Printable View
I think everybody knows what we're in for this year, and we all know it isn't because Ray isn't coaching well, it's because we don't have the players. That's his fault no matter what the circumstances are. If he will go get the players, we will win more games and everyone will be happy. If he doesn't, we won't, and it's time to move on.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
Well saidQuote:
Originally Posted by codeDawg
How do we know that isn't what we've got now? Too early to know for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by codeDawg
I don't understand the problem with his recruiting right now? It's an antiquated viewpoint. He's about to grab 4 or 5 very good, if not elite talents back to back. For all intents and purposes, he's already got 3 of them.Quote:
Stans couldn't coach, Ray isn't recruiting well so far. You have to have players and put them in position to make plays.
I disagree. There are a ton of "diamonds in the rough" in basketball. A widespread failure of college player development is what you are actually seeing. Not "all fully developed" players. The only players that actually get "exposure" in terms of rankings are the top 100 players. Beyond that, it's a total shitshoot. I don't need rankings to tell me that Tookie, Weatherspoon, and Strugg are good. I can see that on film. Just like I could see it with Daniels and Houston.Quote:
Basketball isn't like football. The kids that can play are mostly on AAU teams and they play a lot. If you are worth a damn, you are going to get exposure. There are far fewer "diamonds" in the rough, even in MS.
Basketball is, by far, the major college sport with the most parity. If it was so clearcut who and what was elite and made elite teams -- it should be dominated by the same couple of teams every single year. Yet, half the teams we see go deep every march are relative nobodies that have developed their talent into a mature roster and took out the starz when the marbles were on the line...
What stars do Wisconsin have that were recruited? One local 5* on roster and on other 4*s or something like that? What "law" is out there preventing us from being similar?Quote:
Yes, we can get some role players, buy you have to have a star to really make waves.
24/7 is crap for basketball recruiting. They simply use the football formula -- which doesn't work when the class size gets alot smaller.Quote:
And according to 247, the SEC schools in the top 25:
2014: UK(2), Florida(9), Bama(24)
2013: UK(1), Florida (16), Arkansas (22), South Carolina (25)
2012: UK(2)
2011: UK(1), Arkansas (7), Alabama (9), Florida(14), State (15), Vandy (22)
2010: UK(1), Tennessee (6), Florida (7), Alabama(19), South Carolina (23)
Yes it does. The entire SEC recruits in the top 50 in basketball -- which should, in theory, get them into the tournament practically every single year.Quote:
The SEC does not consistently recruit in the top 25
There is a tail wagging the dog thing with recruiting rankings that is hard to prove one way or another. By those rankings, we should be crap in football right now -- I know that much.Quote:
UK and Florida are consistently on the top of that list and consistently win.
No one is saying it doesn't.Quote:
Talent makes a big difference.
Ray struggled out of the gate with recruiting for a laundry list of reasons -- but he's rolling just fine now. When Newman signs with us, our 2015 class jumps comfortably into the lauded 24/7 top 25 you were just discussing. When Hicks jumps in the boat, that will put the 2016 class in the top 5 -- and with just 2 players(which we'll assuredly add more), would have been good enough for 33rd nationally in the now signed class of 2015...Quote:
I'm not saying that we can go get Cal or Billy Donavan, but so far Rick Ray has sucked at half of his job, so we don't really get to see if he is any good at the other half.
The board would be better if you stopped posting altogether. But we've already established today that you are just trolling without believing your actual position. Hence why you don't actually try to refute things that I rip to shreds on a point-by-point basis, which require individualized quotes to dispel each ignorant thought individually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
Maybe one day -- when you grow up and learn how to use the internet -- you'll be able to do the same thing.
So year 3 of a rebuild MUST equal or exceed year 15 (or whatever it was) of the Stansbury era? By that logic we will likely hire and fire a coach every three years for eternity. That sounds lovely. You could at least make an attempt at being reasonable in your criticisms instead of blatantly overreaching with every post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
It's really simple. We need better players than we have. You're saying the same thing. If we get Newman, we are instantly light years better. If 2016 works out that way, we're a whole lot better. THAT is exactly what I'm asking for. I am in no way saying "fire Rick Ray today". I'm saying that the guys we have now and that are committed in 2015 aren't going to get it done no matter how hard they play. Let's get Newman and put together a good class in 2016, or let's go another direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
Uh, engie was also leading the charge to fire Mullen and hire Hud. Are you calling him out too?Quote:
Originally Posted by thf24
20 is less than 21 and 21 got him fired. Twenty wins is fair. 21 was a disaster that meant firing. Again twenty is fair. 17 wins is a fu@king joke. Will James could coach us to 17 wins in basketball.Quote:
Originally Posted by NewTweederEndzoneDance
Rivals:
2015
#2 Kentucky
#3 aTm
#11 Auburn
#13 Florida
#24 LSU
#30 South Carolina
6 Pac12
6 ACC
3 Big East
4 B1G
2 American
1 Big12
1 Mountain West
1 a10
2014
#2 Kentucky
#10 Florida
#21 Mizzou
#25 Vandy
#28 Bama
7 ACC
3 Big12
5 Pac12
2 Mountain West
4 Big East
4 B1G
So, in the past 2 classes per Rivals:
13 ACC
11 PAC12
11 SEC
8 B1G
7 Big East
4 Big12
3 Mountain West
2 American
1 A10
There is no excuse for the middle of the pack in the SEC to be as bad as it's been in basketball recently
What agenda must you have to keep misstating this?Quote:
Originally Posted by NewTweederEndzoneDance
"So year 3 of a rebuild MUST equal or exceed the season that got Stansbury fired?
There, fixed it for you.
You are pretty careless about forgetting how I hedged that aren't you...Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDawg
ExactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by MadDawg
engie has extensive numbers and information to back up his arguments on this subject. I've never seen preacher back up his opinion with anything other than agreement with others, so I'm not going to give him the benefit of the doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDawg
Do you seriously believe the number of regular season wins Stansbury's final year had jack shit to do with his stepping down/firing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
Conveniently moving the goalposts you previously had set for Ray. Which is all you've done in regards to him since the beginning...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg61
In other words -- you are admitting that you expect us to show improvement and win 17+ this year -- and are hedging your bets on the improvement being sub 20 so that so you can keep going down this ridiculous path for an extra year instead of admitting things are going in the right direction and everything you've said about Ray has been premature and unfounded.
Holy shit you are one sensitive dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by engie
We were discussing three people - the man, the man after the man, and the man after the man after the man. Johnson85 implied Stans was the first man, Ray was the 2nd man and the third man would be the coach you really want to be. You disagreed (imagine that) and said actually Williams was the man, Stans was the man after the man, and Ray was the man after the man after the man. See that puts Stans in the middle according to you. Or the "tweener". And that got your panties in a wad.
20 wins is within reach this year.Engie and Coach knows I did not like this hire but Ray needs this and next season he got better players coming in, Ray has 5 players with 800 or more mins. playing time in the SEC that will count for something. We are only 2 games in the season .I hate to think what this board will be like if he loses a game .
You could have just said "No, I agree with engie so I will not call him out for wanting to fire Mullen last year. His perceived ability to judge coaches should not be impacted by wanting to fire the most successful coach in MSU football history less than 1 year before he had us ranked #1 for a month."Quote:
Originally Posted by thf24
The other big difference is that I admitted when I had jumped the gun about Mullen at the FIRST POSSIBLE juncture to admit such(when he miraculously pulled off the Egg Bowl -- at the time his best win and first win as an underdog in 45 games). I owned it THAT NIGHT. I have never given Mullen grief for one second after that Egg Bowl victory. Although it took me until the win in Baton Rouge to be firmly back in his corner. My viewpoint on Mullen was consistent and well-spelled-out multiple times -- with a consistent set of circumstances he had to meet to get me back in his corner. #1 become bowl eligible to get me off his back -- he did. #2 recruit better -- has has. #3 beat someone good -- he has. He's given us more this year than any reasonable person could have expected. This "Fire Mullen" bullshit you keep trying to run is hilarious -- when it was CLEARLY spelled out by me over a dozen times that you've seen that I was ONLY IN FAVOR OF FIRING MULLEN IF AND WHEN HE LOST THE EGG BOWL. Literally -- a dozen times -- that you've seen. And you are still stuck on it. What is even funnier is the guy that's stuck on that WANTED TO FIRE COHEN....Quote:
Originally Posted by thf24
The PROBLEM with the Dawg61 grouping of the anti-Ray bias is the fact that their goalposts are constantly moving in order to keep bitching. It makes their positions unreliable -- calls actual motive to question -- and basically reduces them to an actual joke. If they could spell out a reasonable position -- even if negative -- with a reasonable approach -- no one would be calling them to task constantly. Instead, it's constantly evolving in order to bitch and fubar every single basketball thread that happens here.
Holy shit -- you still don't get what I was actually saying after it's been spelled out 3 times in this very thread. I wish I was surprised.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDawg
Where did I "want to fire Mullen last year"? Once again -- you are skewing my position by leaving out the bullet points on my Mullen position.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadDawg
You see only through your own little prism, which isn't even close to the reality of a position that I spelled out, in detail, over a dozen times on every MSU site. But then again -- you can't even comprehend the shit that I spelled out for you MULTIPLE times in this very thread -- so asking you to comprehend something old is certainly asking alot.