Just curious, why do some of you expect us to be a great basketball program?

I think we have more to offer than LSU, Bama, Ark, or A&M (facilities be damned), which aside from recent history are fringe top 25 programs pretty often. We might be in rural America but so are the Iowa schools and several other great teams... and they don't have the benefit of being RIGHT in the middle of New Orleans, Memphis, Jackson, and Birmingham.

Aside from elite talent picking schools because of the school on the jersey, I'd bet most kids pick schools based on who their teammates are going to be. It's a vicious cycle. Get a good prospect to sign, get him to ball out in year one, present him as a valuable teammate to the next year's prospects. Boom. Stans WHIFFED on everyone in retrospect but he got Stewart, Jarvis, and Bost and that's what we're going to have to do again. We need a nucleus. Stewart and Jarvis are from rural areas so I don't necessarily see us being a rural school as a negative.

I expect us to be great because I know we can be great, because we've been there fairly recently despite whatever statistic you want to throw out. We're the only SEC West team that cares about basketball. The 2010 game against UK (yeah, we lost) where I waited 7 hours in line and we took 2 NBA All-Stars to the wire is proof.

don't forget Stansbury went out and raised Money for our new Indoor practice facility that he never got to Use but 1 year. Ray has that as a plus that Stasnbury never had

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by esplanade91

I think we have more to offer than LSU, Bama, Ark, or A&M (facilities be damned), which aside from recent history are fringe top 25 programs pretty often. We might be in rural America but so are the Iowa schools and several other great teams... and they don't have the benefit of being RIGHT in the middle of New Orleans, Memphis, Jackson, and Birmingham.

Aside from elite talent picking schools because of the school on the jersey, I'd bet most kids pick schools based on who their teammates are going to be. It's a vicious cycle. Get a good prospect to sign, get him to ball out in year one, present him as a valuable teammate to the next year's prospects. Boom. Stans WHIFFED on everyone in retrospect but he got Stewart, Jarvis, and Bost and that's what we're going to have to do again. We need a nucleus. Stewart and Jarvis are from rural areas so I don't necessarily see us being a rural school as a negative.

I expect us to be great because I know we can be great, because we've been there fairly recently despite whatever statistic you want to throw out. We're the only SEC West team that cares about basketball. The 2010 game against UK (yeah, we lost) where I waited 7 hours in line and we took 2 NBA All-Stars to the wire is proof.

---

we were leading in that Game until they mugged Hood and he never returned for the rest of the season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intramural All-American

. Coach may have built him up before he started out, but now he is saying the same thing I just said. Year three is the true litmus test. It was not Rays fault that he was put in the position he was in. Give him a chance to to dig out of it before forsaking him.

---

This all day long

I didnt advocate hiring Ray nor was I giddy about it. But I have become a fan after watching him coach the last year and a half. The guy can coach. Can he recruit? We'll see. But there is no doubt it's not his fault where the program was when he took over. And THAT is one area me and Grandpaw differ over

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

This all day long

I didnt advocate hiring Ray nor was I giddy about it. But I have become a fan after watching him coach the last year and a half. The guy can coach. Can he recruit? We'll see. But there is no doubt it's not his fault where the program was when he took over. And THAT is one area me and Grandpaw differ over

---

I think one problem Ray is having is he has conflicting roster to preferred style of play. What I mean by that is that it would seem that Ray would like to play more of the VCU up-tempo havoc kinda free flowing with an emphasis on creating turnovers style of play but he has two HUGE problems. 1) he's only using eight players 2) his players can't shoot and threes on transition is vital for VCU types. This is a huge reason why I keep stressing that Ray MUST fill his scholarships to 13 AND have athletic walk-ons (Bear, Elijah and Moore) to also add a few minutes. 15 athletes that can play FAST and HARD when they are in the game. Ray MUST find some shooters too. VCU sucks balls if they can't shoot 3s and our retarded version of VCU is not ever going to work with 8 guys that can't shoot.

I will add that I absolutely LOVE this style of play I just think Ray is mismanaging his roster to it. Half of that blame is out of his control and the other half IS his fault e.g. Applewhite, not using his last scholi 2 years in a row, failed coaching with Steele, Lewis, not getting Daniels & Ndoye qualified (I bet Calipari would get those players into school, get players to stop smoking weed, get players to want to play). I don't expect Ray to be Cal but he doesn't have to strike-out in everything either) sometimes coaching means finding a way to get your players to stay on your roster. Ray seems conflicted on being the hard-nosed type and he cuts off his nose to spite his face when he MUST MUST MUST have a FULL roster of bodies to play the style of basketball he can succeed at.

I also don't understand why he refuses to play all eleven guys. Cunningham can play PG/SG for a couple of minutes each half and Bloodman/Davis or even Sword can slide over and play PG for only a few minutes. This would allow Ready to rest and he seems to need that since he's been injured for half the games so far. Fred Thomas needs some bench time coaching too as does Sword/Roq/Colin when their decision making starts hurting the team. Moore and Wilson can be used here. Ray can still use the power of the bench when the players are being stupid. He doesn't though. He allows the bad decisions to continue by not subbing out players. What does this teach Cunningham, Moore and Wilson? That Ray has favorites and they ain't them. Better coaching is needed here. 2c

other than the fact they arent very good, my guess is Moore and Wilson also dont play because they havent learned the system yet and comfortable with everything

You just dont throw them out there and say "go ball"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

other than the fact they arent very good, my guess is Moore and Wilson also dont play because they havent learned the system yet and comfortable with everything

You just dont throw them out there and say "go ball"

---

I get what he's saying though. In limited PT Tyson has been the best behind the arc (still terrible) yet Jacoby is out there chunking up junk. And Wilson is useless at 6'6" as PF (guy is a post player) but we throw Tyson out there in situations where we need SOMEONE to rebound. Late in the UK game we were playing a white flag lineup, and in that situation I would had loved to see Wilson trying to get rebounds... Which is something he can do regardless of how much information he's been able to process. Why burn his shirt with the 6 minutes he's gotten this far if it's strictly a time-to-process issue?

Wilson's never going to get meaningful minutes- he'll play even less next year when we have a full squad

I don't think Bear's redshirt means anything. He won't be on the basketball team for 5 years, so it would be pointless to redshirt him. I'm actually in agreeance with both of y'all, that I would like to see him get a few more minutes just to try to help on the boards. I don't agree with Moore, however.

Dawg61, how in the world can you blame "failed coaching" as the reason Steele and Lewis left? You blaming them on Ray is laughable. And I also don't think Ray has much control over getting players eligible. They will be playing next season, though, and that should help out a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intramural All-American

I don't think Bear's redshirt means anything. He won't be on the basketball team for 5 years, so it would be pointless to redshirt him. I'm actually in agreeance with both of y'all, that I would like to see him get a few more minutes just to try to help on the boards. I don't agree with Moore, however.

Dawg61, how in the world can you blame "failed coaching" as the reason Steele and Lewis left? You blaming them on Ray is laughable. And I also don't think Ray has much control over getting players eligible. They will be playing next season, though, and that should help out a lot.

---

It's not so much that it's failed coaching so maybe poor choice of words but more like Ray didn't really break his back to keep Kristers, SSmith, Steele, Lewis, or figure out how to get Ndoye and Daniels eligible in time. If a coach really wanted these players he'd find a way around the system or something. I mean Marshall Henderson has failed multiple cocaine tests and he's still chucking up threes. It might be more of an MSU problem than a Ray problem but let's not pick the first two years of an already decimated roster to be kicking off players left and right when there has to be some possible way to keep them and get value from their already spent scholarships. It just really really hurts a team that's entire philosophy is around playing hard to be running with anything less than a full deck. The eight players he plays become worse by the end of each game because they are spent. 3 subs not being used would make all eight guys better players. Don't focus on the 3 being less talented understand they make the 8 better. Play all 11 guys.

I guess one of our main points of contention, is I'm glad ray ran off the players that he did. The players that stansbury had were the reason we were in the position we were in. Ray had to have guys that bought into his system. You don't just keep a guy for numbers purposes who is undermining your authority. They had to go. It's the same thing Cohen did. It's also the same thing Charlie Strong does.

Agree to disagree. I'll never believe it's best for the team to pull one guy off the tug-o-war line. It's not a classroom. Find other ways to get that player right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intramural All-American

I guess one of our main points of contention, is I'm glad ray ran off the players that he did. The players that stansbury had were the reason we were in the position we were in. Ray had to have guys that bought into his system. You don't just keep a guy for numbers purposes who is undermining your authority. They had to go. It's the same thing Cohen did. It's also the same thing Charlie Strong does.

---

This 100%....any coach worth a shit does this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg61

Agree to disagree. I'll never believe it's best for the team to pull one guy off the tug-o-war line. It's not a classroom. Find other ways to get that player right.

---

The players were given multiple chances. It wasnt one failed test. But after 3 failed tests, its obvious they arent going to stop. When you are told- "If you fail another test- you are gone"- and you fail another test...there's no blaming the coach at that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg61

It's not so much that it's failed coaching so maybe poor choice of words but more like Ray didn't really break his back to keep Kristers, SSmith, Steele, Lewis, or figure out how to get Ndoye and Daniels eligible in time. If a coach really wanted these players he'd find a way around the system or something. I mean Marshall Henderson has failed multiple cocaine tests and he's still chucking up threes. It might be more of an MSU problem than a Ray problem but let's not pick the first two years of an already decimated roster to be kicking off players left and right when there has to be some possible way to keep them and get value from their already spent scholarships. It just really really hurts a team that's entire philosophy is around playing hard to be running with anything less than a full deck. The eight players he plays become worse by the end of each game because they are spent. 3 subs not being used would make all eight guys better players. Don't focus on the 3 being less talented understand they make the 8 better. Play all 11 guys.

---

This, in a nutshell, describes our differences. Your philosophy = keep all available players regardless of attitude, chemistry, submission to authority, consequences, etc. Any standard at all is too high a standard in your mind. The fact you identify that kicking off/releasing guys who are selfish for various reasons as a "problem" should speak for itself. I agree we need more bodies, but I do not agree you sacrifice your entire team (by keeping cancers) just to have more bodies. Time will tell if he will have talent, but at least he is building a tight-knit lockerroom with less "ME" guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brad Stevens

This, in a nutshell, describes our differences. Your philosophy = keep all available players regardless of attitude, chemistry, submission to authority, consequences, etc. Any standard at all is too high a standard in your mind. The fact you identify that kicking off/releasing guys who are selfish for various reasons as a "problem" should speak for itself. I agree we need more bodies, but I do not agree you sacrifice your entire team (by keeping cancers) just to have more bodies. Time will tell if he will have talent, but at least he is building a tight-knit lockerroom with less "ME" guys.

---

No my philosophy is to exhaust all measures first before going into battle with one less guy and in this case more than one less guy. When you know you're short handed and you still kick off a player before exhausting all measures than you're being selfish and you're knowingly accepting defeat. Just my opinion.

What is exhausting all measures? How do you know how much was done? How many chances do guys get?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intramural All-American

What is exhausting all measures? How do you know how much was done? How many chances do guys get?

---

Use your imagination. I'm sure Ray's hands were tied on the failed drug tests thing but again I think that's on MSU to help somehow. Oh well **** it. We can argue this all day. Hail State it's tip time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg61

Use your imagination. I'm sure Ray's hands were tied on the failed drug tests thing but again I think that's on MSU to help somehow. Oh well **** it. We can argue this all day. Hail State it's tip time.

---

This is where we differ- because I dont want to just kick off players. BUT:

When they tell you "If you fail another test we are going to dismiss you" and you fail another test- **** you. Get the **** out. You cant win with people like that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

This is where we differ- because I dont want to just kick off players. BUT:

When they tell you "If you fail another test we are going to dismiss you" and you fail another test- **** you. Get the **** out. You cant win with people like that

---

Normally I'm right there with you. I'd get them a personal babysitter first, line up their replacements and then kick them. Replacements being the key word here. I get Ray wasn't awarded that opportunity it seems by MSU. In my opinion the players should of all gotten a fresh clean slate for sticking around. Ray got dealt two players with two strikes against them already. Maybe just a semester suspension since it was warning, warning, death. Maybe try warning, warning, semester suspension, death or again wipe everyone's slate clean and start fresh. Oh well what's done is done. Kristers and SSmith weren't Bowers and Roberts either.