goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Jerome Tang Coaches Kansas State Basketball => Topic started by: EllToPay on April 03, 2012, 08:17:37 AM
-
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7767401/indiana-hoosiers-continue-moving-2012-13
:frown:
-
we will. prepare yourself for all the i told you so.
-
We will be good. I'm expecting big things.
-
In a few days, I will probably be ready for the "He just had a bad marriage" talking point. Ready to be his hot new wife cat fans? CAUSE HE SURE IS READY FOR YOU :fatty:
-
how many teams bring in a brand new coach and are top 25 quality that aren't ku unc uk etc?
We will struggle.
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
-
how many teams bring in a brand new coach and are top 25 quality that aren't ku unc uk etc?
We will struggle.
especially with a guy whose biggest flaw is that he can't get guys to play hard for him.
-
how many teams bring in a brand new coach and are top 25 quality that aren't ku unc uk etc?
We will struggle.
Just look at Mizzou this year. Haith got COTY. Now everyone is trying to "find their Frank Haith". It's going to be entertaining watching him drive them off the cliff over the next few years.
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
Maybe he will 'cruit good?
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
The article was talking about next year. Some people are being fatalists about next year, when we will be good.
I have no idea how the future will go, but people are letting their anger get in the way of looking at anything objectively, which includes the fact that if people come back next year, we will win.
Don't turn my comment into anything more than a observation on next year. I have no idea what the future holds beyond that.
-
I've already heard the "bad marriage at Illinois" talking point. And actually, it was more like, "you never know, maybe he had a bad marriage at Illinois". So it's really fun that everyone is trying to convince themselves that it will be okay. Battered Wife Syndrome at it's best.
-
I've already heard the "bad marriage at Illinois" talking point. And actually, it was more like, "you never know, maybe he had a bad marriage at Illinois". So it's really fun that everyone is trying to convince themselves that it will be okay. Battered Wife Syndrome at it's best.
He was a bad fit there, no doubt about it.
I think he will coach more comfortably in a smaller fishbowl. Whether or not that translates to wins, I have no idea, but my hope, like _FAN's, is that he goes back to his SIU style. Maybe being more comfortable will do that. :dunno:
-
KSU should be good next year. Not disagreeing. In fact, so good that anything less than a Sweet 16 is a fireable offense.
-
how many teams bring in a brand new coach and are top 25 quality that aren't ku unc uk etc?
We will struggle.
Illinois, when they hired Weber. K-State when we hired Frank in '07-'08.
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
The article was talking about next year. Some people are being fatalists about next year, when we will be good.
I have no idea how the future will go, but people are letting their anger get in the way of looking at anything objectively, which includes the fact that if people come back next year, we will win.
Don't turn my comment into anything more than a observation on next year. I have no idea what the future holds beyond that.
i can't think of one person (on here anyway) that thinks we will be bad next year. that's why the "hey guys, let's just wait and see how it goes" talking point is so frustrating. i know how it will go, but it's going to take five years before i can say "i told you so". i don't want to wait that long. i might not even be alive then.
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
The article was talking about next year. Some people are being fatalists about next year, when we will be good.
I have no idea how the future will go, but people are letting their anger get in the way of looking at anything objectively, which includes the fact that if people come back next year, we will win.
Don't turn my comment into anything more than a observation on next year. I have no idea what the future holds beyond that.
i can't think of one person (on here anyway) that thinks we will be bad next year. that's why the "hey guys, let's just wait and see how it goes" talking point is so frustrating. i know how it will go, but it's going to take five years before i can say "i told you so". i don't want to wait that long. i might not even be alive then.
This is exactly right. I've already gone through this once in my life. The long slow decent from Altman to Asbury to Wooldrige was terrible to watch. I don't know if I can stay EMAW while watching K-State basketball slowly wither and die again.
-
i can't think of one person (on here anyway) that thinks we will be bad next year. that's why the "hey guys, let's just wait and see how it goes" talking point is so frustrating. i know how it will go, but it's going to take five years before i can say "i told you so". i don't want to wait that long. i might not even be alive then.
Why will be good next year but suck afterward? I'd see your point if Weber was inheriting a solid crop of 4* top 100 blue chippers. But, he isn't.
Frank left Weber with a decent lot of 3* top 150 talent.
So, I guess the question is whether BW will be able to recruit 3* top 150 talent to KSU. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
-
fwiw, I don't think we'll be very good if Angel leaves (and we don't get a last second ready to start PG by some miracle). you think a team with Will Spradling running point for an entire season will be worth a crap?
-
i can't think of one person (on here anyway) that thinks we will be bad next year. that's why the "hey guys, let's just wait and see how it goes" talking point is so frustrating. i know how it will go, but it's going to take five years before i can say "i told you so". i don't want to wait that long. i might not even be alive then.
Why will be good next year but suck afterward? I'd see your point if Weber was inheriting a solid crop of 4* top 100 blue chippers. But, he isn't.
Frank left Weber with a decent lot of 3* top 150 talent.
So, I guess the question is whether BW will be able to recruit 3* top 150 talent to KSU. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
-
fwiw, I don't think we'll be very good Angel leaves (and we don't get a last second ready to start PG by some miracle). you think a team with Will Spradling running point for an entire season will be worth a crap?
11-7 w/ Angel
9-9 w/out Angel
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
The article was talking about next year. Some people are being fatalists about next year, when we will be good.
I have no idea how the future will go, but people are letting their anger get in the way of looking at anything objectively, which includes the fact that if people come back next year, we will win.
Don't turn my comment into anything more than a observation on next year. I have no idea what the future holds beyond that.
:facepalm:
try to pay attention.
please.
we will be good.
there will be a bunch or tuck based "told you so".
we will prolly give him an extension/raise.
then we will begin the slow steady descent to crap.
tucks will defend crap because he sure is a nice fella/mow's his grass/coupons
6 years from now we will suck be strapped with a crap roster and have to start over.
:bawl:
-
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
No, I read your post. You think BW will play out exactly how it did at Illinois. Inherits somebody else's players, achieves initial success, slowly fades into mediocrity.
Amiright?
-
fwiw, I don't think we'll be very good if Angel leaves (and we don't get a last second ready to start PG by some miracle). you think a team with Will Spradling running point for an entire season will be worth a crap?
this is a good point you sonofabitch.
-
6 years from now we will suck be strapped with a crap roster and have to start over.
Define crap. 3* marginal top 150 players?
Aside from McGruder we don't have any current players who are much better than average 3* talent. Aside from Upshaw (who I give Frank a ton of credit for), we haven't successfully recruited any elite talent post-dalonte. It is what it is. Frank's recruiting had dropped of quite significantly.
So, the question in my mind is whether BW will be able to sustain marginal, 3* top 150 talent at K-State.
-
i'd rather have will at the 1 than the 2, so ya, there's that. assuming art leaves.
-
i'd rather have will at the 1 than the 2, so ya, there's that. assuming art leaves.
you can move will, marty, jeremy around between the 1 & 2 but I got news for you...there's not a winning combination in there no matter how many times you shuffle them around.
-
fwiw, I don't think we'll be very good if Angel leaves (and we don't get a last second ready to start PG by some miracle). you think a team with Will Spradling running point for an entire season will be worth a crap?
This :bang:
-
If angel is gone, I would let Marty run point and just go nuts. It probably wouldn't work great, but would be entertaining and I think it gives the most upside
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
-
and the best part is all the Illini posters have said one of oscar's biggest problem at UI was he could never find the pg to make his motion offense go after Dee Brown left. Angel is the most important piece for Weber's future
-
i'd rather have will at the 1 than the 2, so ya, there's that. assuming art leaves.
you can move will, marty, jeremy around between the 1 & 2 but I got news for you...there's not a winning combination in there no matter how many times you shuffle them around.
Ok Chicken little
-
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
No, I read your post. You think BW will play out exactly how it did at Illinois. Inherits somebody else's players, achieves initial success, slowly fades into mediocrity.
Amiright?
yeah. that was exactly my point.
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
-
My understanding is that all the players are staying. I suppose things could change, but as of now they are all staying.
-
If they all stay I will cheer on and support this team because I love these guys.
I will probably make fun of oscar alot, too.
-
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
No, I read your post. You think BW will play out exactly how it did at Illinois. Inherits somebody else's players, achieves initial success, slowly fades into mediocrity.
Amiright?
yeah. that was exactly my point.
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
6 of those 11 games under .500 were this year... with 6 freshmen, just sayin.
-
My understanding is that all the players are staying. I suppose things could change, but as of now they are all staying.
great news cc. I selfishly didn't want to lose Angel.
-
My understanding is that all the players are staying. I suppose things could change, but as of now they are all staying.
great news cc. I selfishly didn't want to lose Angel.
Well see now that Undy is gone :cry:
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.kansascity.com%2Fsmedia%2F2012%2F04%2F01%2F00%2F32%2FkLwKw.St.81.jpg&hash=28d0191c6a82e3b5309f9316270f7da4b07e7d64)
This picture has 2 completely likeable persons in it. It accually makes me smile.
You might even call them
adorable. :surprised:
-
My understanding is that all the players are staying. I suppose things could change, but as of now they are all staying.
:pbj:
-
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
No, I read your post. You think BW will play out exactly how it did at Illinois. Inherits somebody else's players, achieves initial success, slowly fades into mediocrity.
Amiright?
yeah. that was exactly my point.
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
6 of those 11 games under .500 were this year... with 6 freshmen, just sayin.
and 80% of the roster was comprised of small forwards. what's your point?
-
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
No, I read your post. You think BW will play out exactly how it did at Illinois. Inherits somebody else's players, achieves initial success, slowly fades into mediocrity.
Amiright?
yeah. that was exactly my point.
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
6 of those 11 games under .500 were this year... with 6 freshmen, just sayin.
and 80% of the roster was comprised of small forwards. what's your point?
I had no point, hence the "just sayin"
-
i think you just responded without reading one single word of my post.
No, I read your post. You think BW will play out exactly how it did at Illinois. Inherits somebody else's players, achieves initial success, slowly fades into mediocrity.
Amiright?
yeah. that was exactly my point.
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
6 of those 11 games under .500 were this year... with 6 freshmen, just sayin.
Well then as long as we don't hire the bad person who should be keeping a balanced roster, we should be ok
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
-
Any of those Illinois freshman thinking about following their dear leader to Manhattan?
-
Any of those Illinois freshman thinking about following their dear leader to Manhattan?
My understanding is that all the players are staying. I suppose things could change, but as of now they are all staying.
Aint no seats! :woot: :pbj:
-
fwiw, I don't think we'll be very good if Angel leaves (and we don't get a last second ready to start PG by some miracle). you think a team with Will Spradling running point for an entire season will be worth a crap?
this is a good point you sonofabitch.
Awe c'mon, Spradling is gonna turn into Steve Blake now that Frank is gone. He'll be all happy playing his 35 minutes a game, instead of all grumpy playing 35 minutes a game. So that means he'll be good now, right? RIGHT????
-
6 years from now we will suck be strapped with a crap roster and have to start over.
Define crap. 3* marginal top 150 players?
Aside from McGruder we don't have any current players who are much better than average 3* talent. Aside from Upshaw (who I give Frank a ton of credit for), we haven't successfully recruited any elite talent post-dalonte. It is what it is. Frank's recruiting had dropped of quite significantly.
So, the question in my mind is whether BW will be able to sustain marginal, 3* top 150 talent at K-State.
You are putting way too much stock in recruiting rankings. They should help set expectations, but they are not more important than actual college experience. Inheriting a team featuring McGruder and JO as seniors is huge. McGruder is a hell of a college player, and JO is a potential pro. I think oscar Weber can recruit well enough to build teams like this. I just think we will go to the CBI and NIT during the building process and we will have no success until he gets his tournament team once every 4 or 5 years. That is simply not good enough when we just ran off a coach who still goes to the tournament in rebuilding years.
-
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
What's your point, ultimately? Bad coach or a bad recruiter? I guess I thought your point was bad recruiter. i.e., he'll win with Frank's players like he did with Self's players, but he'll suck with his own players just like he did at Illini. That's why I raise the argument about Frank's 3* players. If he can recruit average talent, we're pretty much in the same spot as with Martin. That's my point.
Weber isn't a bad coach. He's not an elite coach either. Just like Frank.
But, to say he will take our program back to the Asbury/Woolridge era is one of the more Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) goEMAW talking points.
The Negative: Weber had 2 shitty seasons at Illinois. no question. rough ridin' terrible. He was 5-13 (9th) (10 scholarship players/5 freshmen), 6-12 (9th) (6 freshmen).
The Positive: Taken 2 different schools to NCAA, 3 sweet 16s, 1 national title appearance. Won 4 Conference Championships (2 @S.Ill., 2 @ Ill.). He's got a .670 career winning record.
btw, his 2011 recruiting class had 6 top 100 guys. one could make the argument that the 2012 season was bad because these guys were freshmen.
-
I think oscar Weber can recruit well enough to build teams like this. I just think we will go to the CBI and NIT during the building process and we will have no success until he gets his tournament team once every 4 or 5 years.
In eleven seasons, 2001-2012, Weber went to 8 NCAA tourneys, including 3 sweet 16s and a National Championship. 1 NIT. 2 no post-season.
So, I guess your prediction has no basis in fact.
-
I think oscar Weber can recruit well enough to build teams like this. I just think we will go to the CBI and NIT during the building process and we will have no success until he gets his tournament team once every 4 or 5 years.
In eleven seasons, 2001-2012, Weber went to 8 NCAA tourneys, including 3 sweet 16s and a National Championship. 1 NIT. 2 no post-season.
So, I guess your prediction has no basis in fact.
First of all, whatever he did at Southern Illinois is irrelevant. It takes a different level of talent to make the tournament in the Valley than it does the Big 10 or Big 12. He took Illinois to the Sweet 16 and the National Championship with the 5 NBA players he inherited from Bill Self. He made the tournament 2 times in the 5 years after Self's players were out of the system, and he didn't even qualify for the NIT in his last year.
-
My understanding is that all the players are staying. I suppose things could change, but as of now they are all staying.
great news cc. I selfishly didn't want to lose Angel.
There IS a chance he misunderstood Angel. Let Sys ask him, he speaks the language.
-
I’ve beat this drum a lot, but hopefully it will sink in: oscar Weber’s recruiting only got better over the last 3 years because of one man: Jerrance Howard. Otherwise, recruiting under his tenure has been underwhelming considering the available, local talent.
oscar took over a program that had, for the 11 years prior to his arrival had made it to the post season 10 times and in the previous 6 six years had been to the S16 and E8. And by year 5 of Weber, Illinois didn’t make the post season and then subsequently made it to the ncaa twice in the 4 years after that.
To say that expecting this to happen at KSU isn’t being “objective” is absurd. If anything, it’s entirely objective. And the roster he has with KSU now is nothing compared to the roster he stepped into at Illinois.
This team should be an NCAA tourney team that makes it to the s16. They should finish in the top 3 of the conference. They should. That’s not setting unreasonable expectations. Winning next year is moot. It would have been expected even if House Burner was still our coach.
-
This.
-
I’ve beat this drum a lot, but hopefully it will sink in: oscar Weber’s recruiting only got better over the last 3 years because of one man: Jerrance Howard. Otherwise, recruiting under his tenure has been underwhelming considering the available, local talent.
Where was K-State recruiting headed without Frank's Jerrance Howard (i.e. Dalonte Hill)?
Moral of the story, any successful coach needs successful recruiters. Huggins had one. Frank had one. Weber had one. Weber gets to claim credit for Howard's recruits just like Frank/Huggins got to claim credit for Dalonte's recruits. Just like Self gets to claim credit for Dooley's recruits. And so on and so forth.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
-
I’ve beat this drum a lot, but hopefully it will sink in: oscar Weber’s recruiting only got better over the last 3 years because of one man: Jerrance Howard. Otherwise, recruiting under his tenure has been underwhelming considering the available, local talent.
Where was K-State recruiting headed without Frank's Jerrance Howard (i.e. Dalonte Hill)?
I’ve beat this drum a lot, but hopefully it will sink in: oscar Weber’s recruiting only got better over the last 3 years because of one man: Jerrance Howard. Otherwise, recruiting under his tenure has been underwhelming considering the available, local talent.
Where was K-State recruiting headed without Frank's Jerrance Howard (i.e. Dalonte Hill)?
Moral of the story, any successful coach needs successful recruiters. Huggins had one. Frank had one. Weber had one. Weber gets to claim credit for Howard's recruits just like Frank/Huggins got to claim credit for Dalonte's recruits. Just like Self gets to claim credit for Dooley's recruits. And so on and so forth.
Moral of the story, any successful coach needs successful recruiters. Huggins had one. Frank had one. Weber had one. Weber gets to claim credit for Howard's recruits just like Frank/Huggins got to claim credit for Dalonte's recruits. Just like Self gets to claim credit for Dooley's recruits. And so on and so forth.
I don't even
-
i was just confused when your response had something to do with him inheriting 3* players and then judging him moving forward based on whether or not he would be able to continue it, when the fact of the matter is that weber had 4* players at illinois and was still 11 games under .500 in conference play during his last six years there. it just seemed like a weird thing to post in the first place and then even weirder to quote me and then post it since it had absolutely nothing to do with the post that you were quoting.
What's your point, ultimately? Bad coach or a bad recruiter? I guess I thought your point was bad recruiter. i.e., he'll win with Frank's players like he did with Self's players, but he'll suck with his own players just like he did at Illini. That's why I raise the argument about Frank's 3* players. If he can recruit average talent, we're pretty much in the same spot as with Martin. That's my point.
Weber isn't a bad coach. He's not an elite coach either. Just like Frank.
But, to say he will take our program back to the Asbury/Woolridge era is one of the more Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) goEMAW talking points.
The Negative: Weber had 2 shitty seasons at Illinois. no question. rough ridin' terrible. He was 5-13 (9th) (10 scholarship players/5 freshmen), 6-12 (9th) (6 freshmen).
The Positive: Taken 2 different schools to NCAA, 3 sweet 16s, 1 national title appearance. Won 4 Conference Championships (2 @S.Ill., 2 @ Ill.). He's got a .670 career winning record.
btw, his 2011 recruiting class had 6 top 100 guys. one could make the argument that the 2012 season was bad because these guys were freshmen.
my point is that recruiting 3* and 4* talent has very little to do with winning when you have a poor system, are a poor motivator and are very bad at roster management.
give frank 3* and 4* players that he alone recruited, put together and coached during the 5 year period he was here and he went 50-32 in conference. give oscar weber 3* and 4* players that he alone recruited, put together and coached during the same period of time when he was at illinois and he went 41-49 in conference.
my point is that i want to WIN. i want WINNING basketball. W.I.N. i don't care if we only beat ft hays state by four points in november, i want to win. i don't care if our bbpf is worth 20 million or 13.5, i want to win.
frank proved that he could do it at ksu and weber proved that he could not at illinois.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or, they were inexperienced freshmen. If we had a team full of Angel's we wouldn't have been in the tourney.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or, they were inexperienced freshmen. If we had a team full of Angel's we wouldn't have been in the tourney.
Maybe he should have recruited a balanced team, then.
-
my point is that i want to WIN. i want WINNING basketball. W.I.N. i don't care if we only beat ft hays state by four points in november, i want to win. i don't care if our bbpf is worth 20 million or 13.5, i want to win.
frank proved that he could do it at ksu and weber proved that he could not at illinois.
Weber at Illinois = 210-101 .675%
Frank at KSU = 117-54 .684%
-
my point is that i want to WIN. i want WINNING basketball. W.I.N. i don't care if we only beat ft hays state by four points in november, i want to win. i don't care if our bbpf is worth 20 million or 13.5, i want to win.
frank proved that he could do it at ksu and weber proved that he could not at illinois.
Weber at Illinois = 210-101 .675%
Frank at KSU = 117-54 .684%
:lol:
-
From a Basketball Prospectus link that _FAN shared earlier:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.basketballprospectus.com%2Funfiltered%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F03%2Fweberian.jpg&hash=519f75e8190b2de2c08444851de4167a3c368c98)
:sdeek:
-
From a Basketball Prospectus link that _FAN shared earlier:
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.basketballprospectus.com%2Funfiltered%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F03%2Fweberian.jpg&hash=519f75e8190b2de2c08444851de4167a3c368c98)
:sdeek:
Yep, his offensive efficiency is a concern.
To be fair, Frank's offense was often at or below average too. Only the Beasley year was our offense in league play in the Top 4 in the league.
-
btw, his 2011 recruiting class had 6 top 100 guys. one could make the argument that the 2012 season was bad because these guys were freshmen.
You probably meant to type 4. He had 4 (out of 6 total) top 100 players in his 11 class. Still very good to be sure. Those 4 guys were from Chicago. If oscar Weber is able to recruit Illinois the way he recruited Illinois at Illinois you will NEVER hear me complain about his recruiting.
Or, they were inexperienced freshmen. If we had a team full of Angel's we wouldn't have been in the tourney.
KSU 2007-2008?
-
Maybe he should have recruited a balanced team, then.
I will concede the idea about poor recruiting management. Clearly, it's a flawed strategy to roll in 5-6 FR every 3-4 years. The resulting 2 seasons of mediocrity speak for themselves. 07-08 and 11-12 were abysmal.
But, that 06-07 recruiting class (balanced 2(G), 2(F), 1(C))went on to 2 NCAAs and 1 NIT and 2nd, 4th, 5th place finishes in the Big10. Very Frankesque performance.
The 2010-2011 was a top-25 recruiting class. and balanced. 1(PG) 2(SF), 1(PF), 2(C). We'll see how they do in the next 3-4 years. They'll probably be pretty successful.
Look, I'm not saying BW is Coach K. I'd clearly rather have Frank. But, you guys are melting down about how this guy is Jim Wooldridge or Tom Asbury and will return this program to the dark ages.
I just think his track record is a bit better than that. He's been a good coach. good recruiter. poor recruiting management. Wooldrige and Asbury were terrible in all facets.
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
I'll admit, I threw him in with Wooly and Asbury and it wasn't fair. I think it's likely he'll be better than all 3.
-
:lol:
It is funny, right? :lol:
I figured Martin's winning percentage would have been much greater than Weber's. Alas, Martin and Weber are really about the same in terms of being a College Basketball Coach.
-
Weber at Illinois = 210-101 .675%
Frank at KSU = 117-54 .684%
:lol:
It is funny, right? :lol:
I figured Martin's winning percentage would have been much greater than Weber's. Alas, Martin and Weber are really about the same in terms of being a College Basketball Coach.
[/quote]
i was laughing because my post had to do with how they compared with teams that they were pretty much solely reposible for recruiting, putting together and the subsequently coaching. franks five years and webers last five and specifically in conference. then you deleted that part of my post, completely ignored it and instead posted their total overall winning percentage which is largely skewed by the nba roster that bill self handed over to weber. it was pretty lol.
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
Altman
68-54 (.557) overall
19-37 (.339) conference
Weber
210–101 (.675) overall
89–65 (.578) conference
Weber may fail. It's certainly possible. Frank may fail at South Carolina without the DC Assault pipeline. It's possible. That's college athletics.
But, if you look at his track record, the odds are that Weber will take this program to the NCAA tournament most years, the NIT some years, and it's possible we may miss the post-season altogether.
Time will tell. Again, the dude has some flaws. Just like Frank had flaws. I'm just willing to give him a chance. I guess others are not.
-
their starting points were entirely different. their locations were entirely different.
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
Altman
68-54 (.557) overall
19-37 (.339) conference
Weber
210–101 (.675) overall
89–65 (.578) conference
Weber may fail. It's certainly possible. Frank may fail at South Carolina without the DC Assault pipeline. It's possible. That's college athletics.
But, if you look at his track record, the odds are that Weber will take this program to the NCAA tournament most years, the NIT some years, and it's possible we may miss the post-season altogether.
Time will tell. Again, the dude has some flaws. Just like Frank had flaws. I'm just willing to give him a chance. I guess others are not.
I've come around, I'm willing as well. I agree with all you said there as well. Weber was much better at winning road games than those guys, even the last 6 years, though not as good as Frank.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or, they were inexperienced freshmen. If we had a team full of Angel's we wouldn't have been in the tourney.
Illinois was was #244 in experience on kenpom, Kansas State was #238.
-
Time will tell. Again, the dude has some flaws. Just like Frank had flaws. I'm just willing to give him a chance.
Why do people keep repeating this? Illinois gave him his chance and failed. He got fired! That was his chance!
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or, they were inexperienced freshmen. If we had a team full of Angel's we wouldn't have been in the tourney.
Illinois was was #244 in experience on kenpom, Kansas State was #238.
Well if you're going to keep poking holes in his excuses, you really aren't giving him much of a chance to do what he does.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or a poor job coaching. Or both.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or a poor job coaching. Or both.
Yeah. I think we can all agree that he completely failed no matter how you look at it. Well, we should.
-
If you land a crap load of highly rated players and can't make the tournament with them, you did a poor job recruiting.
Or a poor job coaching. Or both.
Yeah. I think we can all agree that he completely failed no matter how you look at it. Well, we should.
Not completely but his performance was definitely subpar. Not awful every time out but not a perennial NCAA Tournament participant either (which, BTW, should be the floor for expectations at KSU).
-
Already pointed out, but Angel's gotta stay.
It's either that or Gruds' improves his handle beyond belief.
The odds of finding an immediate impact PG at this stage of the game are not high.
So a plea from anybody who gives a crap about KSU hoops, please stay Angel.
-
Those 4 guys were from Chicago. If oscar Weber is able to recruit Illinois the way he recruited Illinois at Illinois you will NEVER hear me complain about his recruiting.
Recruiting in Chicago is really weird in that oscar himself will be seen as more palatable now that he's not at Illinois. I know that seems counterintuitive, but there's a screwed up set of expectations that accompany the University of Illinois when it appears in and around the city. Certain coaches believe certain players are entitled to "looks" since they're home state talent, others think Illinois has to do more to "prove" why a kid should stay home, others get bogged down in whether certain high schools are being shown preferable treatment, etc. If there were such a thing as a quadruple-edged sword for us, this would be it.
Things get simpler for oscar now. He's an outsider coming in and (hopefully, for your sake) offering up the chance to come to the Big XII and be the man (this was another problem of his, btw - he would always refuse to blow sunshine on kids while recruiting them and really hold the line on things like "you'll have to earn your spot"; yeah, we get it, oscar, but that goes over like a lead balloon in a living room, ok?). It's a little more cut-and-dried for him, at least in Illinois, I think.
-
Doyle
I heard Illinois has higher academic requirements than most D1 schools. Know anything about that?
-
Maybe he should have recruited a balanced team, then.
I will concede the idea about poor recruiting management. Clearly, it's a flawed strategy to roll in 5-6 FR every 3-4 years. The resulting 2 seasons of mediocrity speak for themselves. 07-08 and 11-12 were abysmal.
But, that 06-07 recruiting class (balanced 2(G), 2(F), 1(C))went on to 2 NCAAs and 1 NIT and 2nd, 4th, 5th place finishes in the Big10. Very Frankesque performance.
The 2010-2011 was a top-25 recruiting class. and balanced. 1(PG) 2(SF), 1(PF), 2(C). We'll see how they do in the next 3-4 years. They'll probably be pretty successful.
Look, I'm not saying BW is Coach K. I'd clearly rather have Frank. But, you guys are melting down about how this guy is Jim Wooldridge or Tom Asbury and will return this program to the dark ages.
I just think his track record is a bit better than that. He's been a good coach. good recruiter. poor recruiting management. Wooldrige and Asbury were terrible in all facets.
Why would you clearly have Frank? Doesn't make sense to me if you can get the same coach (in your opinion) without the stuff you hate about Frank.
-
Doyle
I heard Illinois has higher academic requirements than most D1 schools. Know anything about that?
I think we're pretty rigid with academics. I don't know if it's actual higher standards or just not making as many exceptions, but there's definitely been consistent talk of us having concerns in instances where some other schools don't. Sorry I don't know more of the specifics.
-
If people stay, we probably will be.
People here are just having a hard time seeing that through the butt hurt.
Bullshit. Most people know we'll be pretty good next year and probably the year after that. But it's fairly obvious that Currie didn't give a crap beyond that, which is why there is so much butthurt.
The fact that he mentioned how important it us to win with these seniors speaks volumes. He can't/won't recognize how much more important AR-T and Gip are to the program compared to JO and Rodney.
The article was talking about next year. Some people are being fatalists about next year, when we will be good.
I have no idea how the future will go, but people are letting their anger get in the way of looking at anything objectively, which includes the fact that if people come back next year, we will win.
Don't turn my comment into anything more than a observation on next year. I have no idea what the future holds beyond that.
:facepalm:
try to pay attention.
please.
we will be good.
there will be a bunch or tuck based "told you so".
we will prolly give him an extension/raise.
then we will begin the slow steady descent to crap.
tucks will defend crap because he sure is a nice fella/mow's his grass/coupons
6 years from now we will suck be strapped with a crap roster and have to start over.
:bawl:
:Crybaby:
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
I'll admit, I threw him in with Wooly and Asbury and it wasn't fair. I think it's likely he'll be better than all 3.
Welp.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5mimDzU4AAW1tp.png:large)
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
I'll admit, I threw him in with Wooly and Asbury and it wasn't fair. I think it's likely he'll be better than all 3.
Welp.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5mimDzU4AAW1tp.png:large)
This needs to be shared with the world.
-
I don't think he's Wooly or Asbury. I think he's Altman (in two years).
I'll admit, I threw him in with Wooly and Asbury and it wasn't fair. I think it's likely he'll be better than all 3.
Welp.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5mimDzU4AAW1tp.png:large)
This needs to be shared with the world.
Anyone and everyone, feel free to share it as much as you want. I just tweeted it out this morning too.
-
kstate is a coaches graveyard.
-
kstate is a coaches graveyard.
Factor in an alum staying only 4 years and leaving before those guys, and yeah it's pretty much true.