goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Basketball is hard => Topic started by: Cire on March 21, 2014, 10:59:39 PM

Title: burn. it. down
Post by: Cire on March 21, 2014, 10:59:39 PM
I will never be ok with oscar as our coach.  I just won't
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 21, 2014, 11:06:05 PM
Can't Wait For This Dur Of A Thread.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:06:16 PM
I wanted so bad for Brad to be our coach after Martin was out and never have I wished that had actually happened more than tonight.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:06:44 PM
I enjoy him making his players have to say something to the officials because he too much of a passive aggressive pussy to do it himself.

This was a waste of 2 hours.

I am glad will is done embarrassing ksu.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:10:16 PM
I'm excited about next year's team.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: GoodForAnother on March 21, 2014, 11:11:09 PM
there's a brad moon on the rise
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:12:00 PM
Next year will be same as this year. Possibly worse.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:12:06 PM
I would be optimistic for next year if we had a true point guard but Nigel and Jevon simply aren't. Though Nigel is gritty.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: hjfklmor on March 21, 2014, 11:12:20 PM
Won't even break 50 :curse:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Trogdor on March 21, 2014, 11:12:35 PM
#
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 21, 2014, 11:12:57 PM
Our Fanbase Is So Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  Sigh.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:14:25 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Trogdor on March 21, 2014, 11:14:45 PM
Lost our last 4 games  :facepalm:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: wetwillie on March 21, 2014, 11:14:57 PM
Edwards is going to have to be really good.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 21, 2014, 11:16:06 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:17:21 PM
If oscar was a better coach he would have coached the seniors better.  Sad.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2014, 11:18:23 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 21, 2014, 11:18:44 PM
It's hard to overcome recruiting that leaves you Will Spradling and  Omari Lawrence in your senior class. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Skipper44 on March 21, 2014, 11:19:57 PM
Edwards will be more productive than Sprads
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:20:18 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:20:31 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:20:40 PM
Frank's Big 12 championship last year is what I will remember most about Frank.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:20:59 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: wetwillie on March 21, 2014, 11:21:48 PM
What's josh gray doing these days?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: GoodForAnother on March 21, 2014, 11:21:53 PM
can we all just agree we should've hired brad two years ago?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 21, 2014, 11:22:11 PM
So far no NIT's for oscar and a trophy of significance. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2014, 11:22:30 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:23:19 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 21, 2014, 11:23:26 PM
Frankites will never accept that Unds bailed out Frank.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:25:30 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: tadowdaddy1 on March 21, 2014, 11:27:59 PM
can we all just agree we should've hired brad two years ago?

Agreed, but I'm interested to see what awful oscar does with these transfers..........
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 21, 2014, 11:29:36 PM
Check that, Frank recruiting exits with a 4 for 19 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:30:11 PM
can we all just agree we should've hired brad two years ago?

Agreed, but I'm interested to see what awful oscar does with these transfers..........

Well if you go off of his track record he will win games against shitty and average teams and get no wins of any significance.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:33:45 PM
We only use historical performace when it supports our predetermined conclusions.  And then we do so dogmatically.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2014, 11:34:21 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:37:17 PM
We only use historical performace when it supports our predetermined conclusions.  And then we do so dogmatically.

Um. rough ridin' duh? Predetermined conclusions are generally based on historical performances. Jesus christ.  :facepalm:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:38:57 PM
We only use historical performace when it supports our predetermined conclusions.  And then we do so dogmatically.

Um. rough ridin' duh? Predetermined conclusions are generally based on historical performances. Jesus christ.  :facepalm:

No, they wouldn't be predetermined in that case.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Cire on March 21, 2014, 11:42:00 PM
THIS ISN'T ABOUT EFFING FRANK
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:43:08 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?

I did. no talent. not proven. 
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Boondock Poonhound on March 21, 2014, 11:43:17 PM
Frankites will never accept that Unds bailed out Frank.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Frankites will never accept that Unds bailed from Frank.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 21, 2014, 11:44:34 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:44:38 PM
We only use historical performace when it supports our predetermined conclusions.  And then we do so dogmatically.

Um. rough ridin' duh? Predetermined conclusions are generally based on historical performances. Jesus christ.  :facepalm:

No, they wouldn't be predetermined in that case.

You either just said something incredibly stupid or blew my mind. I'm too drunk to determine right now.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:45:43 PM
Frankites will never accept that Unds bailed out Frank.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Frankites will never accept that Unds bailed from Frank.

If that's the case can anyone blame him for wanting to shake the deadweight?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2014, 11:46:43 PM
lol at oscar blaming three officials for Vulture's T
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:48:17 PM
lol at oscar blaming three officials for Vulture's T

he had an entire game to get after the officials (like when it might count) and he spends the post game to do it.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:48:42 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?

I did. no talent. not proven.

The proven requirement sounds really dumb for newcomers.  Like, should we limit ourselves to all-conference transfers?  If so, we'd have no players.  Well, outside of Edwards, I guess.  The talent requirement is both dumb and vague.  Try to define it and you'll see what I mean.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:49:22 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?

I did. no talent. not proven.

The proven requirement sounds really dumb for newcomers.  Like, should we limit ourselves to all-conference transfers?  If so, we'd have no players.  Well, outside of Edwards, I guess.  The talent requirement is both dumb and vague.  Try to define it and you'll see what I mean.

the transfers aren't proven you rough ridin' dumbass.  and it's not a crazy assertion, it's valid, whether it is attained is not the point.  you're going to get better from one season to the next because you added one or the other (talent or a proven player, they can be both).  we are adding neither.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 21, 2014, 11:50:21 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 21, 2014, 11:53:11 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball

So yeah, MiR wrong once again, called out, and makes up bullshit reason to deflect.  Pretty much rinse and repeat the usual bull when you're wrong.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 21, 2014, 11:54:04 PM
Jesus, We Have A Lot Of Tards On This Board.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 21, 2014, 11:54:14 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?

I did. no talent. not proven.

The proven requirement sounds really dumb for newcomers.  Like, should we limit ourselves to all-conference transfers?  If so, we'd have no players.  Well, outside of Edwards, I guess.  The talent requirement is both dumb and vague.  Try to define it and you'll see what I mean.

the transfers aren't proven you rough ridin' dumbass.

That's not really what I was talking about.  But if you could try to clarify what you mean by proven, it would be helpful.  It's hard for me to imagine that you could give an example of a proven recruiting class that would meet you standards.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MixBerryCrunch on March 21, 2014, 11:55:50 PM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball

Lolwut? Pullen's last season; go look up who's offense we put in place when we couldn't do crap midway through the season.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 21, 2014, 11:56:34 PM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?

I did. no talent. not proven.

The proven requirement sounds really dumb for newcomers.  Like, should we limit ourselves to all-conference transfers?  If so, we'd have no players.  Well, outside of Edwards, I guess.  The talent requirement is both dumb and vague.  Try to define it and you'll see what I mean.

the transfers aren't proven you rough ridin' dumbass.

That's not really what I was talking about.  But if you could try to clarify what you mean by proven, it would be helpful.  It's hard for me to imagine that you could give an example of a proven recruiting class that would meet you standards.

The team will get better because of an infusion of talent or proven players.  Because a proven player isn't/wasn't available doesn't mean it is invalid.  An example is Aaron Murray of Texas Southern.  But keep being a complete dumbass.  It's not a standard, it's a reason a team will get better, regardless of its frequency.  The real or more probable reason (maybe easier?) is talent, and we aren't adding that either.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: AndrewVonLintel on March 21, 2014, 11:58:59 PM
I upgraded oscar from awful hire to average college coach 3 months ago.

The problem I have is that there were probably 6 great hires that we could have made at the time.

1. Larry Brown (didn't think he was available)
2. Gregg Marshall (thought he was available and wanted him badly)
3. Lon Kruger        (not sure if available but would have liked for us to go after him)
4. Jankovich   (thought he was available but he took an assistant job to the legend Larry Brown)
5. Brad Underwood (available and an extremely easy hire).
6. Doug Gottlieb   (available and would have recruited more talent to K-State than we have ever seen).

I also was interested in Brad Stevens and Tad Boyle but I don't think either would have came to Manhattan.

Anyhow I am still mad but have gained enough appreciation for oscar to realize that he does a good job with some things. I hate him in press conferences and in game coaching decisions, but he does teach an offensive system that works well at times. He also has apparently given the defense to someone who knows how to coach defense.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 12:02:37 AM
What proven or talented  players are we adding next year?

Look them up.  It will be interesting.  Plus, the freshman will be better.

There is no talent or proven players.  And the freshmen don't have to get better.  The seniors didn't.

So, you're not going to look them up?

I did. no talent. not proven.

The proven requirement sounds really dumb for newcomers.  Like, should we limit ourselves to all-conference transfers?  If so, we'd have no players.  Well, outside of Edwards, I guess.  The talent requirement is both dumb and vague.  Try to define it and you'll see what I mean.

the transfers aren't proven you rough ridin' dumbass.

That's not really what I was talking about.  But if you could try to clarify what you mean by proven, it would be helpful.  It's hard for me to imagine that you could give an example of a proven recruiting class that would meet you standards.

The team will get better because of an infusion of talent or proven players.  Because a proven player isn't/wasn't available doesn't mean it is invalid.  An example is Aaron Murray of Texas Southern.  But keep being a complete dumbass.  It's not a standard, it's a reason a team will get better, regardless of its frequency.  The real or more probable reason (maybe easier?) is talent, and we aren't adding that either.

So, your not going to say what you mean by "talented" or "proven"?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 12:04:40 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 12:05:46 AM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball

So yeah, MiR wrong once again, called out, and makes up bullshit reason to deflect.  Pretty much rinse and repeat the usual bull when you're wrong.

deflect? You asked me a question and I point blank answered it? Go take your Paxil.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 22, 2014, 12:08:01 AM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball

So yeah, MiR wrong once again, called out, and makes up bullshit reason to deflect.  Pretty much rinse and repeat the usual bull when you're wrong.

deflect? You asked me a question and I point blank answered it? Go take your Paxil.

Go have an emotional outburst somewhere (you're apparently really good at it.)

Either the entire offensive talking point for a year and a half of KSU offense is a lie, or MiR is totally wrong (again).
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 12:16:14 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.

No one knew what to expect from Kelly beforehand.  Could easily have sucked.  Judge did suck, so I don't know why you'd want one of him in your hypothetical.  Clemente didn't do much at Miami.  I don't think you really knew those guys upon arrival would be any better or worse than any players coming in next year.  You're fooling yourself if you think you did.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 12:17:53 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.

No one knew what to expect from Kelly beforehand.  Could easily have sucked.  Judge did suck, so I don't know why you'd want one of him in your hypothetical.  Clemente didn't do much at Miami.  I don't think you really knew those guys upon arrival would be any better or worse than any players coming in next year.  You're fooling yourself if you think you did.

Yeah Clemente was more talent than proven. Kelly was definitely talent.

Go cats.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 12:20:08 AM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball

Lolwut? Pullen's last season; go look up who's offense we put in place when we couldn't do crap midway through the season.

So there's two things that make this talking point a flawed premise at best and just an outright lie at worst. So before we go into the actual offense, it's called the pinch post since clearly you and ednksu don't remember, let's talk about the set up of this absurd point.

You guys say that Brad saved Frank's offense, do you think Frank put in the entire offense without the help & consultation of his assistants? Then one day a half season after his supposed shitty offense took the team to a 2 seed and the elite 8 he decided to cede all control and let Brad completely take over. If this absurd scenario makes sense to you and you think this happened let's go to point two.

Brad didn't invent the pinch post, I learned about it at a high school coaching convention several years ago. We were running elements of it every year before the mid season switch, that's why it was relatively seamless to put it in before conference play started, many of the bigs actions were similar.

What happened is that we were struggling without Curt, Brad recommended we do the pinch post, Frank agreed.


"Brad's offense" didn't save Frank, that is highly inaccurate
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Winters on March 22, 2014, 12:25:10 AM
Our Fanbase Is So Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  Sigh.
Yeah, like guys predicting a Sweet 16  :D
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 22, 2014, 12:27:11 AM
Frank's seniors exit with a 3 for 16 effort. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yep clearly Frank's fault, add the last two tournaments to all of the times that loser Frank lost in the round of 64

Frank and oscar can both get mumped. They're proving just how terrible they both are. Without Hill recruiting and Brad drawing up X and Os Frank is worthless.

lol, okay

I love how you love to think you are so smart but you really aren't. It's cute.

I'm sure you'll have no issue explaining to us what X's & O's Brad taught Frank that he didn't know before.
Are you really trying to debate that it wasn't Brad's offense we were running for a year and a half when Frank's was a dreadful failure?

yeah, everything in your sentence I take exception to, it's all wrong and a gross misunderstanding of basketball

Lolwut? Pullen's last season; go look up who's offense we put in place when we couldn't do crap midway through the season.

So there's two things that make this talking point a flawed premise at best and just an outright lie at worst. So before we go into the actual offense, it's called the pinch post since clearly you and ednksu don't remember, let's talk about the set up of this absurd point.

You guys say that Brad saved Frank's offense, do you think Frank put in the entire offense without the help & consultation of his assistants? Then one day a half season after his supposed shitty offense took the team to a 2 seed and the elite 8 he decided to cede all control and let Brad completely take over. If this absurd scenario makes sense to you and you think this happened let's go to point two.

Brad didn't invent the pinch post, I learned about it at a high school coaching convention several years ago. We were running elements of it every year before the mid season switch, that's why it was relatively seamless to put it in before conference play started, many of the bigs actions were similar.

What happened is that we were struggling without Curt, Brad recommended we do the pinch post, Frank agreed.


"Brad's offense" didn't save Frank, that is highly inaccurate
Yeah you're totally wrong.  The Pinch post pinwheel was Brad's.  End of story.  Frank was not running that and turned to Brad to install that, please go replay post game interviews right around when Pullen was coming back from his suspension (off hand I think).  No one is saying Brad ran the team or totally ran the offense.  People are saying Frank turned to a better offensive system than his owned and helped to work it into a team that made a great couple runs.  So yeah, you're either wrong about, your now convoluted, point, or are projecting a rage strawman into what I'm saying. 
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 12:28:55 AM
I'm not going to quote the smorgasbord of posts in MIR's last reply/ quote, but he's right. If anything it was a good job of coaching by both Frank and Brad at the time. This whole idea of black and white, or crediting one guy necessitates trashing someone else is ridiculous. Like literally ridiculous, as in when you do it you're deserving of ridicule. Which sucks, because it is basically what half the post around here are. 

Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 22, 2014, 12:30:38 AM
I'm not going to quote the smorgasbord of posts in MIR's last reply/ quote, but he's right. If anything it was a good job of coaching by both Frank and Brad at the time. This whole idea of black and white, or crediting one guy necessitates trashing someone else is ridiculous. Like literally ridiculous, as in when you do it you're deserving of ridicule. Which sucks, because it is basically what half the post around here are.
So it was all lies that Brad pushed the pinwheel?  GMAFB you people are nuts. 
No one is saying its black and white.  It took a lot of humility for Frank to allow Brad to step up and install the offense like he did. Both coaches worked that system pretty damn well.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Cire on March 22, 2014, 12:31:31 AM
Undy sold pp to Frank after asprilla left and we had no bigs.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 22, 2014, 12:32:06 AM
Undy sold pp to Frank after asprilla left and we had no bigs.

DING!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Tobias on March 22, 2014, 12:32:16 AM

Our Fanbase Is So Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  Sigh.
Yeah, like guys predicting a Sweet 16  :D

:D
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on March 22, 2014, 12:32:44 AM
I'm not going to quote the smorgasbord of posts in MIR's last reply/ quote, but he's right. If anything it was a good job of coaching by both Frank and Brad at the time. This whole idea of black and white, or crediting one guy necessitates trashing someone else is ridiculous. Like literally ridiculous, as in when you do it you're deserving of ridicule. Which sucks, because it is basically what half the post around here are.

Agreed. The assertion that taking advice from assistants somehow makes you an inferior head coach is just the most rough ridin' asinine thing ever. Frank hired good assistants who had a plethora of basketball knowledge, and instead of being a prideful bad person, he took some of their advice to heart and it worked out well.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: PowercatPat on March 22, 2014, 12:34:51 AM
I upgraded oscar from awful hire to average college coach 3 months ago.

The problem I have is that there were probably 6 great hires that we could have made at the time.

1. Larry Brown (didn't think he was available)
2. Gregg Marshall (thought he was available and wanted him badly)
3. Lon Kruger        (not sure if available but would have liked for us to go after him)
4. Jankovich   (thought he was available but he took an assistant job to the legend Larry Brown)
5. Brad Underwood (available and an extremely easy hire).
6. Doug Gottlieb   (available and would have recruited more talent to K-State than we have ever seen).

I also was interested in Brad Stevens and Tad Boyle but I don't think either would have came to Manhattan.

Anyhow I am still mad but have gained enough appreciation for oscar to realize that he does a good job with some things. I hate him in press conferences and in game coaching decisions, but he does teach an offensive system that works well at times. He also has apparently given the defense to someone who knows how to coach defense.

Jankovich? Really? I doubt he would have even taken us to the tournament last year.

I was on #teamUnderwood as soon as Frank left, but I got ridiculed for it by some of you.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Pett on March 22, 2014, 12:35:19 AM
oscar Weber....1 win last 7 NCAA tournament games :goodbyecruelworld:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 12:35:33 AM
I'm not going to quote the smorgasbord of posts in MIR's last reply/ quote, but he's right. If anything it was a good job of coaching by both Frank and Brad at the time. This whole idea of black and white, or crediting one guy necessitates trashing someone else is ridiculous. Like literally ridiculous, as in when you do it you're deserving of ridicule. Which sucks, because it is basically what half the post around here are.
So it was all lies that Brad pushed the pinwheel?  GMAFB you people are nuts. 
No one is saying its black and white.  It took a lot of humility for Frank to allow Brad to step up and install the offense like he did. Both coaches worked that system pretty damn well.

But what MIR was saying is that it wasn't some overnight overhaul or "installing" of anything. They'd been doing it for years, only at more limited increments. I'd agree it took some humility on Frank's part, but probably less than one might imagine. Basically two coaches getting together and figuring out a game plan that best suited their team moving forward at a critical point in their season.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 12:41:17 AM
Undy sold pp to Frank after asprilla left and we had no bigs.

DING!

Are you trolling or have the world's worst comprehension? Cire is agreeing with my post. To recap slowly.

mixedberrycrunch Said Brad's offense saved Frank
I said that offense, called the pinch post, was not Brad's offense people ran it before he was a coach, & he recommended it to Frank who said yes.
you found some weird way to disagree with what I told you
cire posted this and you agreed
 :confused:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Cire on March 22, 2014, 12:44:57 AM
oscar Weber....1 win last 7 NCAA tournament games :goodbyecruelworld:

Oh my
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Winters on March 22, 2014, 12:45:09 AM
oscar Weber....1 win last 7 NCAA tournament games :goodbyecruelworld:
awful
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 12:47:39 AM
I'm not going to quote the smorgasbord of posts in MIR's last reply/ quote, but he's right. If anything it was a good job of coaching by both Frank and Brad at the time. This whole idea of black and white, or crediting one guy necessitates trashing someone else is ridiculous. Like literally ridiculous, as in when you do it you're deserving of ridicule. Which sucks, because it is basically what half the post around here are.
So it was all lies that Brad pushed the pinwheel?  GMAFB you people are nuts. 
No one is saying its black and white.  It took a lot of humility for Frank to allow Brad to step up and install the offense like he did. Both coaches worked that system pretty damn well.

But what MIR was saying is that it wasn't some overnight overhaul or "installing" of anything. They'd been doing it for years, only at more limited increments. I'd agree it took some humility on Frank's part, but probably less than one might imagine. Basically two coaches getting together and figuring out a game plan that best suited their team moving forward at a critical point in their season.

the guy is weird, he told me I was wrong and then in the same post agreed with what I posted

it's like that Chappelle Show Charlie Murphy Rick James sketch where he says he would never put his feet on someone's couch then the next sentence says he put his feet on Eddie Murphy's couch and blended it on cocaine
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 22, 2014, 12:49:29 AM
Mir Is Such A Racist.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 12:55:11 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois. 
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on March 22, 2014, 12:55:49 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 12:59:46 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

Nope.  Still won't give a crap regardless of what happens here.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on March 22, 2014, 01:01:38 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

Nope.  Still won't give a crap regardless of what happens here.

That's not very smart.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 01:08:17 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 01:10:59 AM
Mir Is Such A Racist.

I'm not sure why you're lashing out at me, let's talk about this post next time I see you, and I'm gonna need more than "I was pak'ed"
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 01:12:19 AM
Mir Is Such A Racist.

I'm not sure why you're lashing out at me, let's talk about this post next time I see you, and I'm gonna need more than "I was pak'ed"


yeah, what the eff fanning?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on March 22, 2014, 01:14:28 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I see what you're saying, but if we have another first round exit next year, then I think results prior to K-State should be considered. I understand that his seat will be hot regardless, but his previous failures in the tourney at Illinois should be a factor, because it would be a long term trend that should not be ignored by our AD.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: SdK on March 22, 2014, 01:15:44 AM
Mir Is Such A Racist.

I'm not sure why you're lashing out at me, let's talk about this post next time I see you, and I'm gonna need more than "I was pak'ed"

:Sword Fight:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 01:16:40 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I don't know if I'm the only one that believes this. The tournament is a crapshoot. Last year KSU/ oscar definitely shat the bed. His biggest mistake was not playing JO more (same could be said for the whole season really), and that was a game the Cats should have won. It really was a great chance for a deep run.

This season was simply a terrible match-up against a team in Kentucky whose strengths match up terribly with KSU's weaknesses a la Baylor.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you just gotta keep consistently getting in and earning higher seeds and eventually you'll make your run.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 01:25:44 AM
Yes but if he doesn't it would be three years in a row here without a tourney win, that isn't just attributed to cold dice. We've gone 7 seasons before tonight, having back to back sessions without a tourney win. Finishing the season the way we have the last two seasons does nothing to build positive momentum. Many casual fans can get swayed by success in March, just as fans can get frustrated with excessive March Failures, cold dice. There would be a whole lot less Frankites if we couldn't get out of the round of 64.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Panjandrum on March 22, 2014, 01:27:14 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I don't know if I'm the only one that believes this. The tournament is a crapshoot. Last year KSU/ oscar definitely shat the bed. His biggest mistake was not playing JO more (same could be said for the whole season really), and that was a game the Cats should have won. It really was a great chance for a deep run.

This season was simply a terrible match-up against a team in Kentucky whose strengths match up terribly with KSU's weaknesses a la Baylor.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you just gotta keep consistently getting in and earning higher seeds and eventually you'll make your run.

I don't think oscar is going to feel a lot of pressure while the football team keeps winning at the level it is.

If oscar is finishing in the top half and going to the tournament every year, and he beats KU once every couple of years, it's all he needs while we win in football.  Especially, if Currie is still here.

Now, if Brad keeps killing it at SFA, then I think that's where the heat comes from.  But we're not going to fire a guy that's going to the tournament every year.  I don't feel that's something the KSU administration would be okay with.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 01:29:16 AM
Yes but if he doesn't it would be three years in a row here without a tourney win, that isn't just attributed to cold dice. We've gone 7 seasons before tonight, having back to back sessions without a tourney win. Finishing the season the way we have the last two seasons does nothing to build positive momentum. Many casual fans can get swayed by success in March, just as fans can get frustrated with excessive March Failures, cold dice. There would be a whole lot less Frankites if we couldn't get out of the round of 64.

Oh yeah. Like I said, the loss to LaSalle was a failure. This loss nah. But, like you said whatever happens next year the microscope will be on come tourney time.  The four-straight losses this season hurts too.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 01:30:29 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I see what you're saying, but if we have another first round exit next year, then I think results prior to K-State should be considered. I understand that his seat will be hot regardless, but his previous failures in the tourney at Illinois should be a factor, because it would be a long term trend that should not be ignored by our AD.

So, I'm not smart because I don't care to play Junior AD?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Panjandrum on March 22, 2014, 01:33:04 AM
Yes but if he doesn't it would be three years in a row here without a tourney win, that isn't just attributed to cold dice. We've gone 7 seasons before tonight, having back to back sessions without a tourney win. Finishing the season the way we have the last two seasons does nothing to build positive momentum. Many casual fans can get swayed by success in March, just as fans can get frustrated with excessive March Failures, cold dice. There would be a whole lot less Frankites if we couldn't get out of the round of 64.

Oh yeah. Like I said, the loss to LaSalle was a failure. This loss nah. But, like you said whatever happens next year the microscope will be on come tourney time.  The four-straight losses this season hurts too.

He's going to get a pass for this year because his freshmen, as a whole, played better than Frank's seniors.

That's going to buy him capital with a large segment of the fan base.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: eastcat on March 22, 2014, 01:34:11 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I don't know if I'm the only one that believes this. The tournament is a crapshoot. Last year KSU/ oscar definitely shat the bed. His biggest mistake was not playing JO more (same could be said for the whole season really), and that was a game the Cats should have won. It really was a great chance for a deep run.

This season was simply a terrible match-up against a team in Kentucky whose strengths match up terribly with KSU's weaknesses a la Baylor.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you just gotta keep consistently getting in and earning higher seeds and eventually you'll make your run.

I don't think oscar is going to feel a lot of pressure while the football team keeps winning at the level it is.

If oscar is finishing in the top half and going to the tournament every year, and he beats KU once every couple of years, it's all he needs while we win in football.  Especially, if Currie is still here.

Now, if Brad keeps killing it at SFA, then I think that's where the heat comes from.  But we're not going to fire a guy that's going to the tournament every year.  I don't feel that's something the KSU administration would be okay with.

Part of our problem is how comfortable a large portion of KSU has become staying where we have historically been - average. They justify it using words like 'family' 'grass roots' 'blue collar' etc.. but it's really just a feel good way of saying 'average as eff'. I know Currie is good at pinching pennies out of donors pockets but we need someone with some nuts to hire people who can win real crap on the big stage.

Could have taken a chance with pearl and now we'll never know. Could have taken a chance with Patterson but now we'll never know.

KSU- Taking the 'safe' route every time!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 01:39:32 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I don't know if I'm the only one that believes this. The tournament is a crapshoot. Last year KSU/ oscar definitely shat the bed. His biggest mistake was not playing JO more (same could be said for the whole season really), and that was a game the Cats should have won. It really was a great chance for a deep run.

This season was simply a terrible match-up against a team in Kentucky whose strengths match up terribly with KSU's weaknesses a la Baylor.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you just gotta keep consistently getting in and earning higher seeds and eventually you'll make your run.

I don't think oscar is going to feel a lot of pressure while the football team keeps winning at the level it is.

If oscar is finishing in the top half and going to the tournament every year, and he beats KU once every couple of years, it's all he needs while we win in football.  Especially, if Currie is still here.

Now, if Brad keeps killing it at SFA, then I think that's where the heat comes from.  But we're not going to fire a guy that's going to the tournament every year.  I don't feel that's something the KSU administration would be okay with.

Brad will get a good job before then and won't sit around and pine for the KSU job.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: nicname on March 22, 2014, 01:41:31 AM
eastcat doesn't know what average means
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Panjandrum on March 22, 2014, 01:47:10 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I don't know if I'm the only one that believes this. The tournament is a crapshoot. Last year KSU/ oscar definitely shat the bed. His biggest mistake was not playing JO more (same could be said for the whole season really), and that was a game the Cats should have won. It really was a great chance for a deep run.

This season was simply a terrible match-up against a team in Kentucky whose strengths match up terribly with KSU's weaknesses a la Baylor.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you just gotta keep consistently getting in and earning higher seeds and eventually you'll make your run.

I don't think oscar is going to feel a lot of pressure while the football team keeps winning at the level it is.

If oscar is finishing in the top half and going to the tournament every year, and he beats KU once every couple of years, it's all he needs while we win in football.  Especially, if Currie is still here.

Now, if Brad keeps killing it at SFA, then I think that's where the heat comes from.  But we're not going to fire a guy that's going to the tournament every year.  I don't feel that's something the KSU administration would be okay with.

Part of our problem is how comfortable a large portion of KSU has become staying where we have historically been - average. They justify it using words like 'family' 'grass roots' 'blue collar' etc.. but it's really just a feel good way of saying 'average as eff'. I know Currie is good at pinching pennies out of donors pockets but we need someone with some nuts to hire people who can win real crap on the big stage.

Could have taken a chance with pearl and now we'll never know. Could have taken a chance with Patterson but now we'll never know.

KSU- Taking the 'safe' route every time!

But what is average?  KSU is now tied with Florida for the most consecutive NCAA tournament appearances, and oscar has 2 of the 5.  We'll make the tournament, most likely, each of the next two years.  Seven consecutive trips puts us into what is currently Louisville, Ohio State, and Syracuse territory.

oscar needs to win a game in March.  I think that happens next year.  But he's got around a .700 winning percentage at KSU right now, and we bring back nearly the entire roster.  If he keeps winning, even at this level, that consistent level of 'B+' is hard to find unless you're a really elite program.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Panjandrum on March 22, 2014, 01:49:15 AM
I don't care what oscar did at Illinois.

You probably should if those trends continue at K-State.

He's been polarizing enough here in 2 seasons that Illinois doesn't matter anymore at all. He has a good foundation in place here and had won a lot of games & a conference title. However, the fans haven't gotten on board en masse, that showing in KC was an embarrassment; and the two round of 64 exits are bad. He has a bit of pressure on him now, what's sad is that the regular season in 14-15, won't mean anything, even if he wins another conference title. His seat will become blazing if he loses another 2nd round game.

I don't know if I'm the only one that believes this. The tournament is a crapshoot. Last year KSU/ oscar definitely shat the bed. His biggest mistake was not playing JO more (same could be said for the whole season really), and that was a game the Cats should have won. It really was a great chance for a deep run.

This season was simply a terrible match-up against a team in Kentucky whose strengths match up terribly with KSU's weaknesses a la Baylor.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you just gotta keep consistently getting in and earning higher seeds and eventually you'll make your run.

I don't think oscar is going to feel a lot of pressure while the football team keeps winning at the level it is.

If oscar is finishing in the top half and going to the tournament every year, and he beats KU once every couple of years, it's all he needs while we win in football.  Especially, if Currie is still here.

Now, if Brad keeps killing it at SFA, then I think that's where the heat comes from.  But we're not going to fire a guy that's going to the tournament every year.  I don't feel that's something the KSU administration would be okay with.

Brad will get a good job before then and won't sit around and pine for the KSU job.

Oh, I know.  I'm just talking about immediate heat from donors and fans that would rather have Brad.

And, who knows, at any given time, Brad may consider this his dream job like Huggs considered WVU his dream job?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Stevesie60 on March 22, 2014, 03:26:47 AM
1. Panj, you said we're tied with Florida with most consecutive tournament appearances at 5. I assume you're saying we're tied for 5th most consecutive appearances, right?

2. Frank and oscar's strengths are different, so these talking points are going to keep going around and around. Frank was inconsistent to the point that if he was hear last year, I don't think we would have won a Big 12 Championship. We would have lost a few more games that we shouldn't have, but maybe beat KU at home to make up for it. However, there is no doubt in my mind that if we had the same slot in the tourney we would have beaten La Salle. And we would have been talked about more (we were a borderline top 10 team for almost all of conference play, but most people will never remember that because no one wanted to talk about us, and I think that's oscar's fault.)

3. Why is coaching the tournament so different? A lot of coaches seem to have completely different reputations when it comes to tournament coaching vs. regular season coaching. I don't doubt that. But it seems weird to me that there is such a big disparity between them for a lot of coaches.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ednksu on March 22, 2014, 08:45:17 AM
Undy sold pp to Frank after asprilla left and we had no bigs.

DING!

Are you trolling or have the world's worst comprehension? Cire is agreeing with my post. To recap slowly.

mixedberrycrunch Said Brad's offense saved Frank
I said that offense, called the pinch post, was not Brad's offense people ran it before he was a coach, & he recommended it to Frank who said yes.
you found some weird way to disagree with what I told you
cire posted this and you agreed
 :confused:

Hopefully your haldol has kicked in by the time you read this.

Mix and I never said Brad invented the PP/Pin.  We said that it was Brad's offense in our system.  That is undeniably a fact.  You are trying to revise history in order to make your point look less asinine.  Yes Brad's offense, his advise to go 100% his direction, saved that season for Frank.  That in no way shape or form is what Frank wanted to do that season as evidence by the floundering offense we had for the first half of the year.  You can attempt to revise history all you want in order to make Frank look better, but its still a lie.  No one on post game for a season and a half referred to the offense as "the great compromise between dear leader Frank and coach Underwood to adopt an old offense based on mutual agreement."  It was always "Brad's offense."  This stupid debate is the same as saying the motion/spread that Bama could go to next year is Sabans and only Sabans, even though he got a new OC, who coincidentally wanted to make some changes.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on March 22, 2014, 08:55:57 AM
sigh
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 09:23:39 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.
No one knew what to expect from Kelly beforehand.  Could easily have sucked.  Judge did suck, so I don't know why you'd want one of him in your hypothetical.  Clemente didn't do much at Miami.  I don't think you really knew those guys upon arrival would be any better or worse than any players coming in next year.  You're fooling yourself if you think you did.

Kelly was a 5*, Judge was a 5*, McGruder was a 4*, all "added" talent.  Judge provided good minutes his freshman year (and Judge flaming out also disproves your "hey the freshman will automatically get better" theory).

You're rough ridin' stupid if you think Clemente wasn't proven.

Quote
The 6-0, 180-pound native of Puerto Rico averaged 9.8 points while shooting 43.5% for Miami last year as a sophomore. He played in 27 games and scored in double figures in 11. He also averaged 3.3 assists and 2.5 rebounds. In Atlanic Coast Conference play, he averaged 10.5 points and 2.6 assists.

and the point isn't that you know, with 100% certainty, what each player will be, but that you have a basis (i.e. stars or historical/proven body of work) to go on for why you think the team will be better.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: lopakman on March 22, 2014, 09:30:40 AM
 :popcorn:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Pete on March 22, 2014, 09:52:06 AM
Go look at oscar's tournament record....when he didn't have Bill Self's NBA players.  Woof.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 10:15:39 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.
No one knew what to expect from Kelly beforehand.  Could easily have sucked.  Judge did suck, so I don't know why you'd want one of him in your hypothetical.  Clemente didn't do much at Miami.  I don't think you really knew those guys upon arrival would be any better or worse than any players coming in next year.  You're fooling yourself if you think you did.

Kelly was a 5*, Judge was a 5*, McGruder was a 4*, all "added" talent.  Judge provided good minutes his freshman year (and Judge flaming out also disproves your "hey the freshman will automatically get better" theory).

You're rough ridin' stupid if you think Clemente wasn't proven.

Quote
The 6-0, 180-pound native of Puerto Rico averaged 9.8 points while shooting 43.5% for Miami last year as a sophomore. He played in 27 games and scored in double figures in 11. He also averaged 3.3 assists and 2.5 rebounds. In Atlanic Coast Conference play, he averaged 10.5 points and 2.6 assists.

and the point isn't that you know, with 100% certainty, what each player will be, but that you have a basis (i.e. stars or historical/proven body of work) to go on for why you think the team will be better.

It's pretty dumb to say that there's no talent in this class solely because there are no five stars or whatever.  If that's true, there was no talent in last year's class, which is clearly not the case.  Talent is just a very vague concept and you haven't really helped me to understand what you mean by it.

I totally misremembered about Clemente, which is rare because I have an excellent memory.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Cire on March 22, 2014, 10:16:54 AM
The Maine guy and the Georgetown guy had better be effing good
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 10:23:38 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.
No one knew what to expect from Kelly beforehand.  Could easily have sucked.  Judge did suck, so I don't know why you'd want one of him in your hypothetical.  Clemente didn't do much at Miami.  I don't think you really knew those guys upon arrival would be any better or worse than any players coming in next year.  You're fooling yourself if you think you did.

Kelly was a 5*, Judge was a 5*, McGruder was a 4*, all "added" talent.  Judge provided good minutes his freshman year (and Judge flaming out also disproves your "hey the freshman will automatically get better" theory).

You're rough ridin' stupid if you think Clemente wasn't proven.

Quote
The 6-0, 180-pound native of Puerto Rico averaged 9.8 points while shooting 43.5% for Miami last year as a sophomore. He played in 27 games and scored in double figures in 11. He also averaged 3.3 assists and 2.5 rebounds. In Atlanic Coast Conference play, he averaged 10.5 points and 2.6 assists.

and the point isn't that you know, with 100% certainty, what each player will be, but that you have a basis (i.e. stars or historical/proven body of work) to go on for why you think the team will be better.

It's pretty dumb to say that there's no talent in this class solely because there are no five stars or whatever.  If that's true, there was no talent in last year's class, which is clearly not the case.  Talent is just a very vague concept and you haven't really helped me to understand what you mean by it.

I totally misremembered about Clemente, which is rare because I have an excellent memory.

you can't do a postmortem and then say you new the cause of death a year ago.  stars are an indicator - again, have all the confidence in the world about next year's team - I do not because there isn't any talent or proven players coming in to aid the core guys (who  may or may not get better).  I'm sorry you can't understand the concept of talent as judged by recruiting services; it's a commonly accepted premise, so I'm amazed someone at your intelligence level can't comprehend it.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on March 22, 2014, 10:25:52 AM
Jesus, 'Zacker.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 10:33:39 AM
talent - add a Curtis Kelly, sprinkle in a Rodney McGruder and Wally Judge
proven - add a Denis Clemente

jfc chum.  quit be a rough ridin' contrarian just to be one.
No one knew what to expect from Kelly beforehand.  Could easily have sucked.  Judge did suck, so I don't know why you'd want one of him in your hypothetical.  Clemente didn't do much at Miami.  I don't think you really knew those guys upon arrival would be any better or worse than any players coming in next year.  You're fooling yourself if you think you did.

Kelly was a 5*, Judge was a 5*, McGruder was a 4*, all "added" talent.  Judge provided good minutes his freshman year (and Judge flaming out also disproves your "hey the freshman will automatically get better" theory).

You're rough ridin' stupid if you think Clemente wasn't proven.

Quote
The 6-0, 180-pound native of Puerto Rico averaged 9.8 points while shooting 43.5% for Miami last year as a sophomore. He played in 27 games and scored in double figures in 11. He also averaged 3.3 assists and 2.5 rebounds. In Atlanic Coast Conference play, he averaged 10.5 points and 2.6 assists.

and the point isn't that you know, with 100% certainty, what each player will be, but that you have a basis (i.e. stars or historical/proven body of work) to go on for why you think the team will be better.

It's pretty dumb to say that there's no talent in this class solely because there are no five stars or whatever.  If that's true, there was no talent in last year's class, which is clearly not the case.  Talent is just a very vague concept and you haven't really helped me to understand what you mean by it.

I totally misremembered about Clemente, which is rare because I have an excellent memory.

you can't do a postmortem and then say you new the cause of death a year ago.  stars are an indicator - again, have all the confidence in the world about next year's team - I do not because there isn't any talent or proven players coming in to aid the core guys (who  may or may not get better).  I'm sorry you can't understand the concept of talent as judged by recruiting services; it's a commonly accepted premise, so I'm amazed someone at your intelligence level can't comprehend it.

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 10:34:37 AM
Jesus, 'Zacker.

what?  someone says "hey we're going to be good" and I want to know why.  i'm sorry if I don't just rough ridin' assume every single rough ridin' player on the roster will make some incredible rough ridin' leap and every single incoming player will be rough ridin' studs and disregard that every other team has returning players and incoming players.

Unless the Maine Bear, GT transfer, and Hurt are the rough ridin' crap AND jevon learns how to shoot a basketball as a sophomore in college AND Westicles and Foster get incrementally better, this team will be mediocre next year.

That is a lot of ANDs and IFs.  Do other teams outside of KU have the same questions?  Probably.  I'd imagine UT will probably be good as they have talent and it is returning and they have a talented player coming in.  The rest of the Big 12 might be garbage-y enough to make KSU seem not as mediocre.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 10:39:25 AM

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 10:46:10 AM

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?

What do you mean by "talent"?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: PowercatPat on March 22, 2014, 10:48:02 AM
FWIW, Bolden's offer list was legit. Baylor, Florida, Georgia, Virginia, VCU, and Va Tech.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Cire on March 22, 2014, 10:49:46 AM
The Maine guy and the Georgetown guy had better be effing good
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 10:52:51 AM

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?

What do you mean by "talent"?

eff, maybe start with a few top 150 kids?  maybe a couple of 4*'s?   jesus chum, I 'm sorry I can't break it down into a formula for you. look at the top 30 classes on rivals. they usually have quantified talent. 
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 10:57:35 AM

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?

What do you mean by "talent"?

eff, maybe start with a few top 150 kids?  maybe a couple of 4*'s?   jesus chum, I 'm sorry I can't break it down into a formula for you. look at the top 30 classes on rivals. they usually have quantified talent.

So, if you don't have a formula, do you just base this on your gut feeling?  That would explain why it is inaccessible to me.   
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Panjandrum on March 22, 2014, 11:21:27 AM
1. Panj, you said we're tied with Florida with most consecutive tournament appearances at 5. I assume you're saying we're tied for 5th most consecutive appearances, right?

2. Frank and oscar's strengths are different, so these talking points are going to keep going around and around. Frank was inconsistent to the point that if he was hear last year, I don't think we would have won a Big 12 Championship. We would have lost a few more games that we shouldn't have, but maybe beat KU at home to make up for it. However, there is no doubt in my mind that if we had the same slot in the tourney we would have beaten La Salle. And we would have been talked about more (we were a borderline top 10 team for almost all of conference play, but most people will never remember that because no one wanted to talk about us, and I think that's oscar's fault.)

3. Why is coaching the tournament so different? A lot of coaches seem to have completely different reputations when it comes to tournament coaching vs. regular season coaching. I don't doubt that. But it seems weird to me that there is such a big disparity between them for a lot of coaches.

Tied for 9th with five straight appearances.

KU is #1 with 25 straight, FWIW.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 11:48:34 AM
Quote from: catzacker link=topic=31681.msg1by073967#msg1073967 date=1395502765

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?

What do you mean by "talent"?

eff, maybe start with a few top 150 kids?  maybe a couple of 4*'s?   jesus chum, I 'm sorry I can't break it down into a formula for you. look at the top 30 classes on rivals. they usually have quantified talent.

So, if you don't have a formula, do you just base this on your gut feeling?  That would explain why it is inaccessible to me.

Go by rivals ratings.  Are you able to access that?  I consider top 150 players or 4* players to have talent.  Fill a class primarily  with those. You are rough ridin' worthless with your stupid rough ridin' contrarian bullshit.  You fein this stupidity form some reason.  eff I thought dax was bad.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 12:31:10 PM
Quote from: catzacker link=topic=31681.msg1by073967#msg1073967 date=1395502765

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?

What do you mean by "talent"?

eff, maybe start with a few top 150 kids?  maybe a couple of 4*'s?   jesus chum, I 'm sorry I can't break it down into a formula for you. look at the top 30 classes on rivals. they usually have quantified talent.

So, if you don't have a formula, do you just base this on your gut feeling?  That would explain why it is inaccessible to me.

Go by rivals ratings.  Are you able to access that?  I consider top 150 players or 4* players to have talent.  Fill a class primarily  with those. You are rough ridin' worthless with your stupid rough ridin' contrarian bullshit.  You fein this stupidity form some reason.  eff I thought dax was bad.

Like I said before, this commits you to saying that there was no talent in last year's class.  That's totally absurd.  You need to reject this theory. 
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 22, 2014, 12:34:43 PM
When you get left with total non talents in Spradling and Omari, and a spot up streak shooter at best as your senior "leadership".  It makes things a little difficult. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: #LIFE on March 22, 2014, 12:36:10 PM
When you get left with total non talents in Spradling and Omari, and a spot up streak shooter at best as your senior "leadership".  It makes things a little difficult. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shutup dumbass
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 22, 2014, 12:36:49 PM
Nope.  Go be angry elsewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 12:54:15 PM
Quote from: catzacker link=topic=31681.msg1by073967#msg1073967 date=1395502765

I know that general point.  It's been made a thousand times before.  I'm saying that there seems to be something wrong with your current, unique suggestion that there is NO talent coming in next year.  It's too strong.

I dunno.  2 3*'s, a transfer from the America East Conference (unranked), and a transfer from GT (former 3*).  That's talent?

What do you mean by "talent"?

eff, maybe start with a few top 150 kids?  maybe a couple of 4*'s?   jesus chum, I 'm sorry I can't break it down into a formula for you. look at the top 30 classes on rivals. they usually have quantified talent.

So, if you don't have a formula, do you just base this on your gut feeling?  That would explain why it is inaccessible to me.

Go by rivals ratings.  Are you able to access that?  I consider top 150 players or 4* players to have talent.  Fill a class primarily  with those. You are rough ridin' worthless with your stupid rough ridin' contrarian bullshit.  You fein this stupidity form some reason.  eff I thought dax was bad.

Like I said before, this commits you to saying that there was no talent in last year's class.  That's totally absurd.  You need to reject this theory.

No.  You can have a warm fuzzy because foster turned out to be good.  If you believe in the DITR recruiting as a reason to think stars don't matter that is fine.  I think it is much more reliable to go off rankings in basketball as an indicator of talent.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 01:05:35 PM
I completely accept that stars matter.  I do not accept the assertion that a particular class with only three stars has no talent.  And it isn't solely because there might be a Foster in it.  It's because they reference two different ideas.
Title: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 22, 2014, 01:12:06 PM
We had two legit studs straight out of high/prep school in forever.   Their coach parlayed their studom into a 4th place finish and a second round blowout loss to  Camp Ginger.   Other than that it's been 3 stars and transfers leading the way.


Some people just live in non reality.   


Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 01:37:35 PM
I completely accept that stars matter.  I do not accept the assertion that a particular class with only three stars has no talent.  And it isn't solely because there might be a Foster in it.  It's because they reference two different ideas.

It might turn out to have talent but right now it doesn't.  The let's win the lotto recruiting philosophy is always a good way to go about it.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 01:47:42 PM
I completely accept that stars matter.  I do not accept the assertion that a particular class with only three stars has no talent.  And it isn't solely because there might be a Foster in it.  It's because they reference two different ideas.

It might turn out to have talent but right now it doesn't.  The let's win the lotto recruiting philosophy is always a good way to go about it.

No, it will, for certain, have talented players.  There's very little risk.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catzacker on March 22, 2014, 01:58:31 PM
How talented, chum?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: michigancat on March 22, 2014, 02:01:17 PM
If oscar wins the conference next year he should absolutely not be on the hot seat. No matter what. My goodness, folks.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 22, 2014, 02:06:36 PM
How talented, chum?

On par with the departing players maybe?  Shane was HM all conference last year, Will was this year, I believe.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: bozocat on March 23, 2014, 02:28:46 AM
Worst thread ever.   :Yuck:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Winters on March 23, 2014, 03:30:01 AM
if you think oscar can take this program to the 'next level' I might re-evaluate your intelligence,    :frown:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on March 23, 2014, 07:08:07 AM
if you think oscar can take this program to the 'next level' I might re-evaluate your intelligence,    :frown:

What is "next level"?  Why wouldn't conference championship qualify as next level?  Why should I care about next level?  Please provide your most intelligent responses and I will evaluate.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sonofdaxjones on March 23, 2014, 08:28:21 AM
A coach that performs well in conference but doesn't do well in the NCAA tourney is going to pose a huge dilemma for like 99.8% of the AD's out there. 

If oscar doesn't perform well at all he's going to be gone fairly soon.   The athletic department needs healthy BB.   For starters, our Tier 3 media contract is going to be coming up soon.   



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 15, 2017, 06:59:04 PM
IN!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Tobias on February 15, 2017, 07:01:14 PM
:lol:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 15, 2017, 07:04:03 PM
This mother rough rider! And Gene is there smiling just as happy as a bee (do bees smile?). Burn. This. rough rider. Down!

CASE CLOSED!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: PIPE on February 15, 2017, 07:05:12 PM
I've been in for 5 years now
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Pete on February 15, 2017, 07:10:42 PM
I've been in for 5 years now


My second home is there.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: IPA4Me on February 15, 2017, 07:28:24 PM
I'll be burning flicks while this pile of crap burns.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: PowercatPat on February 15, 2017, 07:51:52 PM
[email protected]
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 15, 2017, 08:14:18 PM
[email protected]
TY!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on February 15, 2017, 08:14:57 PM
Can't Wait For This Dur Of A Thread.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 15, 2017, 08:26:24 PM
nice work, NB. Sorry I didn't meltdown earlier after a big 12 'ship! :thumbs: Let's finally get this rough rider out of her!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on February 15, 2017, 08:27:23 PM
nice work, NB. Sorry I didn't meltdown earlier after a big 12 'ship! :thumbs: Let's finally get this rough rider out of her!

I couldn't resist, I accidentally clicked on the first page of this thread earlier tonight, thought it was funny.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: PowercatPat on February 15, 2017, 08:37:40 PM
https://twitter.com/IM_MonEy/status/832047323131867136
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ELL3 on February 15, 2017, 08:49:58 PM
https://twitter.com/IM_MonEy/status/832047323131867136

looks very much like he is vying for an admin spot on wildcat salute
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Poonhound69 on February 15, 2017, 09:00:06 PM
Eff this guy!!
I'm done.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 15, 2017, 09:31:01 PM
nice work, NB. Sorry I didn't meltdown earlier after a big 12 'ship! :thumbs: Let's finally get this rough rider out of her!

I couldn't resist, I accidentally clicked on the first page of this thread earlier tonight, thought it was funny.
I don't blame you. Kinda fun to look back at.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: mocat on February 16, 2017, 08:53:48 AM
IN!

i don't understand; what did you learn last night that you didn't already know?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: kso_FAN on February 16, 2017, 08:56:53 AM
https://twitter.com/IM_MonEy/status/832047323131867136

There are a ridiculously high number of "its the players fault" fans. I shouldn't be, but this mentality still surprises me.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 16, 2017, 08:58:26 AM
That our tourney hopes are pretty much gone and oscar can't even mediocre his way to a 12 seed after putting us in a position to get there. I'm fine with a home loss to KU, I was pissed after TCU, but getting blown out by Iowa State at home is unacceptable. Also, there was no motivation from our guys in a must win game at home. They were lifeless and that's on the coaching staff.

Congrats tho Day 1 BID'rs. Sorry I was hoping my school wasn't a complete crap show just to hurry in another coach.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catastrophe on February 16, 2017, 09:02:43 AM
I'm actually still not BID yet, but I'll happily jump on the wagon if we lose any of the next three.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 16, 2017, 09:05:01 AM
We have 3 quality wins. 3! If we make it in, it's because the field is super weak.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Trim on February 16, 2017, 09:08:31 AM
Dax was doing the "prior administration" thing in this basketball thread back in 2014!
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Tobias on February 16, 2017, 09:13:28 AM
:lol:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: michigancat on February 16, 2017, 09:35:25 AM
I bet we still make the tournament
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: kso_FAN on February 16, 2017, 09:38:56 AM
I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: michigancat on February 16, 2017, 09:41:04 AM
I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.

we have 2 home games against teams we beat/should have beat on the road along with roadies against the two worst teams in the league. Plenty of "quality" wins and no bad losses.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Tobias on February 16, 2017, 09:45:11 AM
#bruce4-1eva
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: yoga-like_abana on February 16, 2017, 09:57:26 AM
I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.

we have 2 home games against teams we beat/should have beat on the road along with roadies against the two worst teams in the league. Plenty of "quality" wins and no bad losses.
make his name something with buttstuff.. like buttstuffedbybruce
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: mocat on February 16, 2017, 11:19:33 AM
_FANofroyalsnicknames
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Shooter Jones on February 16, 2017, 11:25:54 AM
I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.

we have 2 home games against teams we beat/should have beat on the road along with roadies against the two worst teams in the league. Plenty of "quality" wins and no bad losses.

Last 10

HOME: 1-4 (win over WVa!)
ROAD: 2-3 (win over Baylor!)

Weirdly, you could say this team has played better on the road, so I don't think playing at home should give you any reason to think they have a better chance of winning.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: sys on February 16, 2017, 11:29:45 AM
Last 10

HOME: 1-4 (win over WVa!)
ROAD: 2-3 (win over Baylor!)

Weirdly, you could say this team has played better on the road, so I don't think playing at home should give you any reason to think they have a better chance of winning.

if we restricted our analysis to kstate's last 10 games, we'd also conclude that the better the opponent, the better our chances of winning.  at some point you have to allow inferences drawn from a larger set of games.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Shooter Jones on February 16, 2017, 11:40:30 AM
Last 10

HOME: 1-4 (win over WVa!)
ROAD: 2-3 (win over Baylor!)

Weirdly, you could say this team has played better on the road, so I don't think playing at home should give you any reason to think they have a better chance of winning.

if we restricted our analysis to kstate's last 10 games, we'd also conclude that the better the opponent, the better our chances of winning.  at some point you have to allow inferences drawn from a larger set of games.

Last 10 is a stat used in almost all sport standings to give a feel of trajectory/BID status. Plus, I like to use it cause I do a lot of drugs and short term memory loss is an issue, so it reminds me.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ben ji on February 16, 2017, 11:42:59 AM
I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.

we have 2 home games against teams we beat/should have beat on the road along with roadies against the two worst teams in the league. Plenty of "quality" wins and no bad losses.

I dont see us beating OSU at home or TCU on the road. Even if we win the rest thats 8-10 in big12 play with a bad non con.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: michigancat on February 16, 2017, 12:02:56 PM


I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.

we have 2 home games against teams we beat/should have beat on the road along with roadies against the two worst teams in the league. Plenty of "quality" wins and no bad losses.

I dont see us beating OSU at home or TCU on the road. Even if we win the rest thats 8-10 in big12 play with a bad non con.

Did you see us beating Baylor on the road or TCU at home?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Mixed-Nutz on February 16, 2017, 01:02:30 PM
 :sdeek:
I bet we still make the tournament

I will change my username to whatever you choose if we do. I just don't see it.

we have 2 home games against teams we beat/should have beat on the road along with roadies against the two worst teams in the league. Plenty of "quality" wins and no bad losses.

Last 10

HOME: 1-4 (win over WVa!)
ROAD: 2-3 (win over Baylor!)

Weirdly, you could say this team has played better on the road, so I don't think playing at home should give you any reason to think they have a better chance of winning.

The quality of play has never really been the issue of play. Never really been a ton of validity to it. Its hard to win on the road when you are average or below average in the conference rankings. It is around 8 point swing from home to road.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: kso_FAN on February 16, 2017, 01:06:17 PM
Things I see.

6 of 7.

8 of 11.

9 of 12.

I don't care about the quality of opponents at this point.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: ksupamplemousse on February 16, 2017, 01:32:51 PM
If we don't go on the road and win at Texas, I get the feeling that this thing could unravel on oscar. I think right now the team is still hanging on by a thread, but if they lose another clunker of a game, I think the wheels could come off. I also think them winning four out of the next five is reasonable as well. There's a wide range of possibilities coming up, and it makes me kind of excited.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 16, 2017, 01:45:36 PM
Texas is another program with no wheels. We should win that game.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: #LIFE on February 16, 2017, 01:48:28 PM
https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/832311226071969793

 
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 16, 2017, 01:52:14 PM
That is awesome.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: yoga-like_abana on February 16, 2017, 01:53:32 PM
https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/832311226071969793
:lol:
he has to be trolling us all at this point
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 16, 2017, 01:55:55 PM
https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/831911490131263488
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: kso_FAN on February 16, 2017, 01:58:32 PM
https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/832311226071969793
:lol:
he has to be trolling us all at this point

Oh no, he really believes in one he says.

I get the feeling that this thing could unravel on oscar. I think right now the team is still hanging on by a thread, but if they lose another clunker of a game, I think the wheels could come off.

Its not like this has happened before. Its been almost a full 2 years since K-State won 2 Big 12 games in a row. I don't see that changing.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: yoga-like_abana on February 16, 2017, 02:00:13 PM
two and a half years ago...... yet here we are luke

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: kso_FAN on February 16, 2017, 02:03:16 PM
Someone get him started on Snyder and football. He's almost anti-football.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 16, 2017, 02:08:03 PM
He's so bizarre. He's like talking to himself in every tweet. Never @'s anyone.

https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/572098170257195009

https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/591290212384374784

https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/610373614873939968

https://twitter.com/maddex2015/status/648624801179811840

I don't think he understands how to use twitter yet.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: SdK on February 16, 2017, 02:19:28 PM
I @d him and he didn't reply
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: yoga-like_abana on February 16, 2017, 02:34:04 PM
tell him to get in here so we can kick his ass
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: chum1 on February 16, 2017, 02:43:38 PM
If we make the tournament, I will be on team not burn it down so hard.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Catchacold on February 16, 2017, 02:44:56 PM
went to hs with that guy  :Ugh:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 16, 2017, 02:46:14 PM
went to hs with that guy  :Ugh:

That is great.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on February 16, 2017, 02:47:20 PM
Ness city or Garden City Community College?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Catchacold on February 16, 2017, 02:49:56 PM
https://twitter.com/wildcat_3232/status/7183794322
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: yoga-like_abana on February 16, 2017, 02:51:11 PM
glad to see that luke has now replaced kenn with two N's
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on February 16, 2017, 02:54:38 PM
https://twitter.com/wildcat_3232/status/7183794322

It's weird that he used to understand how to @ people and now he doesn't.
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: meow meow on February 16, 2017, 02:58:55 PM
that stud is gonna get several new followers today
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: #LIFE on February 16, 2017, 03:54:43 PM
http://www.810whb.com/border-patrol-podcast/ (http://www.810whb.com/border-patrol-podcast/)

How bad is it when you've got Jay Heidrick leaning towards the #BID train  :surprised:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catastrophe on February 16, 2017, 04:42:38 PM
https://twitter.com/wildcat_3232/status/7183794322

Luke says: "hey, remember me? It's Luke."
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: The Big Train on February 16, 2017, 08:40:53 PM
Drugs? :lol:
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: GregKSU1027 on February 17, 2017, 12:45:57 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170217/4db4bd702778d9d41b4137926e8d3d00.jpg)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: GregKSU1027 on February 17, 2017, 12:46:16 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170217/0c8814dd8d63f84aef1d5eab7b80e995.jpg)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: GregKSU1027 on February 17, 2017, 12:46:31 AM
I made these guys

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: GregKSU1027 on February 17, 2017, 12:49:53 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170217/7744de99f8d73661b8a345775340b737.jpg)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: BackPayne on February 17, 2017, 01:20:40 AM
Is Luke sketti brained?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: MakeItRain on February 17, 2017, 01:55:30 AM
went to hs with that guy  :Ugh:

I may have been your basketball coach, if you played of course
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catastrophe on February 22, 2017, 10:25:33 PM
I'm actually still not BID yet, but I'll happily jump on the wagon if we lose any of the next three.

Welp, I'm a man of my word.  So what should I do now that I'm on team BID? Like, lots of passive aggressive posting?
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: star seed 7 on February 22, 2017, 10:27:15 PM
Burn it down isn't very passive aggressive edn
Title: Re: burn. it. down
Post by: catastrophe on February 22, 2017, 10:28:36 PM
Ok, aggressive posting it is!  :curse: :curse: :curse: :curse: