very Mulkey -esque.

I always thought and still think
the Clemson series setup was kind of dumb. Just alternate the series and give the road team two mid weeks.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

Yes, you've got the gist of what I'm suggesting. The B1G programs do it well, which is why they have such high NET ratings (year in and year out) for teams that appear to be closer to average. I use Stanford (not an B1G team, of couse) as an example. How is it that they can beat Oregon and Washington, come within 3 points of Tennessee, but can't beat ACC teams that have poorer NETs than they used to have?

I'd guess travel plus young team.

And maybe those teams not being all that strong really.

Their record vs ACC is surprising.

 

[WBBTakeover]

I'd guess travel plus young team.

And maybe those teams not being all that strong really.

Their record vs ACC is surprising.

Youth? Maybe. Their top three scorers are all juniors, though.

Travel? Cal has 20 ACC regular season wins in two seasons (made the NCAA Tournament last year) to Stanford's 14.

On paper, they should be better. When you see them play, it's apparent why their record is what it is.

I agree that Washington and Oregon aren't that good (which is why it's frustrating for people to rely so heavily on NET to evaluate teams).

 

[triaddukefan]

I figure for every negative post I need to balance it out with a positive one

 

[WBBTakeover]

I figure for every negative post I need to balance it out with a positive one

Good for him for considering what should be obvious, but one good take doesn't erase his litany of terrible ones.

In other words, I don't care what Mitchell Northam has to say.

 

[cancontent]

Good for him for considering what should be obvious, but one good take doesn't erase his litany of terrible ones.

In other words, I don't care what Mitchell Northam has to say.

Ummm, I think @triaddukefan is referring to his posts about greedy chickens, etc. 😉

 

[triaddukefan]

Ummm, I think @triaddukefan is referring to his posts about greedy chickens, etc. 😉

Or mustard in BBQ, or subpar peaches. Well lemme find another positive SC post 🥹

 

[BRS24]

 

[Coburn]

 

[GamecockFam]

I think the Kitts statement was pretty much already known, but that Watkins statement sounds very hopeful. It sounds very direct, like a foregone conclusion, but I'll have to hear the interview first. Anyone have a recording?

 

[Coburn]

I think the Kitts statement was pretty much already known, but that Watkins statement sounds very hopeful. It sounds very direct, like a foregone conclusion, but I'll have to hear the interview first. Anyone have a recording?

5:30 mark

 

[WBBTakeover]

Hmm, so that would be Raven, Ta'Niya, Maryam, and Madina. Madina was always the wildcard here because of the possibility at pursuing another year of eligibility, but she's done enough to elevate her WNBA stock and feel pretty good about where she lands.

With three starters gone, Chloe will definitely be needed.

And speaking of Madina, "Big Mama" was named co-SEC Player of the Week AND USBWA Player of the Week!!!!!!

 

[jumpstart]

Can you imagine Watkins guarding Strong and Raven guarding Fudd?

 

[WBBTakeover]

Can you imagine Watkins guarding Strong and Raven guarding Fudd?

I'd like to see what UConn has for an Edwards-Okot-Tournebize lineup instead. I already know that Raven can more than hold her own against Fudd.

 

[USMC(ret)]

Any idea how long Adhel Tac will be out?

 

[WBBTakeover]

Next year's frontcourt will be STACKED! The backcourt will be a little thin, however. I don't know how we address that. Mouse has earned a shot at starting, but it's going to take a superstar type of talent to replace what Raven brings (and while I love Mouse, she's not a superstar PG at this stage in her career). Maybe we could start two PGs--Mouse and a portal PG (who may be more of a scorer)? It'll be interesting to see how things shake out and to see what's ACCessible.

 

[donalddoowop]

I remember reading how displeased SC fans were with Raven. They complained about her defense and lack of offense. It surprised me because I saw her play in high school and thought she was going to be super in college. After watching her play I thought the complaints were valid. However, she is now playing as well as thought she would. As far as holding her own against Fudd, did she do that last season?

 

[visitingcock]

Next year's frontcourt will be STACKED! The backcourt will be a little thin, however. I don't know how we address that. Mouse has earned a shot at starting, but it's going to take a superstar type of talent to replace what Raven brings (and while I love Mouse, she's not a superstar PG at this stage in her career). Maybe we could start two PGs--Mouse and a portal PG (who may be more of a scorer)? It'll be interesting to see how things shake out and to see what's ACCessible.

No. Don’t start two pgs. Find one more on the portal (I still dream of Jaloni Cambridge whose sister graduated this year) or an international. Tessa splits time at wing and shooting guard with our two sophs next year.occasionally move Chloe to wing in a big lineup.

 

[JstVisiting]

I remember reading how displeased SC fans were with Raven. They complained about her defense and lack of offense. It surprised me because I saw her play in high school and thought she was going to be super in college.

I think the injury took away a bit of her explosiveness and forced her to change her style of play. It took a couple years for her to figure it out.

 

[WBBTakeover]

I remember reading how displeased SC fans were with Raven. They complained about her defense and lack of offense. It surprised me because I saw her play in high school and thought she was going to be super in college. After watching her play I thought the complaints were valid. However, she is now playing as well as thought she would. As far as holding her own against Fudd, did she do that last season?

That's not at all what happened.

 

[WBBTakeover]

No. Don’t start two pgs. Find one more on the portal (I still dream of Jaloni Cambridge whose sister graduated this year) or an international. Tessa splits time at wing and shooting guard with our two sophs next year.occasionally move Chloe to wing in a big lineup.

Raven and Ta'Niya, a quasi PG, started together this year. What's the problem?

Ideally, you'd like to have continuity at the PG position at a program like this one. Mouse provides that. Whoever comes in the portal should complement, not replace, her (unless she leaves first).

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I remember reading how displeased SC fans were with Raven. They complained about her defense and lack of offense. It surprised me because I saw her play in high school and thought she was going to be super in college. After watching her play I thought the complaints were valid. However, she is now playing as well as thought she would. As far as holding her own against Fudd, did she do that last season?

I do not recall anyone ever criticizing her defense.

Where her offense struggled, her ballhandking, defense, and rebounding more than made up for it.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

maddy
tessa
Makeer
Mcdowell
Jerzy.

Not quite thin so much as maybe missing a second pg.

Keep in the mind the post depth is going to require forwards to play wing at
times in big lineups.