goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Basketball is hard => Topic started by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2013, 09:11:59 PM

Title: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2013, 09:11:59 PM
The freshman look good and seem to have some chemistry with the older guys, also not clueless on defense.
Obviously real thin at in the front court, but getting hip back will help.

Maybe its because I'm used to Frank and us fistfucking around in these games, but weber seems to get the team better prepared.

Foster, Johnson and Westicles  :emawkid:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 01, 2013, 09:46:16 PM
Almost at half and I agree on the freshmen.  Johnson, foster, and Iwunu playing with good confidence and fluidity so far. 

Foster is going to be really good.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Holdin Manutz on November 01, 2013, 09:52:16 PM
Spradling still looks like a wasted spot on the floor, and krap is pretty much crap.  The freshmen do look good though.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 01, 2013, 10:00:35 PM
Spradling still looks like a wasted spot on the floor, and krap is pretty much crap.  The freshmen do look good though.

Yes.  Also, Omari is horrible

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2013, 10:02:52 PM
The officiating has gotten Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 01, 2013, 10:08:32 PM
Yep.  Also, Nino has no hands.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: michigancat on November 01, 2013, 10:09:58 PM
did we win
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: salcat on November 01, 2013, 10:11:28 PM
Shultz could do better than sprads. i hope he doesn't sniff the court after Jevon
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 01, 2013, 10:12:00 PM
did we win

if you were chatting, you'd know.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 01, 2013, 10:12:55 PM
did we win

Mich, I will let you know in 12 Tivo mins.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2013, 10:20:16 PM
I'm in. Foster = stud. Inwundo = shiny moments. Nigel = lengthier than expected. Jack krap is crap tho.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: yoman on November 01, 2013, 10:28:52 PM
We are going to get pisspounded by real teams until Thomas acclimates.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 01, 2013, 10:30:31 PM
Marcus Foster looks like a young Antoine Walker
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2013, 10:31:24 PM
We are going to get pisspounded by real teams until Thomas acclimates.
False. We're more athletic than expected. We're gonna hurt in the front court tho.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: steve dave on November 01, 2013, 10:32:57 PM
Foster-may be good
Nigel-ok stopgap at PG. need a scorer at PG, tho. hopefully thomas.
Will-suckier than before
Westicles-would be good if he had guard skills, terrible in the paint. His nickname is "Wundy"
Omari-awful
Nino-same as Wundy. better for his size in the paint than Wundy.
Johnson-hopefully the same as last year
Shane-cold shooting but he'll be fine
Krap-not good
don't know who else played. seems like there had to be someone.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: michigancat on November 01, 2013, 10:34:20 PM
did we win

if you were chatting, you'd know.

This is sys saying he misses me. :shy:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: steve dave on November 01, 2013, 10:35:57 PM
did we win

if you were chatting, you'd know.

This is sys saying he misses me. :shy:

why don't you ever turntable you pretentious bad person?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: meow meow on November 01, 2013, 10:36:35 PM
oscar making excuses for will in post game interview with Stan, wtf
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: yoman on November 01, 2013, 10:36:45 PM
We are going to get pisspounded by real teams until Thomas acclimates.
False. We're more athletic than expected. We gonna hurt in the front court tho.
We played Pitt State tonight. We do look surprisingly athletic, but our defense has a gaping hole in the middle. Gip can't play the whole game. This problem, along with Sprads playing significant minutes, will get us killed against teams like Georgetown. Reasonable teams may give us problems. That said, Thomas will hopefully fix the Sprads problem, and if he acclimates quickly, we should be able to avoid any more loses than the two we will already have. If he doesn't, worry.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: kougar24 on November 01, 2013, 10:53:22 PM
oscar making excuses for will in post game interview with Stan, wtf

This pissed me off also.

And what's with this thread? We're garbage and we looked like garbage.

Better than expected? Pfffft
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: meow meow on November 01, 2013, 11:01:11 PM
oscar making excuses for will in post game interview with Stan, wtf

This pissed me off also.

And what's with this thread? We're garbage and we looked like garbage.

Better than expected? Pfffft

9-4 tuck boy started this what do you expect?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 01, 2013, 11:41:49 PM
Westicles-would be good if he had guard skills, terrible in the paint. His nickname is "Wundy"

it's iwu, actually.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 01, 2013, 11:44:16 PM
i didn't think they looked surprisingly athletic.  maybe i had higher expectations than others did.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: EMAWzified on November 01, 2013, 11:45:23 PM
LOL at tuckthink that the rule changes/emphasis would bring back the old time cutting and passing offense. It's going to be drive to the basket for 40 minutes. Those with stoppers in the middle and slashers prosper. We have neither.
Three freshman look like they could be players to a couple of years, but it's going to be a long rough ridin' year.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2013, 11:45:39 PM
And he's surprisingly better than expected. - iwu
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 01, 2013, 11:47:23 PM
i didn't think they looked surprisingly athletic.  maybe i had higher expectations than others did.
What did you expect? I seriously respect your bball knowledge. Our Seniors looked like crap compared to them.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: yoman on November 01, 2013, 11:54:26 PM
i didn't think they looked surprisingly athletic.  maybe i had higher expectations than others did.
What did you expect? I seriously respect your bball knowledge. Our Seniors looked like crap compared to them.

Shane had a rough night, but if you honestly expected them to be worse than sprads or EMAPE, then you need to raise your expectations. Those two are not good basketball players.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: bones129 on November 01, 2013, 11:58:40 PM
The officiating has gotten Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

Rules changes?  :dunno:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 02, 2013, 12:04:52 AM
What did you expect? I seriously respect your bball knowledge. Our Seniors looked like crap compared to them.

i expected about what they looked like.  a group of pretty normally athletic big 12 freshmen.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: bones129 on November 02, 2013, 12:06:10 AM
What did you expect? I seriously respect your bball knowledge. Our Seniors looked like crap compared to them.

i expected about what they looked like.  a group of pretty normally athletic big 12 freshmen.

Who will struggle to make it to the NCAA Tournament.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 02, 2013, 12:17:08 AM
Who will struggle to make it to the NCAA Tournament.

i think that is wildly optimistic.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 02, 2013, 12:19:57 AM
Who will struggle to make it to the NCAA Tournament.

i think that is wildly optimistic.
With the new format, this team will be fringe 10/11/12. I mean, come on.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 02, 2013, 03:09:35 AM
Who will struggle to make it to the NCAA Tournament.

i think that is wildly optimistic.
With the new format, this team will be fringe 10/11/12. I mean, come on.

The new format doesn't change the fact that you have to win some games to get in the dance. Relying on Shane, a bunch of non-elite freshman, and a couple of tweeners to win a bunch of games is a risky proposition. I don't think making the NIT is even a foregone conclusion this year. We're picked fifth in the Big XII, I think that's generous, and I also don't think five teams from the Big XII make it into the dance this year. We'll see.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 02, 2013, 07:28:43 AM
A lot of negativity from people who clearly didn't watch the game.  Go eff up another thread you dolts. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: AppleJack on November 02, 2013, 07:42:44 AM
were there any dunk shots?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: BackPayne on November 02, 2013, 08:02:30 AM
What was the effing score?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: kougar24 on November 02, 2013, 08:46:32 AM
This team has Neckbraceball written all over it.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 02, 2013, 08:56:34 AM
Relative to our competition this season, we are very good.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: catzacker on November 02, 2013, 08:57:21 AM
I think I'm going to try to follow Texas Tech basketball this season and see if that is more enjoyable.  Tubby Smith is their head basketball coach.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 02, 2013, 09:04:31 AM
Which tournament?   Certainly not the NCAA's? 

NIT is a maybe.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 'taterblast on November 02, 2013, 10:31:59 AM
this year will be tough with our front court issues.

but those freshmen, man. i really like them. was pleasantly surprised last night. if Westicles can play the 3 well he could be a total stud. foster = stud, nigel = semi-stud.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: steve dave on November 02, 2013, 10:45:22 AM
I have high hopes for Thomas as well. He and Foster were the 2 I've been excited about.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: joda on November 02, 2013, 10:50:41 AM
i didn't think they looked surprisingly athletic.  maybe i had higher expectations than others did.
What did you expect? I seriously respect your bball knowledge. Our Seniors looked like crap compared to them.

Shane had a rough night, but if you honestly expected them to be worse than sprads or EMAPE, then you need to raise your expectations. Those two are not good basketball players.
Honest question. Anyone else feel like our walk-ons should get more playing time than Will, EMAPE, and Krap?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 02, 2013, 10:57:58 AM
Foster will be our starting 3.  Will will be the shooting guard because if he isn't there isn't a place to have him on the court.  Also, he has the skillset for a oscar 3.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Nick Florences Beard on November 02, 2013, 11:07:17 AM
What was the effing score?

75-54
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 02, 2013, 04:16:32 PM
Weber's first recruiting class more athletic and skilled than any of Frank's?  (Giving Huggs Beasley, et al.)
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: #LIFE on November 02, 2013, 04:47:33 PM
Weber's first recruiting class more athletic and skilled than any of Frank's?  (Giving Huggs Beasley, et al.)

We look very athletic, but still pretty raw.  Results pending...
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: WillieWatanabe on November 02, 2013, 04:55:53 PM
I think I'm going to try to follow Texas Tech basketball this season and see if that is more enjoyable.  Tubby Smith is their head basketball coach.

odd. He's been fired twice. Or isn't that a thing anymore?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 02, 2013, 05:59:41 PM
Weber's first recruiting class more athletic and skilled than any of Frank's?  (Giving Huggs Beasley, et al.)

art, by himself, is better than this entire class.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 02, 2013, 06:46:57 PM
Weber's first recruiting class more athletic and skilled than any of Frank's?  (Giving Huggs Beasley, et al.)

art, by himself, is better than this entire class.

How would you know
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 02, 2013, 07:06:15 PM
art, by himself, is better than this entire class.

How would you know

i saw art play for two years.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: kougar24 on November 02, 2013, 07:06:59 PM
Weber's first recruiting class more athletic and skilled than any of Frank's?  (Giving Huggs Beasley, et al.)

art, by himself, is better than this entire class.

How would you know

what does this even mean
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: kim carnes on November 02, 2013, 07:37:55 PM
Weber's first recruiting class more athletic and skilled than any of Frank's?  (Giving Huggs Beasley, et al.)

This class is better than any Frank had, but his were all garbage so WGAF.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 02, 2013, 07:57:38 PM
:lol:

Quote
Johnson, a point guard, had a strong all-around performance with 15 points (10 of 10 free throws), 9 rebounds and 3 assists while Westicles provided some much-needed punch inside with 10 points.

As for the veterans, Will Spradling ran the offense and Shane Southwell aided the motion offense with 5 assists plus 10 points. Junior forward Nino Williams contributed 13 points and 13 rebounds, a positive start for the junior forward who could be an important factor for a team lacking size and depth inside.

http://cjonline.com/sports/2013-11-01/k-state-freshmen-shine-debut

Stats aren't everything, I guess.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 02, 2013, 08:12:16 PM
Locker room offense leader

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 03, 2013, 07:46:23 AM
art, by himself, is better than this entire class.

How would you know

i saw art play for two years.

and the current crew not at all . . .

Loved ART, but the above is just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: catzacker on November 03, 2013, 08:09:15 AM
which of oscar's freshman will be 2nd team all big 12 next year?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 03, 2013, 08:19:59 AM
which of oscar's freshman will be 2nd team all big 12 next year?

Depends on which declare for the draft after this year.  I would guess whoever ends up leading the team in scoring though.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on November 03, 2013, 09:09:15 AM
which of oscar's freshman will be 2nd team all big 12 next year?
Jevon will be first team
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 03, 2013, 09:09:30 AM
which of oscar's freshman will be 2nd team all big 12 next year?

Foster could be.  I say could as in having what seems to be enough tools to do it if he develops extremely well over this one year, not as in I think he will do it.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: feartheillini on November 03, 2013, 11:39:06 AM
The team shot 36% on FGs and under 20% on 3s, and you think they looked better than you expected?  Damn, you had some low expectations.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: EMAWzified on November 03, 2013, 12:49:55 PM
If you were half expecting a bunch of Orrises, yeah Foster, Johnson and Iwu were better than that (not krap, tho).
They could be nice pieces. Maybe Thomas has star power.  :dunno:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 03, 2013, 03:08:03 PM
The team shot 36% on FGs and under 20% on 3s, and you think they looked better than you expected?  Damn, you had some low expectations.

Posted at the end of the first half.  The second half was pretty awful and freshmanie
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 03, 2013, 04:32:10 PM
i saw art play for two years.

and the current crew not at all . . .

Loved ART, but the above is just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

as tobias said, i saw the second half of the exh.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 03, 2013, 07:09:21 PM
i saw art play for two years.

and the current crew not at all . . .

Loved ART, but the above is just Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

as tobias said, i saw the second half of the exh.

First half was much better
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 08:27:36 AM
Grades:

Frank Martin Recruits: D-    Stiff, slow and unathletic

oscar Weber Recruits:  B   Quick, vastly more explosive than remaining Frank recruits, generally appear to be better basketball players all around.

No wonder Frank conjured up a mythical fight with the AD to give himself an excuse to bail.   Good lord what was that man doing on the recruiting trail besides nothing?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 09:42:54 AM
Frank recruits oscar bumbled up and lost to another school A+++
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 10:20:09 AM
Grades:

Frank Martin Recruits: D-    Stiff, slow and unathletic

oscar Weber Recruits:  B   Quick, vastly more explosive than remaining Frank recruits, generally appear to be better basketball players all around.

No wonder Frank conjured up a mythical fight with the AD to give himself an excuse to bail.   Good lord what was that man doing on the recruiting trail besides nothing?

Frank's 'cruits weren't that bad (gotta include transfers).  And it's too early to tell how good oscar's 'cruits are.

Regardless, Frank's style of recruits (defensive athletes) were more effective before the new rules change.  I will be curious to see how this emphasis on offensive production impacts Frank's ability to succeed with his doberman, ugly-it-up style.   

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 10:22:38 AM
Angel would have been better with the new emphasis on room to move.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Skipper44 on November 04, 2013, 10:31:50 AM
Frank's rim protecting 7 footers will be even more valuable now that you can't keep people out of the lane.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 10:39:34 AM
Frank's rim protecting 7 footers will be even more valuable now that you can't keep people out of the lane.

Yes.  Our height issues would have been bad regardless, but with this change, even more so.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 10:40:30 AM
What did little Baby Angel want?

He had the 2nd highest minutes on the team last year.   He took the 2nd highest number of shots on the team last year.   

Clearly Angel was afraid of competition.   I mean lawd, who did Frank recruit at guard?   Then all of sudden you've got guys like Marcus Foster coming on.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 10:42:03 AM
You mean Marcus Foster the shooting guard?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 10:42:58 AM
You mean Marcus Foster the shooting guard?

Angel was a true point?

He was there by necessity, thanks to Frank's woeful recruiting.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 10:45:08 AM
You mean Marcus Foster the shooting guard?

Angel was a true point?

He was there by necessity, thanks to Frank's woeful recruiting.

:lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 04, 2013, 10:45:25 AM
You mean Marcus Foster the shooting guard?

Angel was a true point?

He was there by necessity, thanks to Frank's woeful recruiting.

LOL at anyone thinking Angel was anything but a PG.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 10:47:44 AM
Omari, Shane, Nino and Will:  10 for 33   (Thanks Nino!)


That's why I said "Angel was a True Point?"


Man, what a rebuilding job that's going to have to be done after Frank, it's really worse than I thought.




Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 10:48:36 AM
:lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 10:49:45 AM
Will, Shane, and Omari:  Frank's leftover Clankinators

Sad

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 10:51:02 AM
Angel was a true point?

He was there by necessity, thanks to Frank's woeful recruiting.

 :lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 10:51:40 AM
:lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 10:52:57 AM
Look at the anger and denial spew forth from the haters.

I wonder if Frank bounced his "work up a conflict with Currie so I can bail" ideas off of anybody??  If so, who wouldn't have paid to overhear that.

Sad

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 10:54:32 AM
:lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 10:55:23 AM
I win (as usual)

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 10:57:00 AM
I always thought that Angel could make a pretty good stretch 3  :dunno:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 04, 2013, 10:57:36 AM
I win (as usual)

 :ROFL:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 10:58:34 AM
I win (as usual)

it's been years and years since anyone else could guess what game you're playing.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 11:09:00 AM
:lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 11:18:43 AM
You can't even hope to contain me fellas.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 11:24:22 AM
You can't even hope to contain me fellas.

Certainly not with this new freedom of movement bullshit.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: _33 on November 04, 2013, 11:39:16 AM
Man, Dax really hated getting back doored.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Tobias on November 04, 2013, 11:45:09 AM
if one thing's for sure, dax hates frank with way more intensity than anyone here liked frank
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 11:48:09 AM
if one thing's for sure, dax hates frank with way more intensity than anyone here liked frank

I didn't hate Frank, friend.

Plus, give me a break, the Too Cool for School crowd falls in love with somebody because they think they're adorbs, or they like their twitter feed, or their tunnel dance, and they won't let it go no matter how $hitty that coach or player coaches or plays.

 

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 11:55:37 AM
if one thing's for sure, dax hates frank with way more intensity than anyone here liked frank

I didn't hate Frank, friend.

Plus, give me a break, the Too Cool for School crowd falls in love with somebody because they think they're adorbs, or they like their twitter feed, or their tunnel dance, and they won't let it go no matter how $hitty that coach or player coaches or plays.

Dax has really honed in on what made for all the excitement around KSU hoops during the Frank era.  It'll probably continue against my hating ways because they're still doing a tunnel dance.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 12:04:42 PM
if one thing's for sure, dax hates frank with way more intensity than anyone here liked frank

I didn't hate Frank, friend.

Plus, give me a break, the Too Cool for School crowd falls in love with somebody because they think they're adorbs, or they like their twitter feed, or their tunnel dance, and they won't let it go no matter how $hitty that coach or player coaches or plays.

Dax has really honed in on what made for all the excitement around KSU hoops during the Frank era.  It'll probably continue against my hating ways because they're still doing a tunnel dance.

The "excitement" was waning, and that's why Frank bailed, he knew he had no where to go but down since his recruiting sucked and everybody in the region had the Full Monty on Frank being Frank.



Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 12:05:27 PM
the recruiting was decent under Frank, but the further we got away from the Hugs/Dalonte DC Assault era, the further recruiting declined.  We can all agree on this, at least. 

When Frank left, here's what we had:

Excellent:  Rodney
Very Good:  Angel
Above Avg:  JO
Avg:  Irving, Southwell, Gip
Below Avg: Omari, Nino
Terrible:  Spradling, Diaz 

We had Upshaw committed, but no help in the backcourt was anywhere in sight.  Let's call a spade a spade.  Things were going downhill fast.  And with the rules change, jfc... 
   
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 12:06:46 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now? 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 12:12:48 PM
LOL at ppl using the GRCOAT, one Huggs spent an off season outside of NCAA rules, and hiring an AAU coach for a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) high salaray, accumulating as the standard. 

Mike lost our connection to DC Assault and Frank was stuck with a large pipeline being shut off suddenly. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: catzacker on November 04, 2013, 12:15:01 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now?

i don't know and i don't care.  these are the wrong questions. 

art's here, he's not here.  i don't care.  oscar's fate is his.  it has nothing to do with frank. just like frank's successes and failures at KSU were all his.

all the excuses already lined up for oscar are aburd. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Winters on November 04, 2013, 12:16:11 PM
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweknowgifs.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2Fshaq-laughing-gif.gif&hash=a9a2991b471577546f3ec494d786ecad18bf38d9)
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 12:18:42 PM
No one is making excuses, it's just the simple reality.   Some of you guys act like Weber was given a lifetime contract and that anyone else besides Weber would have been mega succesful.  Plus you listen too much to the Illini fans who have so much pent up rage over how $hitty (and  underachieving) their overall athletic program is right now that they have zero objectivity.   
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 12:19:50 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now? 

Yes.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 12:21:36 PM
Plus you listen too much to the Illini fans who have so much pent up rage over how $hitty (and  underachieving) their overall athletic program is right now that they have zero objectivity.   

Also paying even minimal attention to college basketball nationally. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: catzacker on November 04, 2013, 12:24:23 PM
It’s excuses via bitching about Frank  - and which don’t factor in the same circumstances that want to be used when looking at oscar.  I don’t care about complaining about Frank – just not when it’s being laid as the groundwork for excuses for oscar.  It’s hypocritical. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 12:25:57 PM
No one is making excuses, it's just the simple reality.   Some of you guys act like Weber was given a lifetime contract and that anyone else besides Weber would have been mega succesful.  Plus you listen too much to the Illini fans who have so much pent up rage over how $hitty (and  underachieving) their overall athletic program is right now that they have zero objectivity.

Program momentum is an important and fragile thing for programs that have the recent history of ours.  Understanding the absolute gift we were given with Huggs, Bill Walker, Beas, Pullen, etc means being really nervous about drastic change.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 12:30:32 PM
No one is making excuses, it's just the simple reality.   Some of you guys act like Weber was given a lifetime contract and that anyone else besides Weber would have been mega succesful.  Plus you listen too much to the Illini fans who have so much pent up rage over how $hitty (and  underachieving) their overall athletic program is right now that they have zero objectivity.

Program momentum is an important and fragile thing for programs that have the recent history of ours.  Understanding the absolute gift we were given with Huggs, Bill Walker, Beas, Pullen, etc means being really nervous about drastic change.

You do realize that guys like Pullen were great because, particularly by his senior season, we had very little if any offensive firepower around him right?  Even Rodney was still playing with the constant cloud of Frank's wrath hanging over his head.   Rodney's overall confidence was multi-fold higher this past season than it was at any time under Frank.   If Frank was still around IMO we don't get half the production out of Irving that we got last year because Irving was another one of those guys who couldn't breath incorrectly without getting yanked.

Also, the last several recruiting classes under Frank Martin are the last place anyone wants to look when discussing program momentum. 



Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 12:33:23 PM
How many NCAA's did we make with Frank and how long has it been since we did that?  Seems like pretty good momentum to me. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 12:36:27 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now? 

Yes.

why? 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 12:37:46 PM
How many NCAA's did we make with Frank and how long has it been since we did that?  Seems like pretty good momentum to me.

The guy walked into the head coaching job at K-State with Michael Beasley and Bill Walker waiting for him.

The guy went to the Elite Eight and subsequently parlayed that into abject mediocrity or worse on the recruiting trail.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 12:39:09 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now? 

Yes.

why? 

Coach would be a proven winner instead of a proven loser.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 12:40:21 PM


i don't know and i don't care.  these are the wrong questions. 

art's here, he's not here.  i don't care.  oscar's fate is his.  it has nothing to do with frank. just like frank's successes and failures at KSU were all his.

all the excuses already lined up for oscar are aburd.

oscar isn't presently being judged (and never will be) in a vacuum.  He's judged within the context of where KSU basketball was when he took over.  This context includes who the coach was that preceded him and the state of the program under said coach. 

Likewise, Frank's tenure was judged within the context of KSU basketball before Frank/Hugs.  Frank is one of the best coach in KSU history, yet never even sniffed a conference title.  context. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: catzacker on November 04, 2013, 12:43:56 PM


i don't know and i don't care.  these are the wrong questions. 

art's here, he's not here.  i don't care.  oscar's fate is his.  it has nothing to do with frank. just like frank's successes and failures at KSU were all his.

all the excuses already lined up for oscar are aburd.

oscar isn't presently being judged (and never will be) in a vacuum.  He's judged within the context of where KSU basketball was when he took over.  This context includes who the coach was that preceded him and the state of the program under said coach. 

Likewise, Frank's tenure was judged within the context of KSU basketball before Frank/Hugs.  Frank is one of the best coach in KSU history, yet never even sniffed a conference title.  context.

There were a variety of factors/circumstances that were a part of Frank’s beginnings.  Just as there were oscar’s.  Do we have to compare the two?  No – because it’s the wrong question – it’s a waste of time.  For every “well but with oscar…” there’s a “well but with Frank”…..it’s a worthless conversation and one we’ve already had…over and over and over…..  The conversation…the question...is what is the standard for oscar.  The answer shouldn’t have the word “Frank” in it.  I don’t care what happened in Frank’s second year. It’s irrelevant  Not the same time, not the same circumstances, not the same program.   oscar needs to win.  I don’t care how many freshman he rolls out there.  I don’t care if Spradling is running the point.  Win.  That’s it.  He did that last year.   Get to the Tourney.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 12:44:10 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now? 

Yes.

why? 

Coach would be a proven winner instead of a proven loser.

So, even a grossly underachieving 3rd place with that team would have been A-ok because he'd won in the past?  I have my doubts.  eff, Snyder gets put through the ringer and he's got 2 titles.  I imagine at some point, Frank's inability to recruit at a high level and compete for conference titles was going to impact the fan base's "excitement" level. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 12:57:18 PM
If Frank took last year's team and finished 2nd or 3rd in the Conference and got us to the round of 32, would the "excitement" be any higher than it is right now? 

Yes.

why? 

Coach would be a proven winner instead of a proven loser.

So, even a grossly underachieving 3rd place with that team would have been A-ok because he'd won in the past?  I have my doubts.  eff, Snyder gets put through the ringer and he's got 2 titles.  I imagine at some point, Frank's inability to recruit at a high level and compete for conference titles was going to impact the fan base's "excitement" level. 

Well, you asked if it would be higher under your proposed scenario that it is in reality now.  I think it would.  I'd have bought season tickets.  Angel would be the face of the program instead of acne.  Any reservations about coaching would be "our recruiting has dipped" as opposed to "our coach is illinois' discarded garbage."  :dunno:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 12:59:00 PM

There were a variety of factors/circumstances that were a part of Frank’s beginnings.  Just as there were oscar’s.  Do we have to compare the two?  No – because it’s the wrong question – it’s a waste of time.  For every “well but with oscar…” there’s a “well but with Frank”…..it’s a worthless conversation and one we’ve already had…over and over and over…..  The conversation…the question...is what is the standard for oscar.  The answer shouldn’t have the word “Frank” in it.  I don’t care what happened in Frank’s second year. It’s irrelevant  Not the same time, not the same circumstances, not the same program.   oscar needs to win.  I don’t care how many freshman he rolls out there.  I don’t care if Spradling is running the point.  Win.  That’s it.  He did that last year.   Get to the Tourney.

The question, "what is the standard for oscar" can only be answered by looking at what Frank did.  why is this so hard for you?  Sans Frank, we're a program with 30 years of losing, no NCAAS, no national brand, no GameDays at OOD.  In this context, oscar's standard for success would be making NIT runs with maybe an NCAA sprinkled in.

Of course, oscar's standard is much higher than a few NITs because, obviously, Frank Martin raised the bar beyond that.  He will continue to be compared to Frank in every way/shape/form.  Just like he was compared to Bill Self at Illinois.  Just like the next KU coach will be compared to Self.  Just like Frank Martin is compared to South Carolina's coach.  Just like Sean will be compared to Bill.  This is reality. 

This is why Trim isn't "excited" by oscar.  oscar is a lame, hand-clasping, raspy voiced pussy, compared to Frank's glaring, boot stomping, persona.  I think, in large part, oscar's biggest downfall with EMAWers is his lack of charisma, Illinois record notwithstanding.     
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: The Whale on November 04, 2013, 01:24:57 PM

There were a variety of factors/circumstances that were a part of Frank’s beginnings.  Just as there were oscar’s.  Do we have to compare the two?  No – because it’s the wrong question – it’s a waste of time.  For every “well but with oscar…” there’s a “well but with Frank”…..it’s a worthless conversation and one we’ve already had…over and over and over…..  The conversation…the question...is what is the standard for oscar.  The answer shouldn’t have the word “Frank” in it.  I don’t care what happened in Frank’s second year. It’s irrelevant  Not the same time, not the same circumstances, not the same program.   oscar needs to win.  I don’t care how many freshman he rolls out there.  I don’t care if Spradling is running the point.  Win.  That’s it.  He did that last year.   Get to the Tourney.

The question, "what is the standard for oscar" can only be answered by looking at what Frank did.  why is this so hard for you?  Sans Frank, we're a program with 30 years of losing, no NCAAS, no national brand, no GameDays at OOD.  In this context, oscar's standard for success would be making NIT runs with maybe an NCAA sprinkled in.

Of course, oscar's standard is much higher than a few NITs because, obviously, Frank Martin raised the bar beyond that.  He will continue to be compared to Frank in every way/shape/form.  Just like he was compared to Bill Self at Illinois.  Just like the next KU coach will be compared to Self.  Just like Frank Martin is compared to South Carolina's coach.  Just like Sean will be compared to Bill.  This is reality. 

This is why Trim isn't "excited" by oscar.  oscar is a lame, hand-clasping, raspy voiced pussy, compared to Frank's glaring, boot stomping, persona.  I think, in large part, oscar's biggest downfall with EMAWers is his lack of charisma, Illinois record notwithstanding.   

The bolded above led to our coach (and by extension program) getting more time on national tv and more national press.

I miss that national recognition, regardless of who our current coach is.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 04, 2013, 01:44:48 PM
I'm sorry, how many top 150 recruits has oscar landed while he's been here?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 01:50:09 PM
How many NCAA's did we make with Frank and how long has it been since we did that?  Seems like pretty good momentum to me.

The guy walked into the head coaching job at K-State with Michael Beasley and Bill Walker waiting for him.

The guy went to the Elite Eight and subsequently parlayed that into abject mediocrity or worse on the recruiting trail.

His last class included the best point guard to ever play for Kansas State.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 02:00:46 PM
Dax, show us on the doll where Frank touched you :Poke:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 04, 2013, 02:01:20 PM

His last class included the best point guard to ever play for Kansas State.

Nice one, troll.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 02:17:01 PM

His last class included the best point guard to ever play for Kansas State.

Nice one, troll.

Oh look, it's hatingfrancis just letting us know that he doesn't like Sams or Angel. Real surprise there.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 04, 2013, 02:17:55 PM
I'm sorry, how many top 150 recruits has oscar landed while he's been here?

 :impatient:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 04, 2013, 02:20:23 PM
Oh look, it's hatingfrancis just letting us know that he doesn't like Sams or Angel. Real surprise there.

Angel wasn't the best point guard ever at K-State.   :lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 02:22:40 PM
He was on pace to absolutely shatter assist record iirc.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 02:23:41 PM
Oh look, it's hatingfrancis just letting us know that he doesn't like Sams or Angel. Real surprise there.

Angel wasn't the best point guard ever at K-State.   :lol:

I could see how a strong case could be made for Denis, but Angel is just a little bit better, imo. It's a shame we don't get him for 2 more years. He was truly a special player.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 02:27:35 PM
I'm sorry, how many top 150 recruits has oscar landed while he's been here?

 :impatient:

ZERO, in his first full recruiting class.  How many did Frank have?  serious question.  McGruder?  Gipson? 

I really don't care about Top 150 rankings.  I more care about offers from other high D1 schools.  Like, Angel wasn't a Top150 player, but he had offers from Louisville and Miami.  Gipson was a Top 150, but relative to position, is clearly inferior to non-Top150 Angel.  It is what it is.     

Also, there are plenty of transfers (aka Clemente, Kelly) or JuCo guys (Big Meat) that aren't technically "Top 150" recruits, but sure as hell make a recruiting class a lot better. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 02:28:40 PM
He was on pace to absolutely shatter assist record iirc.

He wouldn't have shattered it, but he probably would have broken it. Henson ended up being a terrific scorer for K-State his last two years, which would have made "The Greatest PG in K-State History" debate pretty interesting had Angel stuck around. Now we'll never know for sure  :Crybaby:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 02:30:27 PM
He was on pace to absolutely shatter assist record iirc.

He wouldn't have shattered it, but he probably would have broken it. Henson ended up being a terrific scorer for K-State his last two years, which would have made "The Greatest PG in K-State History" debate pretty interesting had Angel stuck around. Now we'll never know for sure  :Crybaby:

Henson played basketball in an era where the product on the floor was just completely inferior to what is out there today. I will listen to an argument saying Denis is the best PG we have ever had, but Henson is just laughable.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 02:32:35 PM
Yeah, current list of best pg is denis, jake, angel, wgaf.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 02:34:23 PM
Yeah, current list of best pg is denis, jake, angel, wgaf.

Jake was a better player than Denis and Angel, but only when he was at the 2. He wasn't a better PG than Angel.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 04, 2013, 02:34:44 PM
I'm sorry, how many top 150 recruits has oscar landed while he's been here?

 :impatient:

ZERO, in his first full recruiting class.  How many did Frank have?  serious question.  McGruder?  Gipson? 

I really don't care about Top 150 rankings.  I more care about offers from other high D1 schools.  Like, Angel wasn't a Top150 player, but he had offers from Louisville and Miami.  Gipson was a Top 150, but relative to position, is clearly inferior to non-Top150 Angel.  It is what it is.     

Also, there are plenty of transfers (aka Clemente, Kelly) or JuCo guys (Big Meat) that aren't technically "Top 150" recruits, but sure as hell make a recruiting class a lot better. 

Frank had at least one in every class, IIRC. oscar is on pace to have 0% of his classes have a top 150 player in them.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 02:36:06 PM
Yeah, current list of best pg is denis, jake, angel, wgaf.

Jake wouldv'e been a great PG if he played PG. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 02:36:20 PM
He was on pace to absolutely shatter assist record iirc.

He wouldn't have shattered it, but he probably would have broken it. Henson ended up being a terrific scorer for K-State his last two years, which would have made "The Greatest PG in K-State History" debate pretty interesting had Angel stuck around. Now we'll never know for sure  :Crybaby:

Henson played basketball in an era where the product on the floor was just completely inferior to what is out there today. I will listen to an argument saying Denis is the best PG we have ever had, but Henson is just laughable.

I understand your point, but to play devil's advocate, Steve Henson played in the league for six year and Denis never made it to the show at all. It's not like he was Will Spradling.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 02:36:21 PM
Guys, does oscar even have a 2014 guy lined up that has other d1 ofrers?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 02:37:24 PM
Yeah, current list of best pg is denis, jake, angel, wgaf.

Jake wouldv'e been a great PG if he played PG.

He played it off and on. We combo guarded, and he had the job after denis.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 02:37:44 PM
Yeah, current list of best pg is denis, jake, angel, wgaf.

Jake wouldv'e been a great PG if he played PG.

He did play PG as a freshman.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 02:38:34 PM
He was on pace to absolutely shatter assist record iirc.

He wouldn't have shattered it, but he probably would have broken it. Henson ended up being a terrific scorer for K-State his last two years, which would have made "The Greatest PG in K-State History" debate pretty interesting had Angel stuck around. Now we'll never know for sure  :Crybaby:

Henson played basketball in an era where the product on the floor was just completely inferior to what is out there today. I will listen to an argument saying Denis is the best PG we have ever had, but Henson is just laughable.

I understand your point, but to play devil's advocate, Steve Henson played in the league for six year and Denis never made it to the show at all. It's not like he was Will Spradling.

There is absolutely no way that Steve Henson plays in today's NBA. I don't even think he plays Euroball.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 04, 2013, 02:42:59 PM
There is absolutely no way that Steve Henson plays in today's NBA. I don't even think he plays Euroball.


Oh dear lord not this argument again.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 02:46:23 PM
He was on pace to absolutely shatter assist record iirc.

He wouldn't have shattered it, but he probably would have broken it. Henson ended up being a terrific scorer for K-State his last two years, which would have made "The Greatest PG in K-State History" debate pretty interesting had Angel stuck around. Now we'll never know for sure  :Crybaby:

Henson played basketball in an era where the product on the floor was just completely inferior to what is out there today. I will listen to an argument saying Denis is the best PG we have ever had, but Henson is just laughable.

I understand your point, but to play devil's advocate, Steve Henson played in the league for six year and Denis never made it to the show at all. It's not like he was Will Spradling.

There is absolutely no way that Steve Henson plays in today's NBA. I don't even think he plays Euroball.

He played in the NBA from 90-95. I know that the level of athleticism is different today, but it's not like he played in the '70s or something. There were plenty of high level athletes in the NBA at that point in time and Henson was good enough to be on a roster and play some. He wouldn't have been drafted in today's NBA, but he could have had a career similar to Jake or Denis in a foreign league.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 02:58:16 PM

Frank had at least one in every class, IIRC. oscar is on pace to have 0% of his classes have a top 150 player in them.


Recruiting rankings are a poor indicator of success.  Come on.  Weber landed 15-20 top-150 guys from 2003-2012.  Hell, he had seven (7) 4* recruits in his last 2 classes, alone.  You've got to fill needs and you've gotta get the "right fit," as they say. 

To your point on Frank, I think he had a handful of top-150 guys.  Wally, McGruder, Nino?, Gip, Upshaw.  The problem, of course, is that these ratings can be kind of a crap shoot when you get out of the top 50.  I mean, Angel is not a Top 150, but Nino and Gip are???  Nino and Gip are, frankly, very average basketball players. 

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 04, 2013, 03:01:06 PM

Frank had at least one in every class, IIRC. oscar is on pace to have 0% of his classes have a top 150 player in them.


Recruiting rankings are a poor indicator of success.  Come on.  Weber landed 15-20 top-150 guys from 2003-2012.  Hell, he had seven (7) 4* recruits in his last 2 classes, alone.  You've got to fill needs and you've gotta get the "right fit," as they say. 

To your point on Frank, I think he had a handful of top-150 guys.  Wally, McGruder, Nino?, Gip, Upshaw.  The problem, of course, is that these ratings can be kind of a crap shoot when you get out of the top 50.  I mean, Angel is not a Top 150, but Nino and Gip are???  Nino and Gip are, frankly, very average basketball players. 



Fine, you want to go by offer list I take it? What's the best school that oscar has beaten out for a recruit, OU?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 03:03:22 PM

Frank had at least one in every class, IIRC. oscar is on pace to have 0% of his classes have a top 150 player in them.


Recruiting rankings are a poor indicator of success.  Come on.  Weber landed 15-20 top-150 guys from 2003-2012.  Hell, he had seven (7) 4* recruits in his last 2 classes, alone.  You've got to fill needs and you've gotta get the "right fit," as they say. 

To your point on Frank, I think he had a handful of top-150 guys.  Wally, McGruder, Nino?, Gip, Upshaw.  The problem, of course, is that these ratings can be kind of a crap shoot when you get out of the top 50.  I mean, Angel is not a Top 150, but Nino and Gip are???  Nino and Gip are, frankly, very average basketball players.

I prefer to use on-the-court results to determine the quality of a coach's recruiting. Frank's recruits took us to an elite 8, 3 consecutive NCAA tournaments, and a Big 12 Championship. I would say that he was recruiting on a very high level.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 03:06:38 PM

Frank had at least one in every class, IIRC. oscar is on pace to have 0% of his classes have a top 150 player in them.


Recruiting rankings are a poor indicator of success.  Come on.  Weber landed 15-20 top-150 guys from 2003-2012.  Hell, he had seven (7) 4* recruits in his last 2 classes, alone.  You've got to fill needs and you've gotta get the "right fit," as they say. 

To your point on Frank, I think he had a handful of top-150 guys.  Wally, McGruder, Nino?, Gip, Upshaw.  The problem, of course, is that these ratings can be kind of a crap shoot when you get out of the top 50.  I mean, Angel is not a Top 150, but Nino and Gip are???  Nino and Gip are, frankly, very average basketball players.

I prefer to use on-the-court results to determine the quality of a coach's recruiting. Frank's recruits took us to an elite 8, 3 consecutive NCAA tournaments, and a Big 12 Championship. I would say that he was recruiting on a very high level.

I say we don't sniff a Big 12 Championship or an NCAA tourney invite last year with Frank at the helm.

We get approximately 40% less production from Tay Irving and Shane Southwell with Frank's Dark Cloud hanging over their head the entire time.   McGruder also checks out at multiple points during the season and clueless Frank Martin's offense gets him open far less as well.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 03:09:59 PM
Shane may be a decent talking point but rodney has never checked out in his first three yrs. Silly to suggest he would start his sr yr.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 03:11:37 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 03:12:36 PM
Shane may be a decent talking point but rodney has never checked out in his first three yrs. Silly to suggest he would start his sr yr.

Yeah, and Shane wouldn't have been nearly as big of a part of the gameplan. JO and Gip would have started down low, spelled by Upshaw and the European. Rodney would have played almost all the minutes at the three, so Shane would have played sparingly, for better or worse.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 03:15:18 PM
Plus, wasn't Spradling going to transfer is Frank stayed?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 03:16:32 PM
Plus, wasn't Spradling going to transfer is Frank stayed?
Oh man, addition by subtraction.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 03:16:39 PM

Fine, you want to go by offer list I take it? What's the best school that oscar has beaten out for a recruit, OU?

Where did you get the idea that I'm defending oscar's recruiting at KSU?  While I certainly believe that Frank's recruiting was slipping, especially at the guard position, I've never claimed that oscar's recruiting at KSU has been anything special.

Regardless, Big Meat (2014) had offers from Miami, Zona, Indiana, and Ole Miss.  So, that's encouraging.  especially because we need a big man in a bad way. 

The rest of the guys had very Pullenesque offer lists.  Foster (OU, Cal), Westicles (CU, Tech).  Hopefully the Georgetown transfer and the Maine Transfer (Edwards) are quality players.  I dunno. 

   
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 03:17:47 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.

There were only 2 Weber recruits on the roster.   Stupid talking point.

Plus, there's absolutely nothing about the Robert Upshaw track record in hindsight that indicates he wouldn't have been back in Fresno within a month after classes started at K-State.   To keep bringing that guy up is just stupid on every level.   There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 03:18:14 PM

I prefer to use on-the-court results to determine the quality of a coach's recruiting. Frank's recruits took us to an elite 8, 3 consecutive NCAA tournaments, and a Big 12 Championship. I would say that he was recruiting on a very high level.


Ok.  so, I guess Snyder's recruiting at a high level too. 

Furthermore, I didn't say Frank was a poor recruiter.  I said that the further we got from the Hugs/Dalonte era, the further our recruiting had slipped.  IMHO, we were beginning to see much more Spradling/Nino/Omari/Southwell type players and less McGruder/Judge/Clemente/Kelly type players entering our program.  Again, IMHO, I believe that the Elite 8 days were behind us.  Maybe I would've been proved wrong. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 03:19:05 PM
If these new guys oscar brought in end up being studs then I will defend oscar's recruiting and even want him to stick around for awhile. Something tells me they probably won't end up having the same kind of success that Frank's kids did, though.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on November 04, 2013, 03:19:40 PM

I prefer to use on-the-court results to determine the quality of a coach's recruiting. Frank's recruits took us to an elite 8, 3 consecutive NCAA tournaments, and a Big 12 Championship. I would say that he was recruiting on a very high level.


Ok.  so, I guess Snyder's recruiting at a high level too.

Yes he is.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 03:20:23 PM
Shane may be a decent talking point but rodney has never checked out in his first three yrs. Silly to suggest he would start his sr yr.

There's nothing to indicate to me that Frank wouldn't have been anything less than a raving mental basket case last year, so check out factor increases significantly.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 03:21:02 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.

There were only 2 Weber recruits on the roster.   Stupid talking point.

Plus, there's absolutely nothing about the Robert Upshaw track record in hindsight that indicates he wouldn't have been back in Fresno within a month after classes started at K-State.   To keep bringing that guy up is just stupid on every level.   There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.

If you can't qualify at K-State, then you pretty much can't qualify anywhere.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 03:22:12 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.

There were only 2 Weber recruits on the roster.   Stupid talking point.

Plus, there's absolutely nothing about the Robert Upshaw track record in hindsight that indicates he wouldn't have been back in Fresno within a month after classes started at K-State.   To keep bringing that guy up is just stupid on every level.   There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.

If you can't qualify at K-State, then you pretty much can't qualify anywhere.

I believe Fresno State and their conference have lower standards than the Big 12 and K-State.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 04, 2013, 03:22:55 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.

There were only 2 Weber recruits on the roster.   Stupid talking point.

Plus, there's absolutely nothing about the Robert Upshaw track record in hindsight that indicates he wouldn't have been back in Fresno within a month after classes started at K-State.   To keep bringing that guy up is just stupid on every level.   There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.

You literally just made that up.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 03:23:48 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.

There were only 2 Weber recruits on the roster.   Stupid talking point.

Plus, there's absolutely nothing about the Robert Upshaw track record in hindsight that indicates he wouldn't have been back in Fresno within a month after classes started at K-State.   To keep bringing that guy up is just stupid on every level.   There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.

If you can't qualify at K-State, then you pretty much can't qualify anywhere.

I believe Fresno State and their conference have lower standards than the Big 12 and K-State.

I guess it's possible, but I have a hard time believing there is much difference.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 03:26:18 PM
The Big 12 was really weak last year, and I think Frank would have been just fine. I don't see what any of that has to do with Frank recruiting at a high enough level to win the Big 12, though. His recruits were the only guys seeing significant minutes in conference play last year.

There were only 2 Weber recruits on the roster.   Stupid talking point.

Plus, there's absolutely nothing about the Robert Upshaw track record in hindsight that indicates he wouldn't have been back in Fresno within a month after classes started at K-State.   To keep bringing that guy up is just stupid on every level.   There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.

You literally just made that up.

Okay, Upshaw getting into K-State was a foregone conclusion.   He's already been booted off the Fresno State. 

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 03:33:48 PM
Probably because Fresno is a cesspool filled with drugs and crime. Not a great place to stay out of trouble.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 03:37:19 PM
There's huge doubt if the guy would have even qualified at K-State.

 :lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 03:37:54 PM
Going out on a limb here, but no way currie wouldn't have kept upshaw all tied up on the bench in street clothes.

Prob not just upshaw.  I mean if finding receipts wouldn't have gotten rid of frank, how far would currie have gone?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 03:38:49 PM
I say we don't sniff a Big 12 Championship or an NCAA tourney invite last year with Frank at the helm.

 :lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 03:39:54 PM
Going out on a limb here, but no way currie wouldn't have kept upshaw all tied up on the bench in street clothes.

Prob not just upshaw.  I mean if finding receipts wouldn't have gotten rid of frank, how far would currie have gone?

Would have photoshopped a picture to make it look like Frank was selling drugs to Upshaw, with Angel beating up a cop in the background.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 03:40:16 PM
The ncaa birth thing is also silly.  Frank had the media selling tickets for ksu.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 03:57:30 PM
I say we don't sniff a Big 12 Championship or an NCAA tourney invite last year with Frank at the helm.

 :lol:

I don't think we would've sniffed the BXII trophy, but probably would've done better in the NCAA.  certainly would've made the tourney. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 04:14:40 PM
sys we know where you stand, so don't even bother.   

Sad
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 04:18:24 PM
Probably because Fresno is a cesspool filled with drugs and crime. Not a great place to stay out of trouble.

Come on man.   There's drugs and crime in every city in America.   You're gonna tell me that a school with 20,000 students on campus with a major military base just over the hill doesn't have plenty of drugs and crime?

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 04, 2013, 04:22:38 PM
Probably because Fresno is a cesspool filled with drugs and crime. Not a great place to stay out of trouble.

Come on man.   There's drugs and crime in every city in America.   You're gonna tell me that a school with 20,000 students on campus with a major military base just over the hill doesn't have plenty of drugs and crime?

Nope, K-State is pretty much perfect in every way. If you don't think that then you're obviously a Jayhawk.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 04:23:33 PM
sys we know where you stand, so don't even bother.   

Sad

lolling at how stupid you are isn't a position statement.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 04:26:54 PM
sys we know where you stand, so don't even bother.   

Sad

lolling at how stupid you are isn't a position statement.

Laughing at how angry you are with all things K-State basketball related really isn't a position statement either, but it's still hilarious.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: star seed 7 on November 04, 2013, 04:30:38 PM
maybe it's because i'm from topeka, but no, manhattan doesn't seem flush with drugs and crime.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 04, 2013, 04:32:59 PM
maybe it's because i'm from topeka, but no, manhattan doesn't seem flush with drugs and crime.

love these.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 04:34:51 PM
I admit I am still in awe of the Frankites trying to throw Robert Upshaw into the equation.

I mean really, there's reaches and then there's major shoulder surgery, arm in a sling for 6 months followed by major rehab reaches.  Robert Upshaw fits into the latter category of reaches.

 



Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 04:36:34 PM
I mean really, there's reaches and then there's major shoulder surgery, arm in a sling for 6 months followed by major rehab reaches.  Robert Upshaw fits into the latter category of reaches.

 :lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 04:46:54 PM
I mean really, there's reaches and then there's major shoulder surgery, arm in a sling for 6 months followed by major rehab reaches.  Robert Upshaw fits into the latter category of reaches.

 :lol:

Laughter is very healing for the angry.   :thumbsup:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Stevesie60 on November 04, 2013, 04:53:15 PM
sonofdaxjones? More like grandpaofkimcarnes!
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 04:55:05 PM
sonofdaxjones? More like grandpaofkimcarnes!

If you must lash out to heal, do it.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 05:17:08 PM
This is why Trim isn't "excited" by oscar.  oscar is a lame, hand-clasping, raspy voiced pussy, compared to Frank's glaring, boot stomping, persona.  I think, in large part, oscar's biggest downfall with EMAWers is his lack of charisma, Illinois record notwithstanding.     

As fanning would say, I think you're over analysis my take.  Frank gave most of us the most winning K-State basketball of our lives.  He was also a giant dork in many situations, which we over-the-top defended because of the winning.  oscar is a giant dork in nearly all situations, but that could all be spun as adorable if he was a winner.  But he's a loser, so he gets fired and mocked.

The "excitement" is purely about winning.

I'm not sure I butchered that "over analysis" wording enough to truly be as fanning would say.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Cartierfor3 on November 04, 2013, 05:20:45 PM
It would be more like "overed analysised" but you're in the ballpark.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 04, 2013, 05:21:38 PM
Winning and exposure.  I mean, we weren't just winning games being played in an ISU-like closet.  We had like 4 big monday games two years ago for godsake.

Also, you couldn't turn on ESPN or watch one of the dummy journo's tweet long without seeing a reference to our team or Frank rough ridin' with them on twitter.

We were everywhere.  Now the only place you can find us is on the list of the top 8 programs in decline.  All after our most winning season in a long time and a conf champy. 

If Frank won the Conf Champ, he would still be on ESPN or CBS explaining how the last few seconds went down to a round table of three or four ESPN or CBS personalities eating it up like they have never heard it before.

I would def still have season tix if Frank was here. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: star seed 7 on November 04, 2013, 05:29:37 PM
frank wouldn't have lost to that play-in team in the tourny.  i don't even remember that team's name.  did it start with an "M"?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on November 04, 2013, 05:31:44 PM
This is why Trim isn't "excited" by oscar.  oscar is a lame, hand-clasping, raspy voiced pussy, compared to Frank's glaring, boot stomping, persona.  I think, in large part, oscar's biggest downfall with EMAWers is his lack of charisma, Illinois record notwithstanding.     

As fanning would say, I think you're over analysis my take.  Frank gave most of us the most winning K-State basketball of our lives.  He was also a giant dork in many situations, which we over-the-top defended because of the winning.  oscar is a giant dork in nearly all situations, but that could all be spun as adorable if he was a winner.  But he's a loser, so he gets fired and mocked.

The "excitement" is purely about winning.

I'm not sure I butchered that "over analysis" wording enough to truly be as fanning would say.
You know that was a autocorrect, right?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Belvis Noland on November 04, 2013, 05:38:59 PM
frank wouldn't have lost to that play-in team in the tourny.  i don't even remember that team's name.  did it start with an "M"?

agree.  Frank also  would've  lost 2-3  more  conference  games and finished 3rd or 4th  in the conference.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Tobias on November 04, 2013, 05:39:46 PM
frank wouldn't have lost to that play-in team in the tourny.  i don't even remember that team's name.  did it start with an "M"?

a philly coworker of mine had never heard of the team we lost to, FWIW
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 04, 2013, 05:41:16 PM
Man, just thinking of the Wally Judge like Franking that Robert Upshaw would have gotten. 

The "Why isn't Upshaw playing/suited up/on the bench" threads would have been epic





Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: michigancat on November 04, 2013, 06:27:59 PM
Great thread
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
Great thread

 :lol:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: AndrewVonLintel on November 04, 2013, 08:14:32 PM
Will Frank Martin reach a tournament with South Carolina?

Will oscar get his team to the NIT?

Will Angel totally kick ass after his medical redshirt year?

Will K-State be the worst rebounding team in the country?

Stay tuned for answers to these questions and more on............

goEMAW       :impatient:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: meow meow on November 04, 2013, 09:50:33 PM
This is why Trim isn't "excited" by oscar.  oscar is a lame, hand-clasping, raspy voiced pussy, compared to Frank's glaring, boot stomping, persona.  I think, in large part, oscar's biggest downfall with EMAWers is his lack of charisma, Illinois record notwithstanding.     

As fanning would say, I think you're over analysis my take.  Frank gave most of us the most winning K-State basketball of our lives.  He was also a giant dork in many situations, which we over-the-top defended because of the winning.  oscar is a giant dork in nearly all situations, but that could all be spun as adorable if he was a winner.  But he's a loser, so he gets fired and mocked.

The "excitement" is purely about winning.

I'm not sure I butchered that "over analysis" wording enough to truly be as fanning would say.
You know that was a autocorrect, right?

 :D
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Trim on November 04, 2013, 09:51:53 PM
This is why Trim isn't "excited" by oscar.  oscar is a lame, hand-clasping, raspy voiced pussy, compared to Frank's glaring, boot stomping, persona.  I think, in large part, oscar's biggest downfall with EMAWers is his lack of charisma, Illinois record notwithstanding.     

As fanning would say, I think you're over analysis my take.  Frank gave most of us the most winning K-State basketball of our lives.  He was also a giant dork in many situations, which we over-the-top defended because of the winning.  oscar is a giant dork in nearly all situations, but that could all be spun as adorable if he was a winner.  But he's a loser, so he gets fired and mocked.

The "excitement" is purely about winning.

I'm not sure I butchered that "over analysis" wording enough to truly be as fanning would say.
You know that was a autocorrect, right?

 :D

Saw that, but I just can't anymore.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 04, 2013, 09:57:27 PM
watched the first half.  like foster's shot.  lawrence had some good stretches early.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: PBLIllini on November 05, 2013, 01:01:58 PM
No one is making excuses, it's just the simple reality.   Some of you guys act like Weber was given a lifetime contract and that anyone else besides Weber would have been mega succesful.  Plus you listen too much to the Illini fans who have so much pent up rage over how $hitty (and  underachieving) their overall athletic program is right now that they have zero objectivity.

Is this a schtick or are you for real?  Because you sound like a whole lot of Illini fans circa 2006-07. 

If you are serious, you are in for one hell of a rough ride. 

By the way, that "shitty" program just landed another 4* top 50 recruit yesterday.  The first ever from Simeon to declare before their senior year so I am told.  He will look nice with the rest of the 'breds that Groce is bringing in.  If we land Alexander then all bets are off.  But please, keep thinking that Weber is some golden child and that we were lucky to have him. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 05, 2013, 01:06:41 PM
I remember when Dax used to fight against mediocrity in the K-State basketball program on the internets with zeal, now he defends it with an equal amount of zeal. The guy is passionate about mediocrity, one way or the other, that's just how he's wired.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sonofdaxjones on November 05, 2013, 02:07:34 PM
I remember when Dax used to fight against mediocrity in the K-State basketball program on the internets with zeal, now he defends it with an equal amount of zeal. The guy is passionate about mediocrity, one way or the other, that's just how he's wired.

I only go by what's been done.   Last season K-State had the most wins in a single season ever.   You are comparing a Big 12 Co-Champion/NCAA tourney team, to my ranting about teams that weren't even making the NIT.   

If we aren't making the NCAA tourney in the coming years, then I'll be saying the exact same thing about fighting mediocrity. 


Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: kso_FAN on November 05, 2013, 02:34:35 PM
There were a variety of factors/circumstances that were a part of Frank’s beginnings.  Just as there were oscar’s.  Do we have to compare the two?  No – because it’s the wrong question – it’s a waste of time.  For every “well but with oscar…” there’s a “well but with Frank”…..it’s a worthless conversation and one we’ve already had…over and over and over…..  The conversation…the question...is what is the standard for oscar.  The answer shouldn’t have the word “Frank” in it.  I don’t care what happened in Frank’s second year. It’s irrelevant  Not the same time, not the same circumstances, not the same program.   oscar needs to win.  I don’t care how many freshman he rolls out there.  I don’t care if Spradling is running the point.  Win.  That’s it.  He did that last year.   Get to the Tourney.

I just picked this thread back up after a couple of days. This is all I really needed to read. Refreshing ZACKanlysis from my friend catfencezacker.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on November 05, 2013, 02:53:35 PM
What is more valuable?

  4 NCAA Tourney Bids
  Finishing in the top of the conference every year

               VS.

  1 NIT BID
  1 NCAA BUBLE TEAM
  1 Good NCAA TEAM (Sweet 16)
  1 Great or better NCAA TEAM (Elite 8 or Better) and a 50% chance at a conference championship
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Ghost of Stan Parrish on November 05, 2013, 03:29:34 PM
My random thoughts:
:th_twocents:

P.S.  I love KSU basketball!   :emawkid:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: hatingfrancisco on November 05, 2013, 03:39:09 PM
My random thoughts:
  • Frank was a better salesman/recruiter than Weber is.  Weber is a better Xs & Os coach than Frank.
  • Frank was gifted with far better players when he arrived at KSU in 2007 than Weber got upon his arrival last year.
  • Frank would've probably won a couple more games in the tournament last year, but would not have won the conference nor beat Florida during the regular season.
  • Frank and Weber are both quite good coaches.  Neither is yet in the top five coaches in KSU history.  I still think Huggins did more for KSU basketball than either of them.
  • One final IMHO: Weber is more likely to be successful at KSU than Frank is to be at USC, for whatever that's worth.
:th_twocents:

P.S.  I love KSU basketball!   :emawkid:

the eff?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Ghost of Stan Parrish on November 05, 2013, 03:44:43 PM
My random thoughts:
  • Frank was a better salesman/recruiter than Weber is.  Weber is a better Xs & Os coach than Frank.
  • Frank was gifted with far better players when he arrived at KSU in 2007 than Weber got upon his arrival last year.
  • Frank would've probably won a couple more games in the tournament last year, but would not have won the conference nor beat Florida during the regular season.
  • Frank and Weber are both quite good coaches.  Neither is yet in the top five coaches in KSU history.  I still think Huggins did more for KSU basketball than either of them.
  • One final IMHO: Weber is more likely to be successful at KSU than Frank is to be at USC, for whatever that's worth.
:th_twocents:

P.S.  I love KSU basketball!   :emawkid:

the eff?

What?  I love KSU basketball!   :ksu:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Skipper44 on November 05, 2013, 04:26:45 PM
My random thoughts:
  • Frank was a better salesman/recruiter than Weber is.  Weber is a better Xs & Os coach than Frank.
  • Frank was gifted with far better players when he arrived at KSU in 2007 than Weber got upon his arrival last year.
  • Frank would've probably won a couple more games in the tournament last year, but would not have won the conference nor beat Florida during the regular season.
  • Frank and Weber are both quite good coaches.  Neither is yet in the top five coaches in KSU history.  I still think Huggins did more for KSU basketball than either of them.
  • One final IMHO: Weber is more likely to be successful at KSU than Frank is to be at USC, for whatever that's worth.
:th_twocents:

P.S.  I love KSU basketball!   :emawkid:
GoSP, the sop is to start a new topic when cut and pasting a post from gpc
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Ghost of Stan Parrish on November 05, 2013, 04:43:11 PM
If everyone else jumped off a bridge would I jump, too?  My mom asked me that once.  The answer is maybe.  If it's a really low bridge and everyone else was okay after jumping, then I would too.  Sometimes my mom asked random questions.

Anyway, I digress.  I'm doubling down on oscar.  Maybe someone will cut-and-paste my stuff and pass it off as GPC?  Would be cool.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Winters on November 08, 2013, 10:21:13 PM
We need to start banning people  :users:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 08, 2013, 10:26:02 PM
Fifth in conf is probably pretty sunshine pumper'ey at this point.  Brucember sucks much more than Frankember or Frankruary ever did.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: timhawk on November 08, 2013, 10:29:14 PM
LMAO TITLETOWN? lol wow....,
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: MakeItRain on November 08, 2013, 10:30:15 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 08, 2013, 10:31:20 PM
The young guys are on the wagon, Frank's guys just need to start driving!

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: 0.42 on November 08, 2013, 10:32:39 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

Looks like tuckville just got a one way ticket to rationalization station
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: yoman on November 08, 2013, 10:34:29 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

Looks like tuckville just got a one way ticket to rationalization station

Oh goddammit, oscar is gonna skate blame free, isn't he.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: The Whale on November 08, 2013, 10:35:55 PM
We made it just over 1/2 a game into the season before Shane had to run point over Will and Nigel.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: PBLIllini on November 08, 2013, 10:42:02 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

What were his comments?

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 08, 2013, 10:48:00 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

What were his comments?

The old guys need to play better


Pretty innocuous unless your a nut bag fanboy desperate for controversy
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: EMAWzified on November 08, 2013, 10:50:57 PM
oscar has absolutely ruined Shane's shot Frank worked so hard to develop.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Spracne on November 08, 2013, 10:51:32 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

What were his comments?

The old guys need to play better


Pretty innocuous unless your a nut bag fanboy desperate for controversy

Thanks, Obama...
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: felix rex on November 08, 2013, 10:55:48 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

What were his comments?

The older guys need to "drive the wagon" or some ridiculously dumb thing.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: PBLIllini on November 08, 2013, 10:58:45 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

What were his comments?

The older guys need to "drive the wagon" or some ridiculously dumb thing.

That is pretty tame for him.  He typically drives the bus directly over at least one player to try to excuse himself. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: lopakman on November 08, 2013, 11:01:30 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

What were his comments?

The older guys need to "drive the wagon" or some ridiculously dumb thing.

That is pretty tame for him.  He typically drives the bus directly over at least one player to try to excuse himself.

Is that what he said?  I can never understand what the eff he's saying.  eff YOU oscar, [redacted]!   :curse:

I feel better now. 
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 08, 2013, 11:26:17 PM
LOL at oscar outwardly blaming Frank's recruits.

it was unseemly.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: chum1 on November 08, 2013, 11:28:28 PM
Do the older players not need to play better?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: sys on November 08, 2013, 11:29:58 PM
Do the older players not need to play better?

better players would play better.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: PowercatPat on November 08, 2013, 11:33:29 PM
Can anyone explain why Jack Krap even saw the floor tonight?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Lucas Scoopsalot on November 08, 2013, 11:34:49 PM
Can anyone explain why Jack Krap even saw the floor tonight?
Gip being out  :dunno:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on November 08, 2013, 11:35:07 PM
it's a valid point. it's also valid to say that he gets paid close to two million a year to get the upper classmen to play well.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on November 08, 2013, 11:55:32 PM
Motion offense was a joke tonight and will be for atleast the 1st half of the season. We don't have a guy (pg) that can make plays at the end of the shot clock. Teams could really use Angel but will have to wait for Jevon.

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on November 09, 2013, 12:05:39 AM
Motion offense was a joke tonight and will be for atleast the 1st half of the season. We don't have a guy (pg) that can make plays at the end of the shot clock. Teams could really use Angel but will have to wait for Jevon.

i agree that oscar should have been able to keep his starting returning point guard or should have recruited someone to replace him during his first two recruiting classes.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on November 09, 2013, 12:15:05 AM
Niño and Omari have no rough ridin' idea what is going on. Living and dieing from how Foster plays is going to suck. Will is a streaky shooter who has more off days then good days and will help this team for 7-9 games max this year.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Dr Rick Daris on November 09, 2013, 12:26:17 AM
Niño and Omari have no rough ridin' idea what is going on. Living and dieing from how Foster plays is going to suck. Will is a streaky shooter who has more off days then good days and will help this team for 7-9 games max this year.

i agree that it all seems fixable with good coaching.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: EMAWzified on November 09, 2013, 12:29:29 AM
Niño and Omari have no rough ridin' idea what is going on. Living and dieing from how Foster plays is going to suck. Will is a streaky shooter who has more off days then good days and will help this team for 7-9 games max this year.

i agree that it all seems fixable with good coaching.

So, you're saying we're mumped?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: MakeItRain on November 09, 2013, 12:42:45 AM
Do the older players not need to play better?

My issue is that his exact quote was "The young guys were fine, it was the older players who need to play better. The older players need to play better."

Significantly different from what known liar FSD said.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: MakeItRain on November 09, 2013, 12:45:40 AM
Niño and Omari have no rough ridin' idea what is going on. Living and dieing from how Foster plays is going to suck. Will is a streaky shooter who has more off days then good days and will help this team for 7-9 games max this year.

When does Will have a good streak?
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: ksupamplemousse on November 09, 2013, 12:47:03 AM
Niño and Omari have no rough ridin' idea what is going on. Living and dieing from how Foster plays is going to suck. Will is a streaky shooter who has more off days then good days and will help this team for 7-9 games max this year.

When does Will anyone on our team have a good streak?

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: BigCat on November 09, 2013, 02:32:54 AM
Thanks, guys. I typically don't have time to post in the comments section of this blog; too busy over at CNN's site. But that was fun. :buh-bye:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: felix rex on November 09, 2013, 05:27:12 AM
agreed that it's oscar's coaching when Frank's players win titles but Frank's faults when Frank's players don't play well.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: CNS on November 09, 2013, 07:59:09 AM
The way of the world

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: steve dave on November 09, 2013, 08:28:20 AM
FSD message boarding about sports >
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Ghost of Stan Parrish on November 12, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
 :Yuck:
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on November 17, 2013, 06:36:01 PM
Looked pretty good in the first half moving the balls and getting shots.

Also, defense was aggressive in a good way.
Title: Re: We look better than I thought we would
Post by: kougar24 on November 18, 2013, 09:51:00 AM
Looked pretty good in the first half moving the balls and getting shots.

Also, defense was aggressive in a good way.

Rusty is right about you being too vulgar for GPC, but if you could learn to tone it down, you'd really be happier there. Give it some thought.