How much longer is USC willing to put up with Paris?
- Thread starter rockingamecock
- Start date
That was then, this is now.
If anything, the time zone differences is what is driving the expansion for both the B1G and B1g 12.
Per the commissioner of the B1g 12 he wanted to have games spanning across the zones for more exposure.
Fot those who disagree, take it up with the commissioners of those conferences...
I think the rule is you have to lose 6 games by 40+. So give it a few more weeks.
John Lennon played an epiphone when he could have gone gibson. Ignominious only exists and has meaning in the eye of a beholder.
You may be the lone fan who takes pride in back-to-back NIT champs.
Couldn’t care less. Enjoyed the ride and appreciated the accomplishment; my self esteem doesn’t require ‘pride’ from achievements of the program I am a fan of.
I watched the NIT those years and was proud of our accomplishment. We had some decent players worth pulling for back then
Back-to-back NIT champs is an embarrassment. Winning it once is fine, so long as you build off it. Not since the 1950s has any team aspired to make the NIT in consecutive seasons, much less win it all twice in a row.
That said, those teams would take this team to the woodshed.
Honestly, if anything, our recent history shows that Dave Odom was one hell of a coach. He and Fogler are the only two that had us at least in the bubble conversation heading into the final week or two each season…
I’m not saying that should be the standard or that it’s good. But both of those guys are like John Wooden and Dean Smith compared to what even had since outside of the Final Four season.
We have to figure out how get this thing on the tracks. I for one would rather see us investing big money in men’s sports than Dawn’s team but I know that’s not popular among the fanbase. Hell, if I were making the $$ decisions, I’d pour all the money into Football OR Basketball until I actually won something. Might as well. Spreading out the $$ hasn’t gotten us recently in Men’s sports. 2010-2012 isn’t recent. Let’s at least be good in one of the 2 bigtime Men’s Sports.
You're right. I'm now missing the days when we had a Warchest of Credibility.
Did you lead the chant of "WE'RE 65TH, WE'RE 65TH!!" after the big NIT win?
It's a wise strategy fiscally. As exciting as our WBB may be, it's a total money pit. From July 1, 2023 - June 20, 2024, the WBB lost $5.6 million, and that was despite going 38-0 and winning a national title. WBB will never be a money maker. As much as people claim to love it, the bottom line doesn't lie.
Of our 11 wins, nine came at the expense of the following
NC A&T. 9-11
Southern Miss 11-12
Presbyterian. 11-12
Radford. 12-11
Charleston Southern. 11-12
Stetson. 8-14
The Citadel 7-15
SC State. 1-13
Albany. 4-11
I'm fumbling for the right words
NC A&T. 9-11
Southern Miss 11-12
Presbyterian. 11-12
Radford. 12-11
Charleston Southern. 11-12
Stetson. 8-14
The Citadel 7-15
SC State. 1-13
Albany. 4-11
I'm fumbling for the right words
I understand the rationale that there's no great advantage to parting ways with Paris mid-season. But what advantage is there to keeping until the end of the season?
Personally I don't really recall, but I doubt it. Probably enjoyed and appreciated the accomplishment(s) and moved on because it doesn't affect my ego, You know, like not being embarrased because a gen z-er sniggles a meme of our football coach.
Poohs and Eyores, what can I say.
It doesnt affect you, but here you are still clinging to it, whining and crying over a year later about it.
Lmao
Last edited:
I would be curious if the champions of the importance if the NIT tourney are the same ones who decry any bowl outside the playoffs as "meaningless".
It's not an accomplishment when you follow up a NCAAT season with a NIT season. That's called "regression". When you follow up a NIT season with another NIT season, that's called "stagnation".
No, but that was back in the day when kids played for the name on the front of the jersey. I liked some of those guys. They were worth watching and pulling for. I can't speak for the current time and student athlete, but I pulled for USC no matter what the game or tournament was.
I can enjoy the NIT tournament if Carolina’s playing and there are good games. That’s not the goal or anything but Carolina doesn’t seem to care regardless.
Okay, just to be clear, I'm coming from a place of not really having a dog in the fight. I didn't watch us in either tourney.
But I am honestly curious why the NIT had some importance in 2005-2006? More so than now, I mean.
It would seem on the surface that the NIT has been the fight for 65th for much longer than that.
I don’t know that the NIT carried much more significance then. Maybe slightly more viewer engagement. I think he’s pointing out how things were before NIL and the transfer portal. Even though it was the NIT, the team spent a lot of time together and had a sense of something to play for when it came to representing South Carolina.
2005 was well and truly into the "leave early" era of college basketball. College basketball players haven't really been playing for the name on the front of the jersey since around 1971 when the Spencer Haywood ruling came down. After that, the NBA couldn't require players to be four years out of HS.
Winning the NIT is better than what is going on now, but I don't recall seeing any "NIT Champion" bumper or window stickers back then.
Winning the NIT is a stepping stone for most programs, as the next year they're in the dance. But not for us.
a bit longer because you cant afford to get rid of all (Beamer, Maneiri, and Parris ) in 1 year.
Sounds like you would be in favour of the school dropping all varsity sports save football.
There are a couple of more non-dance post-season tournaments now than there were then?
If I recall, and that's a big if, we were the 1st team at that time to win the NIT and not make the NCAA tournament the next year. After accomplishing this feat twice in as many years Dave was let go.
Honestly didn't know that, but thats how much I follow bball.
Although, with more tourneys arguing over who is #65, it still seems like a tallest midget contest. But I get your point.
I don't think the NIT had much importance even back then. Much like the bowls now, I did not have interest in watching games established for the "losers". I will say this: Dave Odom was our coach back then. He was/is a good man. He was a solid coach. After winning the 2nd NIT championship here, he would get livid, when someone called him "NIT Dave". I'm not joking. He asked someone who called him that: "Is that supposed to be a compliment?".
That should be: "Nuff said" regarding the "importance" of the NIT, even back then.