Have done two D1 schools before. Quinnipiac in Naismith which turned out quite well, and Houston in Rupp in which I didn't get a chance to stick around long enough to see how it would do. Here's what I start with.

Name	Yr.	Pos.	A	SPD	REB	DE	BLK	LP	PE	BH	P	WE	ST	DU	FT	TOT
Bryan Geiger	Sr.	PG	40	91	25	63	12	2	56	82	75	57	68	74	C+	645
James Fromm	So.	PG	53	83	7	35	3	1	59	84	93	50	73	51	A-	592
Craig Johnson	Jr.	SG	66	48	48	71	48	32	65	54	35	81	74	51	B+	673
Mike Meachum	Jr.	SG	40	64	5	41	3	48	72	84	55	69	73	15	B	569
Nicolas Ewell	Sr.	SF	56	64	50	56	19	60	71	35	54	67	74	64	D+	670
Justin Walters	Sr.	SF	68	40	61	79	49	50	53	33	62	77	93	75	B	740
Modesto Bianchi	Sr.	PF	74	40	67	91	96	49	39	9	18	55	85	44	D+	667
Averages	-	-	57	61	38	62	33	35	59	54	56	65	77	53	-	651

Recruits
Brad Fenley
#65 PG

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	43	Low		Perimeter	81	Low
Speed	77	Low		Ball Handling	66	High
Rebounding	1	Low		Passing	58	High
Defense	36	Average		Stamina	59	Average
Shot Blocking	1	Low		Durability	63	High
Low-post	1	Average		FT Shooting	71.5%	Average

ATH and SPD being at LOW is bet disheartening, but it's already high enough where it shouldn't be a big worry.

Charles Seamons
#97 PF

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	46	High		Perimeter	40	Average
Speed	40	Low		Ball Handling	27	Average
Rebounding	47	High		Passing	51	Low
Defense	57	High		Stamina	71	Average
Shot Blocking	23	High		Durability	69	Low
Low-post	35	Low		FT Shooting	72.5%	Average

SPD and LP are limited, he'll probably end up as a SF with his PER and PASS skills.

James Ditto
#112 PF

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	60	Low		Perimeter	25	High
Speed	31	Average		Ball Handling	26	High
Rebounding	52	Average		Passing	53	Low
Defense	52	Average		Stamina	77	Low
Shot Blocking	32	Low		Durability	46	High
Low-post	72	High		FT Shooting	64.2	High

WE is only 18. Will give him as many starts as possible to try to bump it up. High LP and PER potential should make him an offensive star.

Clifford Smith
#121 PF

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	47	High		Perimeter	1	Low
Speed	34	Low		Ball Handling	28	Average
Rebounding	62	Low		Passing	40	Low
Defense	52	Average		Stamina	67	Average
Shot Blocking	49	Low		Durability	21	High
Low-post	44	High		FT Shooting	76.0%	Average

WE at 73. Will be interesting to see how him and Ditto develop in regards the mirror opposite WE. I'm thinking of trying a redshirt, but I believe 3 seasons from now I'll be able to get much better players, so I just want this goes to do their time and move on ASAP.

Andrew Griffin
#141 C

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	58	Low		Perimeter	1	High
Speed	30	Low		Ball Handling	23	High
Rebounding	72	High		Passing	31	Low
Defense	41	High		Stamina	56	High
Shot Blocking	78	High		Durability	63	High
Low-post	19	High		FT Shooting	72.4	Average

May start him right away. At 72 he's the best REB on the team, which means I'm going to get murdered on the boards this season. Lots of High potential here, but the LP and STAM are dreadful.

Overall, I'm okay with the recruiting class. No world beaters, but at D- I'm not expecting any. The REB is going to be bad. I'm probably going to switch to a ZONE D to counteract all the low staminas. Pretty weak non-conference, so hopefully I can sneak in a 6-4 there.

Looking at my depth chart and how my exhibition game played out I saw that Fenley wasn't going to get much PT. I threw him a RS and he accepted luckily. Charles Seamons will be seeing a fair amount of DNP-CD on his record, however.

What Happened?

Finished 8-20, which may be more than I deserved as 5 of those wins were by 3 points or less. RPI at 308, SOS at 308.

What's Good?

Clifford Smith and Andrew Griffin improved 66 and 67 rating points. Clifford Smith shot 50% FG and 78% FT with 7 PPG and 4 RPB. He'll be a star in the conference. Brad Fenley gained quite a bit during his RS season and should be a solid player.

What's Bad?

Not happy with James Ditto's low improvement and the fact he might get a bit worse with his low WE. Couldn't find major time in the lineup for him with the PF slot full. More minutes for him next year, but picking him up might have been a bust.

Lessons Learned?

Think I shot perhaps a little low with my recruits. I think they'll be okay, but I should have made a stab at someone a bit higher on the totem poll. Also I made a mistake not paying enough attention to the staminas. All the guys are in the 70's with Fenley at 65. That's not good.

I should've set player distribution up way earlier. I did eventually but only after my terrible non-conference. Once I put Modesto Bianchi as my go-to-guy I became much more competitive.

Overall?

Pleased, but optimistic. I wanted 10 wins, but got 8. After recruiting I'll have 9 guys that I've selected. The losses will pile on again next season but the team is on their way up.

Recruits

Michael Hammond #77 SF
Athleticism     71     Low           Perimeter       51     High
Speed            46     High           Ball Handling  34     Average
Rebounding   49     High           Passing          50     Average
Defense         49     High           Stamina         72     Average
Shot Blocking 38     Average     Durability      35     Average
Low-post       29     High           FT Shooting   C-      High

My favorite player in this class. He's got a bit of everything going for him, is only maxed out in his already solid ATH and will play right away. These are the types of guys I need to succeed. He might be a 3 year starter at SF.

Marvin Oliver #187 PG
Athleticism      63     Low         Perimeter           65     High
Speed             66     High           Ball Handling    53     High
Rebounding     1     Low           Passing             61     Low
Defense         49     Average     Stamina            77     High
Shot Blocking   1     Low           Durability          48     High
Low-post         1     High           FT Shooting     C+      Average

This may be seen as a bit of an undershoot, but I couldn't overlook the high potential in numerous categories. Perhaps I'm a bit too enamored with potential right now, but my team has time before it'll be competitive so guys like this will work for me. Marvin will probably shift over and be a SG based on his maxed out passing. Could actually start next year at SG.

Jason Clark #143 C
Athleticism     42     Low             Perimeter        1     Average
Speed             20     Average     Ball Handling   3     Average
Rebounding    94     Low            Passing         21     Low
Defense         41     High             Stamina         49     High
Shot Blocking 94     Low             Durability       15     High
Low-post       49     High             FT Shooting     C     High

Huge oddity here. He's actually the top rebounder and 2nd in shot blocking among all recruits. This is the last guy I picked up. After I realized I had everyone else locked down I went searching. I found him considering a DII school gave him a SV, HV, and CV and he was all mine, ******* off Billyho in the process. Clark has a fatal flaw in stamina, so I'm having huge minutes spent on conditioning. He's getting good minutes right away and hopefully he'll be worth the trouble.

William McNany #90 C
Athleticism       44     Average     Perimeter         31     Low
Speed             17     High           Ball Handling     38     Average
Rebounding     56     High           Passing            44     Low
Defense          37     Average     Stamina           72     Average
Shot Blocking  45     Average     Durability         40     Low
Low-post        46     High           FT Shooting      C-     Average

My redshirt for this season. He's got a little bit of everything, but great in nothing. He's got a nice 81 WE as well, so I'll get to see his full potential. Could end up with the best ratings overall of all my post players. Very happy with this signing.

I don't think I could have done any much better with my low prestige. I got guys that should develop into nice players for me to help me compete.

As for this season, I'm not sure what to expect. I got a great win at Mississippi St in my first game. All 10 of my opponents finished in the top 100 in RPI last season, so if I can get 3-4 wins non conference I'd be very surprised. If I can get 10-12 wins or perhaps a .500 record I think that would be good progress.

Name	Yr.	Pos.	A	SPD	REB	DE	BLK	LP	PE	BH	P	WE	ST	DU	FT	TOT
Craig Johnson	Sr.	SG	67	47	62	76	56	33	65	59	34	88	78	52	A-	717
James Fromm	Jr.	PG	59	84	13	39	14	2	59	84	96	63	85	60	A-	658
Brad Fenley	Fr.	PG	44	78	2	44	4	2	81	91	75	75	69	85	B-	650
Andrew Griffin	So.	C	59	32	89	52	89	54	1	28	30	52	83	80	B-	649
Clifford Smith	So.	PF	68	36	63	62	54	73	1	32	40	82	81	51	A-	643
Mike Meachum	Sr.	SG	42	64	5	41	4	77	72	87	57	79	82	31	B+	641
Michael Hammond	Fr.	SF	72	52	55	53	43	44	62	37	49	51	76	40	C+	634
Charles Seamons	So.	PF	56	40	62	70	37	36	47	25	52	35	76	69	B-	605
William McNany	Fr.	C	48	22	69	39	48	56	31	39	44	81	74	41	C	592
James Ditto	So.	PF	59	33	52	51	32	84	31	31	51	21	74	57	C	576
Marvin Oliver	Fr.	PG	64	75	1	48	1	1	76	68	60	37	83	56	B-	570
Jason Clark	Fr.	C	44	25	93	46	95	69	1	2	20	49	60	25	C+	529
Averages	-	-	57	49	47	52	40	44	44	49	51	59	77	54	-	622

Name	Yr.	Pos.	A	SPD	REB	DE	BLK	LP	PE	BH	P	WE	ST	DU	FT	TOT
Andrew Griffin	So.	C	0	1	7	4	5	19	0	7	0	8	14	5	-	70
Michael Hammond	Fr.	SF	1	6	6	4	5	15	11	3	-1	4	4	5	-	63
Jason Clark	Fr.	C	2	5	-1	5	1	20	0	-1	-1	3	11	10	-	54
Marvin Oliver	Fr.	PG	1	9	0	-1	0	0	11	15	-1	1	6	8	-	49
William McNany	Fr.	C	4	5	13	2	3	10	0	1	0	0	2	1	-	41
Clifford Smith	So.	PF	7	1	0	3	1	9	0	1	0	5	3	11	-	41
Brad Fenley	Fr.	PG	0	0	0	2	2	0	1	9	5	3	7	7	-	36
James Fromm	Jr.	PG	3	1	4	1	7	0	0	0	0	8	7	1	-	32
Charles Seamons	So.	PF	4	0	5	6	6	0	5	-1	0	-3	2	0	-	24
Mike Meachum	Sr.	SG	1	0	0	0	0	11	0	0	0	6	3	3	-	24
James Ditto	So.	PF	0	0	2	-1	0	5	3	3	0	2	1	4	-	19
Craig Johnson	Sr.	SG	1	0	5	0	1	0	0	1	0	5	4	1	-	18
Averages	-	-	2	2	3	2	3	7	3	3	0	4	5	5	-	39

Name	Yr.	Pos	GP	GS	MIN	FG%	FG3%	FT%	OREB	REB	AST	TO	STL	BLK	PF	PTS
C. Johnson	Sr.	SG	28	28	25.6	.451	.345	.808	1.2	3.9	1.3	1.6	0.5	0.4	1.9	7.5
C. Smith	So.	PF	28	28	25.5	.485		.831	1.9	5.4	0.9	2.0	0.4	1.0	2.3	13.0
A. Griffin	So.	C	28	28	25.0	.522		.717	2.5	7.8	0.8	1.3	0.6	1.1	2.4	7.5
M. Meachum	Sr.	SG	28	24	24.8	.489	.344	.733	0.5	1.4	1.8	1.9	0.6	0.0	2.1	10.4
J. Fromm	Jr.	PG	28	28	24.5	.429	.432	.837	0.3	0.9	3.3	2.0	0.8	0.0	3.0	6.0
M. Hammond	Fr.	SF	28	4	17.2	.486	.364	.704	1.1	2.5	0.9	1.4	0.5	0.2	1.6	6.6
B. Fenley	Fr.	PG	28	0	16.5	.447	.452	.741	0.3	0.6	2.2	1.4	0.5	0.0	2.3	6.3
J. Ditto	So.	PF	28	0	15.0	.542		.650	1.3	2.8	0.5	1.1	0.3	0.3	1.0	7.0
J. Clark	Fr.	C	28	0	14.4	.452		.705	1.4	5.0	0.3	0.8	0.2	0.6	1.8	3.8
M. Oliver	Fr.	PG	26	0	10.7	.478	.273	.607	0.0	0.2	1.2	0.9	0.3	0.0	0.7	1.6
C. Seamons	So.	PF	21	0	6.6	.455	.333	.833	0.4	1.5	0.4	0.3	0.1	0.1	0.4	1.3
Averages						.481	.392	.748	10.9	31.7	13.4	14.4	4.9	3.7	19.3	70.5
Opp. Averages						.495	.382	.738	10.5	30.4	14.4	11.3	7.1	5.1	18.2	77.8

What Happened?

Finished 7-21. Team was 1-7 in games decided in OT or by 5 points or less. Got hit by some bad luck in a few games. RPI at 285, SOS at 261.

What's Good?

Andrew Griffin improved another 70 points. He's starting to become more than just a rebounder. Clifford Smith had yet another good season with 13 PPG with good percentages. Hammond is looking like a very fine player and I'll enjoy seeing him starting at SF for the next 3 seasons. Seamons didn't transfer. Although I wouldn't have been heartbroken if he did. As it looks, he'll get decent minutes as the backup SF.

Still pleased at my 4 pickups last offseason. Doesn't appear to be a lemon in the bunch.

What's Bad?

Turnovers and defense. Turnovers are hopefully just an IQ issue, as I did have 8 lowerclassmen playing. I think playing a zone is not a good strategy. Seems like M2M is the way to go, but it's too late in the game to switch, plus many of my players are really weak in DEF. When I'm able to move up it'll be to a M2M team. Went to a 3-2 DE (which I may keep doing) results were a little more promising.

Losses- they suck, but the numbers should be coming down.

Lessons Learned?

Need more attention to WE. Unless their ratings are already superb no reason to get a sub 30ish guy.

Zone sucks, however the 3-2 seems like it gives a better chance of success.

Overall?

Wanted more wins. I scheduled teams that were too hard too quickly. I should have went with 10 cupcakes to beef up the wins and help out the prestige. This will be fixed, because next season I should have a number of cheap wins coming my way.

As far as recruiting, I want a PG with good passing skills and can play right away. I'll also look for a SG with high PER and decent potential, for a redshirt. I'll be way short on cash with only 2 schollies so I'm at the mercy of everyone else.

Game #	Opponent	Coach	Current Record	Current RPI	Current SOS
#1	UNC	jamier2003	23-10	40	49
#2	at Birmingham-Southern	cnsmuck	12-16	207	173
#3	Georgia Tech	gopokes24	11-17	85	7
#4	at UL-Lafayette	jellyd	6-21	292	236
#5	Kansas St.	tiger23	3-24	234	30
#6	Chicago St.	lenny74	23-8	41	78
#7	at Niagara	max21blouin	12-17	215	231
#8	at E. Michigan	Sim AI	14-14	129	89
#9	UCLA	shtickless_1	27-7	7	10
#10	at Temple	Sim AI	7-20	211	77

Fourth Season at UCSB

Overall Record 34-51

Recruits

John Towell
#254 OA
#45 PG

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	62	Average		Perimeter	64	High
Speed	67	High		Ball Handling	66	High
Rebounding	19	Low		Passing	29	High
Defense	64	High		Stamina	68	Average
Shot Blocking	11	Low		Durability	59	High
Low-post	16	Average		FT Shooting	67.2%	Average

Managed to keep ahead of Arizona St by dropping $22,659 of my $33,000 on him. Arizona St got in too many other battles so my money and distance trumped his C prestige.

Towell has good starting ratings in places that matter. He's high-high in SPD, PER, and PASS. WE is a little low at 42, but he should still be able to get 50-60 growth in rating his first season. Passing is a red flag, but I'll be sure to put a big emphasis on it. Already have 4 other guards so it'll be lots of pine time his first two seasons unless I cut bait with Boggs, just like I did with Ditto. Could also slot him in for some time at SF. He'll end up as a SG. Odd that I just can't find a guy I want with a huge PA rating.

Raymond Truelove
#186 OA, #44 PF

	Current Rating	Potential			Current Rating	Potential
Athleticism	28	High		Perimeter	53	Low
Speed	28	High		Ball Handling	51	Average
Rebounding	51	Average		Passing	58	Low
Defense	43	Average		Stamina	68	Average
Shot Blocking	50	Average		Durability	26	High
Low-post	38	High		FT Shooting	69.1%	Average

With my first class graduating after this season I wanted a guy that could play both forward spots as I'm losing Seamons and Smith. Right now Truelove can't play either position, but with a year under his belt he should be able to. He's got a sparkling 92 WE. I have a PG in Knight that has a 99 WE and gained 117 points in one season. So I would project that Truelove that could get 80-90 points right off the bat. With a strong emphasis in conditioning, ATH and SPD will be in the low to mid 40s by next season.

Surprisingly, to me at least, I put a minimum amount to get him. I found him by chance, scouted Montana, and saw that nothing pivotal was in the low potential. Made 1 phone call, 2 SV, 1 HV, and 1 CV, along with a scholly and he would up signing with me.

Overall

Luckily I don't need either right away. Truelove will be 3rd string SF and 4th string PF. Towell will be 4th string SG and SF. So it would take a hellacious scenerio for either get to get court time. Both have the potential to be All-Conference Team winners by the time all is said and done.

I really feel the D+ had a big advantage. I think there's just a slightly different mentality though when people view who is going after who. Perhaps a D- or D team shied away from Truelove because they didn't have the prestige advantage.

While the position and overall rankings aren't 100% accurate they are a good predictor of success. Getting players in the top 300 are a first for this team and their starting ratings blow away the guys they are replacing.

This season should be a great one as I'm finally working with all my own players. I expect to make the NT, but we'll see how it goes.