Anyone have insight on Moss for the future of her HS time?

 

I saw something about POY in an earlier comment and understand the D1 comment and I would like to add that "IF" SK gets back to S16 and "IF" Tolliver breaks Male / Female scoring record at SK and "IF" (this is an optional "IF" because I do not think it matters) she signs D1 there should be no question about POY in NKY this year. Tolliver (IMO) :jump:

 

Great student, athlete and person! They all are!

 

If I have to bet I'd say Sydney will either end up at Lakota West or Mt. Noter Dame in OHIO

Edited February 26, 200917 yr by Ram
Rule 13

The 8th is not very competitive so is there any doubt SK will make it to Diddle?

 

Every parent of a program is understandably biased. In the end, when the coach’s vote for “their” top 10 players in each division, including POY, they take into account a much bigger picture than box scores. They have scouted these players for years and prepare a game-plan each night…so they know them better than all of us and know what they bring to the table.

 

Sorry panda…agreed, this is a 9th region thread.

 

I think ebrown5606 was confused about this being a 9th Region thread.

 

However, I think he makes a very valid point that Chelsea Tolliver is the POY for all of Northern KY. She does it all, and does it better than everyone else. A coach's dream.

Courtney plays for the same organization that helped expose these young athletes last year:

 

Casey Jackson - NDA - Youngstown State

Tessa Elkins - Lakota West - Murray State

Alexis Rogers - Lakota West - Duke

Moriah Hodge - Glen Este - Indiana State

Jacy Bradley - Boone - Saint Louis

Kelsey Sharkey - St. Ursula - App State

Gabby Smith - Mt. Notre Dame - Vanderbilt

 

Talk about a fun team to watch! Expensive but fun....played at Chapel Hill, NC, Knoxville,Louisville, Los Angles etc.

 

I know that Duke, Indiana State, and Vanderbilt are D1 schools. But, what about the rest of the names on this list?

 

I have heard of Murray State, but never heard of Youngstown State or Saint Louis (State?). I don't even know what "App State" means. Does anyone know what Division these schools are?

I know that Duke, Indiana State, and Vanderbilt are D1 schools. But, what about the rest of the names on this list?

 

I have heard of Murray State, but never heard of Youngstown State or Saint Louis (State?). I don't even know what "App State" means. Does anyone know what Division these schools are?

 

 

All are D1. To put it into perspective it equates to about $500,000 in scholarship monies for the group.

 

For the record it is St. Louis University, and Appalacian State. Sorry for abbrieviating the school names.

I think ebrown5606 was confused about this being a 9th Region thread.

 

However, I think he makes a very valid point that Chelsea Tolliver is the POY for all of Northern KY. She does it all, and does it better than everyone else. A coach's dream.

 

 

Since we are bound and determined to talk about the 8th who are the top ten in your mind on this list Bomb Squad or EBrown? I gather you will start with Chelsea and you will get no arguement from me on her. Very talented.

I know that Duke, Indiana State, and Vanderbilt are D1 schools. But, what about the rest of the names on this list?

 

I have heard of Murray State, but never heard of Youngstown State or Saint Louis (State?). I don't even know what "App State" means. Does anyone know what Division these schools are?

 

St. Louis is in the A10 along with Xavier, Temple, Dayton, UMass, Charlotte, etc. This year they have played Kansas, Oklahoma, Princeton, Wyoming, TCU and Colorado. That is a BIG TIME schedule.

 

Youngstown State is in the Horizon League along with Butler, Valparaiso, Loyola and Wright State. They have played Pittsburgh, Toledo, Kent State, Buffalo and Central Michigan to go along with their conference schedule.

 

Appalachian State plays in the Southern Conference and has played Wake Forest, Georgetown, Witchita State, Marshall and East Carolina this season. These are all three big time, Division I programs in good conferences.

 

Not a big college fan I assume.

Since we are bound and determined to talk about the 8th who are the top ten in your mind on this list Bomb Squad or EBrown? I gather you will start with Chelsea and you will get no arguement from me on her. Very talented.

 

Sorry everyone, I just noticed that someone had mentioned NKPOY and chimed in with CT. :isurrender:

 

All the players mentioned on this 9th thread are great kids and ball players.!

St. Louis is in the A10 along with Xavier, Temple, Dayton, UMass, Charlotte, etc. This year they have played Kansas, Oklahoma, Princeton, Wyoming, TCU and Colorado. That is a BIG TIME schedule.

 

Youngstown State is in the Horizon League along with Butler, Valparaiso, Loyola and Wright State. They have played Pittsburgh, Toledo, Kent State, Buffalo and Central Michigan to go along with their conference schedule.

 

Appalachian State plays in the Southern Conference and has played Wake Forest, Georgetown, Witchita State, Marshall and East Carolina this season. These are all three big time, Division I programs in good conferences.

 

Not a big college fan I assume.

 

"Big time, Division I programs"?

 

Really?

 

I was kind of willing to allow you this overly exuberant claim - until today.

 

Let's take a look at the facts:

 

St. Louis (12-18) did play Oklahoma and Xavier. Got smoked by Oklahoma (87/61) and lost by three to Xavier. Not too bad. They went 3-13 against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

Youngstown State (3-27) Did play Green Bay twice. Lost both (62/42) and (79/42). They went 1-13 against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

Appalachian State (9-22) Didn't play any top 40 team. Of the 9 games they won, 2 were against Wofford (5-25). They went 0-5 against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

As a group, these three schools have a 24-67 (26%) record while playing in notoriously weak conferences.

 

The group went 4-31 (11%) against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

Maybe that's why I had never heard of these "Big Time" Division I programs.

"Big time, Division I programs"?

 

Really?

 

I was kind of willing to allow you this overly exuberant claim - until today.

 

Let's take a look at the facts:

 

St. Louis (12-18) did play Oklahoma and Xavier. Got smoked by Oklahoma (87/61) and lost by three to Xavier. Not too bad. They went 3-13 against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

Youngstown State (3-27) Did play Green Bay twice. Lost both (62/42) and (79/42). They went 1-13 against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

Appalachian State (9-22) Didn't play any top 40 team. Of the 9 games they won, 2 were against Wofford (5-25). They went 0-5 against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

As a group, these three schools have a 24-67 (26%) record while playing in notoriously weak conferences.

 

The group went 4-31 (11%) against the "noteworthy" teams that you highlighted.

 

Maybe that's why I had never heard of these "Big Time" Division I programs.

 

It does not matter what the records of these schools are these girls are getting scholarships to Division I programs and a great education to make the college experience easier financially. Many of these players are going to be great at the college level and in some cases totally turn these programs around.

It does not matter what the records of these schools are these girls are getting scholarships to Division I programs and a great education to make the college experience easier financially. Many of these players are going to be great at the college level and in some cases totally turn these programs around.

 

I think it's great that these girls are getting scholarship opportunities.

 

I'm happy for them, and their families.

 

Who could argue against a scholarship opportunity at any level?

 

However, the importance of a scholarship is not the point that is being contested.

 

We are talking about the level of basketball being played. Not the level of education being obtained.

 

An (enthusiastic) claim was made that these are "Big Time Division I Programs".

 

That sparked my interest.

 

Being that I had never heard of these schools, I decided to take a look.

 

I simply provided some data points that reflect the level of basketball being played at these "Big Time Division I Programs".

 

Feel free to draw your own conclusions. I believe I have made mine very clear.

I think it's great that these girls are getting scholarship opportunities.

 

I'm happy for them, and their families.

 

Who could argue against a scholarship opportunity at any level?

 

However, the importance of a scholarship is not the point that is being contested.

 

We are talking about the level of basketball being played. Not the level of education being obtained.

 

An (enthusiastic) claim was made that these are "Big Time Division I Programs".

 

That sparked my interest.

 

Being that I had never heard of these schools, I decided to take a look.

 

I simply provided some data points that reflect the level of basketball being played at these "Big Time Division I Programs".

 

Feel free to draw your own conclusions. I believe I have made mine very clear.

 

 

 

If your daughter gets a scholarship for athletics or academics I will congratulate her for her awesome accomplishment that obviously took a lot of time and commitment to achieve. I will not spend time looking for reason to try and diminish her accomplishment or success.

I could not have put it any better. Players (especially girls , since there is limited professional opportunities) should attend the school that is the best ALL AROUND fit for them. The level of the program (D1, D2, etc.) should only be a fraction of the equation.

If your daughter gets a scholarship for athletics or academics I will congratulate her for her awesome accomplishment that obviously took a lot of time and commitment to achieve. I will not spend time looking for reason to try and diminish her accomplishment or success.

 

Absolutely dead-on.

I could not have put it any better. Players (especially girls , since there is limited professional opportunities) should attend the school that is the best ALL AROUND fit for them. The level of the program (D1, D2, etc.) should only be a fraction of the equation.

 

 

Couldn't agree more.

 

Some of these player's I'm sure had opportunities to choose between multiple offers from bigger, more successful, more well known programs, but chose to commit to the school they felt was the perfect all around fit.

 

In this day and time, to get an opportunity to get a "free" college education while pursuing their dream of playing basketball...is incredible for the kid and their parents. No way anything can diminish this accomplishment.

Couldn't agree more.

 

Some of these player's I'm sure had opportunities to choose between multiple offers from bigger, more successful, more well known programs, but chose to commit to the school they felt was the perfect all around fit.

 

In this day and time, to get an opportunity to get a "free" college education while pursuing their dream of playing basketball...is incredible for the kid and their parents. No way anything can diminish this accomplishment.

 

Let's be clear on the subject.

 

An overly enthusiastic claim was made:

 

"These are all three big time, Division I programs in good conferences."

 

This is the subject that I responded to.

 

I supplied the data which accurately reflects the status of these "big time, Division I programs in good conferences".

 

After having been confronted with the facts - a few people simply chose to change the topic of the debate.

 

 

So, just to reiterate, I think it's great that these girls are getting scholarship opportunities.

 

I'm happy for them, and their families.

 

Who could argue against a scholarship opportunity at any level?

 

However, the importance of a scholarship is not the point that is being contested.

 

We are talking about the level of basketball being played. Not the level of education being obtained.

 

 

I don't know how I could make this more clear.

 

 

I would assume that if an individual is willing to make an enthusiastic claim - then they (or other like-minded individuals) would at least attempt to support that claim.

 

Instead, they simply ignored the facts, and made an attempt to change the topic to one which everyone would agree with.

 

Facts are hard to fight.

 

 

One more minor point:

 

Is this really a "free" college education?

 

I mean, don't you have to take into consideration all the money that was spent along the way?

 

For example: The expense incurred by participating in AAU. Up-front fees, shoes, travel expense, hotel rooms, airfare, car rental, gas money, vehicle maintenance, dining on the road, tournament fees, referee fees, fund raising, (Gatorade!), etc.

 

Many families have had their kids involved in AAU from a very early age. So, you can multiply the annual AAU expense times 7 or 8 years.

 

I'm sure that many incurred a "marketing expense" while obtaining this "free" education. Videos, letters, visits, telephone calls to "contacts", etc.

 

Shouldn't these very real expenses be considered when determining just how much that "free" education actually costs?

 

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.