High School Basketball Forum: SEMO Conf. Awards

Posted by bean84 on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 8:05 AM:

Who do you think will be the ten man 1st team all-conference, honorable mention, player of the year, and coach of the year?

Replies (30)

  • 1. Raulston - P.B

    2. Ealy - NMCC

    3. Tolbert - ND

    4. Jones - Charl.

    5. Lane - Cape

    6. Wiggans - Sik

    7. Williams - Jack

    8. Hollifield - Sik

    9. Maher - ND

    10. Flannigan - Dex

    Honorable mention:

    Jenkins(NMCC), Johnson (PB), Williams (Cape), Howard (SIK), Tucker (Charl), Clark (Jack), Koeppel (ND), Cassasola (Cape)

    Player of the year: Tolbert

    Coach of the year: Roberts (ND)

    -- Posted by bean84 on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 8:17 AM
  • Church gets my vote for Coach of the year. He has done an amazing job with that group of kids and with wins over Sikeston, ND, and Bluff kind of seals the deal for me. Just my opinion.

    -- Posted by coachpanther on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 8:44 AM
  • *

    Church has as many losses that make you shake your head as he does big wins. They lost to Bluff by 35, Charleston twice, Jackson by 11, and NMCC, and Eureka.

    -- Posted by yah-yah on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 8:48 AM
  • *

    Coach of the year is a tough award to give out this year, in my opinion. And, I'm not saying Church hasn't done a lot to turn Cape around this year. But, ND, Sikeston, and PB all lost their leading scorers (Greer, Porter, and Raulston) from last season and have still managed to have great seasons so far.

    -- Posted by yah-yah on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 8:54 AM
  • Everybody thought Sikeston would fall flat on their face this year after Michael Porter graduated. Holifield deserves a little bit of credit for that. I think Church has done a good job, but coach of the year in the SEMO Conference? Come on. They finished near the bottom in the league. They had some big wins, but big losses as well.

    -- Posted by semohoops on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 9:46 AM
  • Church has done a great job with cape but they didnt win/share the conference. I think the coach of the year needs to be one of the 4 that shared the conference and at the beggining of the year conf tourny, the seeds went 1.Sikeston 2. NMCC 3. Bluff 4. ND

    Those are the teams that share the conf title...so I think the coach of the year should be the team that no one thought was going to be very good (ND). Also, that is why I put Tolbert as player of the year. He has really stepped up and carried his team.

    -- Posted by bean84 on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 10:16 AM
  • I can live with that assessment bean84. But Sikeston has won this conference three years in a row and Holifield has never gotten the award. I always found that suspicious. One year Charleston got three guys on the all-conference team (Parham, Riggens, Dixon), Sikeston got just one (Porter, who didn't get player of the year...Willen). Sikeston won the conference, yet Holifield still somehow didn't get coach of the year.

    -- Posted by semohoops on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 10:26 AM
  • I think Notre Dame may have had a low preseason ranking simply because you can't predict beforehand what kind of team ND will have because you can't know for sure who will be playing for them. It's impossible to know who will be transferring in to take the place of departing players. Therefore, it stands to reason that ND may tend to occasionally be underrated before the season starts. This situation does not exist with the other teams in the conference. Aside from the rare instance where a kid moves into the district, or a kid who never played basketball before decides to come out, the area sportswriters and pollsters are going to know what the other teams have coming up through the ranks. With Notre Dame, you just never can predict who will be wearing the bulldog blue from year to year. Starling is a good example this year.

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 10:45 AM
  • bean, you have those rankings a bit mixed up. The SEMO Conference seeds had Sikeston first, PB second, ND third, and New Madrid fourth. I think Holifield has done an excellent job this year especially considering he lost a four time all state player.My vote is for him.

    -- Posted by Boss Man on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 10:47 AM
  • IMO Holifield should be CEMO Conf. coach of the year. Winning or sharing the title of a very tough conference for three years in a row is very hard to do. Alot of people thought Sikeston would ne average at best after they graduated an exceptional player in MIchael Porter. Instead they regrouped and have won 18 games so far. Good job by him and his staff. Also kudo's to Coach Church at Cape Central and Coach Roberts at Notre Dame. They have also coached very well.

    -- Posted by semo ref on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 11:35 AM
  • are the 1st team all conf. players selected based on what they did in regular season conf. play or does it also include the semo tourney.

    -- Posted by BIGELW on Wed, Feb 17, 2010, at 1:44 PM
  • I really like this thread. As soon as a I get time I am going to make a long post on this thread. But I think we need more comments on this thread. Good post bean84!

    -- Posted by drawmules on Thu, Feb 18, 2010, at 11:06 PM
  • I believe that most people predicted that Sikeston would be very average this year after losing Porter. Holifield has done an outstanding job leading this group of boys to another great season. A lot of long days and many hours of work by Holifeld and staff has paid off. What a great basketball program he has built at Sikeston! My vote goes to him as well.

    -- Posted by PBDC on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 11:18 AM
  • football monkey only ONE player on ND's teams is a transfer, Starling, and he would have gone to Dexter had it not been for a Visa problem. The rest of the players have been playing at ND for the past 2 or 3 years, so drop the transfer talk that is ridiculous.

    -- Posted by semo2014 on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:04 PM
  • I would think whoever wins Class 4 District 1 would win Coach of the Year.

    -- Posted by FarmBoy06 on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:11 PM
  • transfer talk...transfer talk.

    Transfer talk.

    My point is the POTENTIAL is greater with Notre Dame. There is a greater POTENTIAL that you will not know who they will have.

    transfer talk

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:13 PM
  • I've always thought the team with "Player of the Year" should never have the coach win "Coach of the Year." There is a reason why that team is successful, and it mostly comes down to the players. If you have the best player in the conference, you're going to have a good season. And how can someone think you 'overachieved' and need to win Coach of the Year, when you have the Player of the Year? One player makes more of an impact in a basketball game than any other sport.

    -- Posted by Pwilcox on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:24 PM
  • That is because players step up and fit into their roles not because they go out and buy the players they want each and every season, these guys have worked in the same system for 3 years (excluding Starling) so of course they have great potential, they have played together for a long time, the same thing goes for Sikeston and SCC as well you can tell these guys have played together for a long time by the wat they play.

    -- Posted by semo2014 on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:34 PM
  • bball2010,

    I don't think you read my initial post very carefully. The question was regarding whether ND overachieved this year, or were they simply underrated coming into the season. My hypothesis is that ND is a team that is more difficult than others in the conference to get a preseason read on because you just can't know with the same degree of certainty who they will have playing for them as you do the other schools. This is simply a fact. If you don't see that, then there really isn't much else I can say.

    And who said anything about ND going out and buying players? Where in the world did you come up with that one?

    Transfer talk.

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:49 PM
  • We don't buy players? What the hell was my tuition money paying for then? :)

    Transfers? Transfers? We not talkin' bout recruiting...we talking bout TRANSFERS?

    -- Posted by FarmBoy06 on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:52 PM
  • The "all conference" meeting is before the District Tourn.

    -- Posted by PBDC on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:53 PM
  • I agree, farmboy. Sometimes Notre Dame has transfers. I theorize they have more transfers than surrounding public schools. Therefore, they're a little harder to get a feel for year in and year out. There is a little less knowing for sure what they're gonna have. Never said they recruit. Certainly never said they pay for players.

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 12:55 PM
  • Notre Dame's advantage isn't from transfers, it's from having a 50 miles radius to draw in students and being selective in who they bring in. (Certainly not going to bring in distractions and turds which is something you have to deal with at public schools). If you have athletes hanging around the wrong crowd, it can corrupt them. ND probably doesn't have this problem.

    However, I can think of very few actual basketball transfers at the high school level they've had over the years (Xavier Delph, Starling). Most of their transfers arrive after parochial school in the 9th grade. I do know they've benefitted greatly in baseball from Sikeston "defections" many of which leave Sikeston schools after the 8th grade.

    -- Posted by semohoops on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:17 PM
  • Again, not talking about advantages - perceived or otherwise - I am talking about the ability to PREDICT WHAT KIND OF TEAM ND WILL HAVE. Like semohoops said. You never know who they will have coming in from the region as a freshman. At Sikeston, SCC, P'ville, etc. etc. You pretty much know which kids have been there since Junior High. You can't say with same degree of certainty from year to year who will be playing for ND. Therefore, it is harder to get an accurate read on them in the preseason. Am I explaining this poorly? How does this keep getting misconstrued?

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:26 PM
  • I agree with what you're saying ndtransfertalk. If, for example at Sikeston, if you've got a bad class coming in the 6th grade, you know it's coming. ND won't know if they have a bad class until they arrive as freshmen.

    -- Posted by semohoops on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:32 PM
  • You got it. Therefore, it's hard for anyone in the area to know how good ND will be to the same extent they can for the other schools. Therefore, I believe the argument that Coach Roberts deserves Coach of the Year solely because ND was seeded 4th in the SEMO conference tourney is flawed. It's just harder to know how good ND will be. Did Starling make a difference? Sure. How much? Who knows. Was he an unknown? Somewhat.

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:37 PM
  • Couldn't that be viewed as a DISadvantage for ND then? Their coaches don't get a chance to work with the kids coming through Jr. high like most coaches do.

    -- Posted by FarmBoy06 on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:38 PM
  • It could be a disadvantage just because you really don't know what you're going to have from year to year until they arrive, but I think the large radius to draw athletes negates it. For example, ND's junior class isn't particularly strong, but getting a 6'7" monster like Tolbert from Oak Ridge more than makes up for it. Getting the Willen brothers and Ty Williams from Cape Central Public Schools bolstered the lineup too. Those are guys you may not necessarily depend on coming to ND as freshmen, but then they show up and it's a bonus.

    -- Posted by semohoops on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:45 PM
  • I agree. Could be a disadvantage. you could also argue that ND doesn't have the "automatic" kids like some of the other schools. For instance, the public schools can pretty much always count on a few established families that have lived in the same town for generations and are always going to be there. For instance, you can count on SCC and Sikeston pretty much always having some member of the Porter, Hatchett, Wiggins, Dixon family. These families have shown over the years that they can play ball. Notre Dame can't rely on anything like that. They have to rely on their tradition, academic reputation, and the fact that they can attract players from a wider area with less restrictions than their public counterparts.

    -- Posted by Cully Bryant on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 1:55 PM
  • Although many of those successful athletes at ND in the past have offspring that are just as successful, just like any public school's offspring. I'd say if a parent went to ND in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, then their children all went or are going to ND as well (if they still live in the area).

    -- Posted by semohoops on Fri, Feb 19, 2010, at 2:09 PM

Respond to this thread

Posting a comment requires free registration: