Even considering the mass exodus our team is undergoing, walk-ons that played maybe 10 minutes do not even deserve the key presses it takes to type that they are leaving.
Discuss.
Discuss.
Are walk-ons leaving a news worthy item?
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
Even considering the mass exodus our team is undergoing, walk-ons that played maybe 10 minutes do not even deserve the key presses it takes to type that they are leaving.
Discuss.
Discuss.
End of discussion.
I suspect the only reason they got any press at all is because their Gold Team schtick had them buddies with Marcello.
I suspect the only reason they got any press at all is because their Gold Team schtick had them buddies with Marcello.
irrelevant otherwise. Let's face it, the program was in worse shape than most of us realized in terms of discipline and work ethic. When the tide went out<div>on Rick he was swimming naked. I like Rick but I am disappointed that he allowed things to get to this point. With that said I think we will be ok in a couple of</div><div>years, if not we will need to make another change, it really is that simple. Let's put this behind us and move forward.</div>
With everything else going on, though, it is worth mentioning. Do they affect the apr or is that scholarship players only?
The other thing that makes it relevant to me: maybe ray really is making the players work a lot harder.
The other thing that makes it relevant to me: maybe ray really is making the players work a lot harder.
Had the same thought yesterday. Short answer is no, long answer, well I think it boils down a couple things. There is no longer a "print deadline" (well there is but no one actually reads the paper) and along with that, there is no editorial process where you present ideas for stories to have them rejected/accepted. The other thing propagating this non-news nonsense is that thereis no longer a need to commit real estate in the paper, you aren't limited to one or two stories a day, your limit is only set by the number of insider tips and shocking headlines you can write, just sling as much crap on the blog as you can and see what sticks (or in this case generates clicks). <div>
</div><div>With these changes, "journalists" now just throw out everything they run across and let the people decide what is newsworthy. Sadly, people in this culture are more likely to click negative nonsense than to click on a decent positive newsworthy story. It's a world of extremism where shocking headlines generate the most buzz and buzz means clicks and clicks mean dollars.</div><div>
</div><div>In the end, the people who click on these "non-news" stories are responsible for them bring "printed" because them more clicks a story gets the more "newsworthy" it has been deemed by the almightyadvertisingdollar.</div><div>
</div><div>I don't think it's the fault of the "writers". I'm sure a lot of them would love to go back to the day where they were paid to do research and build stories for a living. I'm sure slinging crap takes a lot out of you. For one, you have to spend a lot of time searching for crap. I've had to clean up my back yard and it's not very exciting walking around hunting turds. I can't imaging doing it for a living but if every turd I found meant money in my pocket I'd find even the smallest of turds and present it to the masses for approval.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
</div><div>With these changes, "journalists" now just throw out everything they run across and let the people decide what is newsworthy. Sadly, people in this culture are more likely to click negative nonsense than to click on a decent positive newsworthy story. It's a world of extremism where shocking headlines generate the most buzz and buzz means clicks and clicks mean dollars.</div><div>
</div><div>In the end, the people who click on these "non-news" stories are responsible for them bring "printed" because them more clicks a story gets the more "newsworthy" it has been deemed by the almightyadvertisingdollar.</div><div>
</div><div>I don't think it's the fault of the "writers". I'm sure a lot of them would love to go back to the day where they were paid to do research and build stories for a living. I'm sure slinging crap takes a lot out of you. For one, you have to spend a lot of time searching for crap. I've had to clean up my back yard and it's not very exciting walking around hunting turds. I can't imaging doing it for a living but if every turd I found meant money in my pocket I'd find even the smallest of turds and present it to the masses for approval.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
Not quite sure I agree with that statement. Our basketball program is already a steaming mound that I think will take much longer than two years to turn around. I honestly don't even see us NIT relevant for 4 years. If we fire the coach year 2 then we just set ourselves back even more. I think the biggest thing the program needs right now (aside from discipline) is stability. If we start the coaching carousel then we reduce the pool of coaches that would be willing to come here and as we just saw with this search they were aready not beating down our door and it would further complicate recruiting if we get the reputation of changing coaches faster than we change our underwear. I think we have to give him 4 years...3 if we are not showing any kind of improvement and are staying in the 7-11 win range. Just my thoughts.
2 years is plenty of time to show marked improvement - i.e. the program "headed in the right direction." If that doesn't happen, then yes, I would hire a new coach in 2 years. If we go 15-45 over the next two years, Ray hasn't shown that he can pull in the recruits and the players don't show any more effort than they did this season, then absolutely we'd be doing a new coaching search. Obviously we're talking about worst-case here.
All of this "free pass for 4 years"and "no hope of the NIT for4 years"******** is just that. It's an archaic way of thinking.
All of this "free pass for 4 years"and "no hope of the NIT for4 years"******** is just that. It's an archaic way of thinking.
and it will be news. This is news because it seems everyone is bailing on the basketball program, yes, even the walk ons. Now the rumors of Jalen and Wendell leaving are swirling. When does this end? I hope soon!
Tell me why this is so archaic. We have what 7 people on roster right now? We have lost 6 of our topseven scorers. We have a very underwheming class coming in and have lost some of them. The tallest player on our roster right now is 6'8". Nobody taller is coming in for next season as it now stands. We are going to be lucky to win 10 games next year. Yes basketball can be turned around in a hurry but star players like to play for winners because they want the national exposure for their 1-2 years in the NCAA before they make the jump to the NBA. We can't replace a roster of 5 star McDonald's All Americans like UK can year in and year out with the same caliber players. It is going to be a long rebuilding process which is why I am saying years before we reach the NIT. The only exception I see isif the cash register starts ringing and we buy high caliber recruits wholesale. That is typically the only way to get good players on very bad teams.
All of your points are valid (except for underwhelming recruiting class, we'll get back to that). Yes, we've had attrition and we're in awful shape for next year.
But it's an archaic way of thinking because it doesn't take years to lay a foundation like it does in football. Freshmen start and excel from day one in today's NCAA basketball. One good recruiting class is all it takes (see UK basketball). Now I know we're not Kentucky and we're not bringing in John Wall or Anthony Davis. But we're also not talking about national championship expectations, either. The NIT isn't exactly lofty expectations.
And this year's recruiting class is not bad. Obviously losing Gray hurts because we don't have a PG (Seriously... WTF?) but 2-3 of the remaining recruits are nice pickups. There aren't any one-and-done prospects, but calling it "underwhelming" is understating things.
But it's an archaic way of thinking because it doesn't take years to lay a foundation like it does in football. Freshmen start and excel from day one in today's NCAA basketball. One good recruiting class is all it takes (see UK basketball). Now I know we're not Kentucky and we're not bringing in John Wall or Anthony Davis. But we're also not talking about national championship expectations, either. The NIT isn't exactly lofty expectations.
And this year's recruiting class is not bad. Obviously losing Gray hurts because we don't have a PG (Seriously... WTF?) but 2-3 of the remaining recruits are nice pickups. There aren't any one-and-done prospects, but calling it "underwhelming" is understating things.
I think you can have an idea of where we are headed after year 3. As I have said before, the good thing about basketball is that it seems to me it is the easiest to turn around quickly.
Wins? Playing hard? Winning "easy" games? What? One could argue we didn't progress this year in football... are you ready to pull the trigger on Mullen just because instead of going 9-4, we went 7-6? What if we have another 7-6 year next year? Would you pull the trigger on him then? I'm with DS, you have to be able to evaluate the program based on more than just wins... and I think in this case, 2 years (ESPECIALLY after the **** we are having to deal with right now) is not enough time.
He will only have one chance to prove himself with recruiting HIS class, so you could argue that really you are only giving him a year, then you'd be ready to fire him. I'd give him AT LEAST 3, if not 4 years.
He will only have one chance to prove himself with recruiting HIS class, so you could argue that really you are only giving him a year, then you'd be ready to fire him. I'd give him AT LEAST 3, if not 4 years.
hard and compete then that is the start I would be looking for. If he is able to recruit to his system and bring in some consensus good players then I would see that as<div>progress. If neither of these two things happen in the first two years then I would say cut your losses and open up the checkbook. Mullen has restored pride and hard</div><div>work is a must to be successful under his program. He recruited ok his first two years and things look to be improving in that area. I look for Mullen to win at least 7 games</div><div>this year and maybe 8 or 9 if luck falls our way. If Ray can come close to what Mullen has done I will be with him 100%. Mullen didn't go out looking for excuses, he found</div><div>a way to get the job done. If Ray starts with alot of excuses then I will be officially concerned. Mullen was Mr. Positive from day one, Ray needs to go talk to Cousin Eddie.
</div>
</div>