What are everyones thoughts on the 4th region this year with Warren Central being down a bit. Looks like Bowling Green is probably at the head of the class with Greenwood, Russell County, and Russellville all looking like top contenders as well.

Sorry I missed this thread. You must really be taken with BG's 16-1 record. You poked at WC's record in the rankings thread and noted (erroneously I might add) that Warren Central hadn't beaten any of the top teams. Tell me Bowling Green's marquee win? From where I stand, it's Greenwood. Bowling Green has not so much as played a team that is now or has been in the BGP Top 20. The Massey Ratings (my ratings of choice outside of BGP) rates Warren Central's schedule as #5 in the state. Bowling Green's is #43. They're 16-1, but honestly, who have they played?

 

I would rate Warren Central and Bowling Green as the cream of the crop. Just below them is a group of Glasgow, Russellville, Greenwood, and Franklin-Simpson. Teams like AC/S and Russell County are probably capable of surprising, but IMO are not threats to take the title, just teams that might take out one of the guys that can.

 

Warren Central is not as good as last year at this point, but they're hardly down. I'm hopeful that by the time region runs around that Shanklin will be fully back up to speed and Central will be on par with the previous year. They've beaten teams like Lexington Catholic and Tates Creek without him. Bowling Green will go as Behanan takes them. God help them if he has a bad game, because there is no one else on that team that can pick up the slack, and that's why I don't consider them as good as WC. I think they'll split with WC, but ultimately I think the team around Behanan is far inferior to the Warren Central team. You see an incredible drop when he goes off of the floor. If Fant can limit Chane at all, BG's in deep trouble.

 

A couple of the other teams are that way as well. Franklin-Simpson has Mickey Lewis, but the dismissal of Terry Bryant prior to the season really hurt them. Most of the time if you stop Mickey, they're done. Glasgow has Cameron Hall, and.....? Greenwood has Dee Anderson and.....? Heck, Greenwood has two players on the floor that look terrified to even shoot. Of all the teams outside of WC and BG, Russellville is the team I could most see winning the title. Elam is a four year starter as a junior, and they have a bevy of other players that can get hot from three, and they've got the athleticism to stick with WC & BG.

 

In actual numbered rankings, I'd have:

 

1) Warren Central

2) Bowling Green

 

---Friday will tell us which one is #1 and #2 for the next two weeks until their next meeting

 

3) Glasgow

4) Greenwood

5) Russellville

6) Franklin-Simpson

 

7) Russell County

8) AC/S

 

Pretty much a crapshoot after that.

Once again you give the 16th no credit, Russell and Clinton are in the group that could win it. Clinton got Durham back this week and destroyed Cumberland and Metcalfe. Russell has some very nice wins and barely lost at Greenwood. Clinton is the hottest team in the region, Durham is back from his broken leg and they have a sophomore guard that has been on fire. Clinton was up close to 30 on both Cumberland and Metcalfe in the 2nd half before they called off the dogs. As weak as the region is this year, Clinton and Russell could meet in the finals! I do think WC will beat BG but I also think they are capable of losing to anyone in the regional tourney as well. Just not like it used to be, you are going to need to accept that. WC domination is over!

 

1 Warren Central

2 Bowling Green

3 Franklin-Simpson

4 Russellville

5 Glasgow

6 Greenwood

7 Russell Co.

8 Clinton

Edited January 14, 201016 yr by gold sunrise
Rule 13

That's a lot of chastisement you're giving me to turn around and only swap out one team from my rankings. Clinton County was probably #9 on my list. You say I don't give the 16th credit and then rank your highest 16th District team in the same spot I did?

 

I agree that Warren Central could lose to any of those teams. They are not as dominant as they once were, and last year proved that. But I do believe that there are teams that are more likely to be able to string three together than others, and I don't believe Russell County or Clinton County are those teams yet.

Clinton County and Russell County are every bit as good as Glasgow, Franklin Simpson, and Russellville. Just say Bowling Green and Warren Central are a cut above the rest with several other teams who could win a game or two in Diddle in the mix. How many times have you seen Clinton play since they have their full roster in place? You always used an excuse when Warren Central's PG was injured. Don't make definitive statements about the region when you haven't seen everyone play. Clinton returns 4 starters this season and a very talented sophomore class to a team that crushed Russellville last year and lost by 1-2 in the district to Cumberland at Cumberland. I think Cumberland and Russell proved how tough the 16th district was last season in the regional tournament and everyone is better this season.

What Cumberland County and Russell County proved was that they were capable of winning a game in the regional tournament, which was pretty well what I was saying above, and for that matter you just reiterated. The only difference in our statements is that you think Glasgow, Franklin-Simpson, and Russellville are only capable of doing tht as well. The 16th district is definitely better than they've been, probably the second best district in the region, and have been for about 4 years. But they are going to have to win the region before I will believe they can. History absolutely doesn't lie on their capability of doing so. Outside of Metcalfe County, none of the teams in the 16th District have even played for the title in the last 30 years.

 

I was not even aware that Durham was back yet. Back in the preseason I picked Clinton County to win the 16th District (on the other site - look it up), and was summarily told I was pretty well crazy because he wasn't expected to play, or at best it was uncertain he would play.

 

BTW, I did not ALWAYS use the excuse that Shanklin was injured. Oftentimes when it was mentioned, it was a response to someone who asked if he was out. Yes, I referenced it above.

Fair enough!

Sorry I missed this thread. You must really be taken with BG's 16-1 record. You poked at WC's record in the rankings thread and noted (erroneously I might add) that Warren Central hadn't beaten any of the top teams. Tell me Bowling Green's marquee win? Bowling Green has not so much as played a team that is now or has been in the BGP Top 20. The Massey Ratings (my ratings of choice outside of BGP) rates Warren Central's schedule as #5 in the state. Bowling Green's is #43. They're 16-1, but honestly, who have they played?

 

I agree. Bowling Green hasn't played anyone and they still haven't after never trailing against what appears to be an overrated Warren Central team.

I agree. Bowling Green hasn't played anyone and they still haven't after never trailing against what appears to be an overrated Warren Central team.

 

Warren Central a little highly ranked, but as I said in the postgame thread, I still believe they are one of the top 20 teams in the state. Now that Bowling Green has played someone we can really gauge them against, I'd rate them also in the top 20 in the state, higher than Warren Central, and #1 in the region with Warren Central #2. That is the way it will remain for at least two weeks until the return engagement, unless Central should fall before then, which is possible with them going to Greenwood.

 

I'd respect your opinion more Blockbuster if you had bothered to take issue with my rankings and analysis before the game Friday. It's easy to swoop in with a glib remark after the fact. Would you rate Central outside the top 20, or just feel they were too high at #9? I'd also welcome your analysis of the game in the postgame thread. Just would like to hear your take on the game outside of calling Warren Central overrated.

Edited January 18, 201016 yr by DragonFire

I'd respect your opinion more Blockbuster if you had bothered to take issue with my rankings and analysis before the game Friday. It's easy to swoop in with a glib remark after the fact.

 

...and i'd respect your "rankings and analysis" a little more if you had not ran down BG's glowing record going into the game. While I agree WC has played a little tougher competition, the fact is the Dragons have failed to come out with a victory in any game they stepped up in class. The only exception was a victory over Lex Cath that was playing without its best player.

...and i'd respect your "rankings and analysis" a little more if you had not ran down BG's glowing record going into the game. While I agree WC has played a little tougher competition, the fact is the Dragons have failed to come out with a victory in any game they stepped up in class. The only exception was a victory over Lex Cath that was playing without its best player.

 

LexCath without its best player was still better than any single win on BG's schedule prior to Friday. On top of that, Tates Creek is also considered one of the best teams in the state, another opponent Central beat. They're #12 in the current rankings. Either one of those was a significant upgrade over BG's best win. I asked in my first post who their marquee win was before, a question still unanswered. I believe it is not unreasonable to question whether BG would be nearly the same record if they had played Central's schedule. WC has played 4 opponents that are currently in the BGP Top 20 going 2-2 against them, will soon have a fifth join them in BG which would make them 2-3 against that competition. They additionally have gone 1-1 against two teams that are no longer in the top 20 in Muhlenberg County and Fairdale.

 

I simply ask if you're going to come in here to blast me, you extend me the courtesy of at least giving your opinion beforehand. Again, it is very easy for you to come in here and knock me after the fact. I even said in my post I expected a split this season, and I still do.

I simply ask if you're going to come in here to blast me, you extend me the courtesy of at least giving your opinion beforehand. Again, it is very easy for you to come in here and knock me after the fact. I even said in my post I expected a split this season, and I still do.

 

I really don't think I "blasted" you. Heck, you came after me talking about respecting my opinion and such.

 

..and it's not easy for you to spew about marquee wins and who is in the Bluegrass preps top 20 before the game is played while covering your tracks by saying you "expect a split"?

 

I don't question that Warren Central has played a tougher schedule. But they have lost every one of those games other than Lex Cath. For every Tates Creek victory you chose to look at, I see a loss to a barely above .500 Fairdale squad. So the only quality win Central has is Lex Cath and the only perceived quality win for BG is against a Warren Central team that has only one quality win.

 

See you on the 29th.:popcorn:

I really don't think I "blasted" you. Heck, you came after me talking about respecting my opinion and such.

 

..and it's not easy for you to spew about marquee wins and who is in the Bluegrass preps top 20 before the game is played while covering your tracks by saying you "expect a split"?

 

I don't question that Warren Central has played a tougher schedule. But they have lost every one of those games other than Lex Cath. For every Tates Creek victory you chose to look at, I see a loss to a barely above .500 Fairdale squad. So the only quality win Central has is Lex Cath and the only perceived quality win for BG is against a Warren Central team that has only one quality win.

 

See you on the 29th.:popcorn:

 

I was simply saying I didn't think the 16-1 record was all it was cracked up to be, and I explained why. I never said Bowling Green wasn't a good team, hence why I stated I expected a split. Bowling Green is not an easy place to win at. Central hasn't won their since 2007. I don't see how that's "easy".

 

For every Tates Creek victory I chose to look at.... They were ranked that highly when they played, and are still ranked that highly. If you want to call the Fairdale loss a bad loss, that's fine, but there's no denying that Central has another quality win in Tates Creek. Well, clearly there is denying, because you are, which I quite frankly don't get.

 

Do you deny you weren't trying to get under my skin with your first statement?

Do you deny you weren't trying to get under my skin with your first statement?

 

I plead the 5th. :sssh:

 

I'll give you Tates Creek as a quality win. But I also think you discount the victory BG had at the FS tourney over the Math, Science team from Philly as a quality win. They also have already beaten Greenwood twice. Not sure if that is worth anything, but I guess we'll find out more when WC plays them this week.

 

I'll say this. Neither BG or Warren Central are top 20 teams IMO. If they are the entire state is down badly.

I watched Tates Creek soundly defeat Shelby Valley in finals of the AAU state this summer. They ARE a quality opponent and could easily win the 11th region if Scott County blinks.

 

I think Bowling Green and Warren Central are lower tier top 20 programs. Both are a little better than anyone else in the region followed closely by Glasgow and Russellville. These are the top 4. After that, there are 5 other teams capable of winning the region. Should be a great regional tourney! Could be a year for Cinderella!