General Recruiting Discussion/Comments 2022 and before

giovanni · Unread post by **giovanni** » 7 years ago

rjsuperfly66 wrote:
bostonwhaler wrote: Agreed. Trust in Dan, trust in the process. If he wants Fatts over Langford, then it was the right move, and we can enjoy watching this play out over the next 4 years.
Umm, was he recruiting him?
URI was never really associated with MAL, so I don't think it was a matter of taking one over the other.
That said, I can never blame a coach for that.
They put out feelers, but they aren't going to waste their time on a long-shot.
But I'm sure every coach would still go down the list of the top players in the country, and say "Damn, kid is going to be a good player, wish I could land him."
I think every program would be Kentucky or Duke if they could.

Dan chose to take Fatts over Langford? Wow. I guess you learn something hear every day. Fatts may be great and turn out better, but there seem to be a refusal by some that PC got a helluva recruit. On paper, I believe you would typically take a top 50 if you had a choice.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 7 years ago

The homerism on here is way over the top, sometimes.
Dan never got a sniff from Langford.
Guess that makes anyone who thinks Cooley
has scored big this recruiting cycle, a PC fan, right?

bostonwhaler · Unread post by **bostonwhaler** » 7 years ago

giovanni wrote:
rjsuperfly66 wrote:
bostonwhaler wrote: Agreed. Trust in Dan, trust in the process. If he wants Fatts over Langford, then it was the right move, and we can enjoy watching this play out over the next 4 years.
Umm, was he recruiting him?
URI was never really associated with MAL, so I don't think it was a matter of taking one over the other.
That said, I can never blame a coach for that.
They put out feelers, but they aren't going to waste their time on a long-shot.
But I'm sure every coach would still go down the list of the top players in the country, and say "Damn, kid is going to be a good player, wish I could land him."
I think every program would be Kentucky or Duke if they could.
Dan chose to take Fatts over Langford? Wow. I guess you learn something hear every day. Fatts may be great and turn out better, but there seem to be a refusal by some that PC got a helluva recruit. On paper, I believe you would typically take a top 50 if you had a choice.

geez guys. I think you all are latching onto just one part of that post. My main point was that I trust Dan's judgment on Fatts. And I expect them both to be quality guards, and it should be fun watching them go at it over the next few years.

steveystuds06 · Unread post by **steveystuds06** » 7 years ago

Everyone knows PC has an amazing class....

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 7 years ago

I think the overriding theme from those being called homers is that we really like what we have seen from Fatts and believe he will have a very good career at URI. PC has in past years as well as this year landed highly ranked recruits.

steviep123 · Unread post by **steviep123** » 7 years ago

Just curious, were we even recruiting Langord? It would have been a great get, and it is for Providence, but unless we were involved, then this conversation is a non starter.

Rhody15 · Unread post by **Rhody15** » 7 years ago

steviep123 wrote:Just curious, were we even recruiting Langord? It would have been a great get, and it is for Providence, but unless we were involved, then this conversation is a non starter.

Rivals lists an offer from us.

giovanni · Unread post by **giovanni** » 7 years ago

Every school offers about 50 guys a year. Doesn't mean anything except assuring recruit knows you are interested. Look at all the guys we have offered, that we don't get, goes for basically every school outside of KY and Duke types. Russell looks to be an excellent recruit no doubt. He probably wasn't rated higher due to his size and the fact he seem to really come one and had a great senior season. But, I highly doubt Dan "chose" Fatts over MAL. I, rather would believe Dan may have sent out his interest to Langford and some others along the lines of that rating class that didn't display any mutual interest. At which point you move on. Dan, to his credit, seemed to sniff out and isolate on Russell early on and ended up with a tremendous looking recruit. On paper it would appear both guys will be very good players and are certainly good recruits, but until they actually step on a college court, you can't compare who will be better. Guys like Frank Mason and Joel Berry are obviously smaller guys who turned out to be AA players. But typically, it is D'Aaron Fox, Lonzo Ball types are the guys who ultimately succeed at a higher level and also rated higher. Langford, though not a big as those guys, has more size you would normally look for. Cooley can flat out recruit and scored a very good one. And yes, whether Fatts turns out to be a better player, Langford is certainly a far superior recruit on paper.

bostonwhaler · Unread post by **bostonwhaler** » 7 years ago

realistically, what's the chance we add a grad transfer for next year? This team can be good as currently constructed, but it's ceiling is capped if we can't add another big.

reckless jake · Unread post by **reckless jake** » 7 years ago

Zac Cuthbertson, a 6-7 combo forward from Mineral Area JC in Missouri, has been released from his commitment to UNCW. He was ranked #40 in the end of the season 2017 JUCO player rankings.

Blue Man · Unread post by **Blue Man** » 7 years ago

I never said anyone was better than anyone, or that Dan wanted Fatts over Langford even. Dan wanted Fatts. That's good enough for me.

PC got a great recruit - I don't see anyone saying otherwise. Anyone arguing that Fatts is better is also wrong, the rankings are right there in black and white. They deserve to celebrate this get, just like we would.

What I am saying is that the particulars of rankings are dumb, and the team that recruits or signs a player will significantly impact how high a player is ranked, not how good the player is.

As for the Friar fans who love their life so much they spend it on their rival's message board in the offseason; why?

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 7 years ago

Its not an either/or situation. Fatts signed on the dotted line and is someone to be excited about. The PC kid is good. So thats interesting I guess.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Both will be very good. Which team is better is more important.

Next season, we should be at least PC's equal. After that, depends on who we get for 2018-19.

Right now, I like PC's potential better than ours. Their classes are more balanced. Ours will literally be half freshmen 2 years from now, unless we can bring in a couple transfers in the meantime.

My guess is, we are going to have to do that.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:Both will be very good. Which team is better is more important.

Next season, we should be at least PC's equal. After that, depends on who we get for 2018-19.

Right now, I like PC's potential better than ours. Their classes are more balanced. Ours will literally be half freshmen 2 years from now, unless we can bring in a couple transfers in the meantime.

My guess is, we are going to have to do that.

Mr. Negative

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:Both will be very good. Which team is better is more important.

Next season, we should be at least PC's equal. After that, depends on who we get for 2018-19.

Right now, I like PC's potential better than ours. Their classes are more balanced. Ours will literally be half freshmen 2 years from now, unless we can bring in a couple transfers in the meantime.

My guess is, we are going to have to do that.

I'm not sure which team is better is so important. For me personally I'm backing way, way off the importance I have always put on the PC game. I'm more interested in how we do, how we progress towards making the NCAA or bust. I got so tired of hearing about the 7 straight losses last year everywhere I looked, as if the season was over because of it. If we lose again this year, we lose, I'm more about how we do in Conference performance and Post Season. Too much on both the URI and PC boards about the other. I'll admit I've been part of it in the past but I'm moving towards just our team. Many quotes from posters here get copied directly to the PC Board and blasted, many just in the last two days. It's ugly.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Iggy, no I am Mr. Realistic.
I'm stating the obvious I know....if we recruit well we'll be fine....just need to do it.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 7 years ago

MiKyle McIntosh, F, leaving Illinois St. 2nd team MVC, eligible immediately, from Canada

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

We should be getting some info on what went down this weekend by tomorrow maybe?

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 7 years ago

Iggy1979 wrote:MiKyle McIntosh, F, leaving Illinois St. 2nd team MVC, eligible immediately, from Canada

He is 6-7 235 lbs
Averaged 12.5 ppg & 5.6 rebounds. Took 3 three point attempts per game.

Tom98 · Unread post by **Tom98** » 7 years ago

Strange weekend for a visit....campus must have been empty.

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 7 years ago

A lot or players visiting schools this weekend. This is the second weekend since the spring recruiting opened.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 7 years ago

Needs:
1. A transfer F who is eligible right away who will allow the team's young bigs time to improve.
2. A transfer G who sits out a year who will step in and play after next year's mass G graduation.

steviep123 · Unread post by **steviep123** » 7 years ago

Iggy1979 wrote:Needs:
1. A transfer F who is eligible right away who will allow the team's young bigs time to improve.
2. A transfer G who sits out a year who will step in and play after next year's mass G graduation.

After next year, we'll still have Dowtin (who'll be a Jr), Fatts (who'll be a Sr.) and Thompson (who'll be a Sr). But I'd like another.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 7 years ago

steviep123 wrote:
Iggy1979 wrote:Needs:
1. A transfer F who is eligible right away who will allow the team's young bigs time to improve.
2. A transfer G who sits out a year who will step in and play after next year's mass G graduation.
After next year, we'll still have Dowtin (who'll be a Jr), Fatts (who'll be a Sr.) and Thompson (who'll be a Sr). But I'd like another.

We'll need 3 or 4 more.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 7 years ago

Right. And Hurley doesn't want to be in that position if he can help it.

giovanni · Unread post by **giovanni** » 7 years ago

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... s-vcu-rams

reckless jake · Unread post by **reckless jake** » 7 years ago

I think everyone pretty much assumed Evans was going to transfer to VCU. His former coach is now the head coach at VCU.... It's his hometown and his sister previously went to VCU as well.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 7 years ago

Since we seem to be recruiting New England again pretty hard, especially for the '18 class, here's the rankings. A lot of familiar names there.
http://www.newenglandrecruitingreport.c ... ss-of-2018

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

78, it's the Boswell effect...he can't actively recruit [meaning travel and visit, since he's not currently an assistant] but he has a ton of connections in the area.....should result in the staff getting multiple visits at least......

Some of those guys in the rankings are EE......the 1st on the list has quite the name......

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:78, it's the Boswell effect...he can't actively recruit [meaning travel and visit, since he's not currently an assistant] but he has a ton of connections in the area.....should result in the staff getting multiple visits at least......

Some of those guys in the rankings are EE......the 1st on the list has quite the name......

Yeah, Simisola Shittu, 5*. PC is recruiting him.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

We need to be recruiting him......got to get that BB practice facility on the drawing board at least......that's a question I have for the staff....why such secrecy about this I have no idea.

Probably going to need a big donor to make it happen though. Bought my Powerball tickets.....

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:We need to be recruiting him......got to get that BB practice facility on the drawing board at least......that's a question I have for the staff....why such secrecy about this I have no idea.

Probably going to need a big donor to make it happen though. Bought my Powerball tickets.....

We have no shot at him. He's a top 10 recruit in the '18 class. Check him out.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Top 10? PC has no shot either........although with 3 top 100's committed for next season, we can only dream.....whether they work out or not....

No one in the A10 can match that...although St. Louis has 2. That team, if Ford can coach them up at all, will be a power again in the conference soon.

I think they could be a serious candidate for BE expansion if/when they decide to again.

steviep123 · Unread post by **steviep123** » 7 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:Top 10? PC has no shot either........although with 3 top 100's committed for next season, we can only dream.....whether they work out or not....

No one in the A10 can match that...although St. Louis has 2. That team, if Ford can coach them up at all, will be a power again in the conference soon.

I think they could be a serious candidate for BE expansion if/when they decide to again.

I say again for all the times Big East fans say the A10 is weak and very far below them. If the A10 is so weak, why does the Big East keep having to steal A10 teams to survive?

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

steviep123 wrote:
rambone 78 wrote:Top 10? PC has no shot either........although with 3 top 100's committed for next season, we can only dream.....whether they work out or not....

No one in the A10 can match that...although St. Louis has 2. That team, if Ford can coach them up at all, will be a power again in the conference soon.

I think they could be a serious candidate for BE expansion if/when they decide to again.
I say again for all the times Big East fans say the A10 is weak and very far below them. If the A10 is so weak, why does the Big East keep having to steal A10 teams to survive?

The Big East hasn't looked to expand with Fordham's and Duquesne's.
They are taking the teams with proven track records.
Weakness is determined by the top to bottom of the A10.
The BE, top to bottom, is and has been significantly stronger than the A10.
Doesn't mean every team sucks though.
There are good programs in the A10, there are just many more bad programs than good ones.
When the BE chooses to expand, they will be taking from the teams that almost always make the tournament.

steviep123 · Unread post by **steviep123** » 7 years ago

rjsuperfly66 wrote:
steviep123 wrote:
rambone 78 wrote:Top 10? PC has no shot either........although with 3 top 100's committed for next season, we can only dream.....whether they work out or not....

No one in the A10 can match that...although St. Louis has 2. That team, if Ford can coach them up at all, will be a power again in the conference soon.

I think they could be a serious candidate for BE expansion if/when they decide to again.
I say again for all the times Big East fans say the A10 is weak and very far below them. If the A10 is so weak, why does the Big East keep having to steal A10 teams to survive?
The Big East hasn't looked to expand with Fordham's and Duquesne's.
They are taking the teams with proven track records.
Weakness is determined by the top to bottom of the A10.
The BE, top to bottom, is and has been significantly stronger than the A10.
Doesn't mean every team sucks though.
There are good programs in the A10, there are just many more bad programs than good ones.
When the BE chooses to expand, they will be taking from the teams that almost always make the tournament.

It's still a valid argument. It's hypocritical to call a league weak and turn around and steal our teams. You are gaining/maintaining your strength from a league you are calling weak. The A10 would be stronger if we still had Butler and Xavier (just going by the most recent steals). This has happened all the way back to Villanova and Pittsburgh in the late 70s/early 80s. Would they have remained stronger if they weren't allowed to steal from the A10? You absolutely can make the argument the big east wouldn't be.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

steviep123 wrote:
rjsuperfly66 wrote:
steviep123 wrote:
I say again for all the times Big East fans say the A10 is weak and very far below them. If the A10 is so weak, why does the Big East keep having to steal A10 teams to survive?
The Big East hasn't looked to expand with Fordham's and Duquesne's.
They are taking the teams with proven track records.
Weakness is determined by the top to bottom of the A10.
The BE, top to bottom, is and has been significantly stronger than the A10.
Doesn't mean every team sucks though.
There are good programs in the A10, there are just many more bad programs than good ones.
When the BE chooses to expand, they will be taking from the teams that almost always make the tournament.
It's still a valid argument. It's hypocritical to call a league weak and turn around and steal our teams. You are gaining/maintaining your strength from a league you are calling weak. The A10 would be stronger if we still had Butler and Xavier (just going by the most recent steals). This has happened all the way back to Villanova and Pittsburgh in the late 70s/early 80s. Would they have remained stronger if they weren't allowed to steal from the A10? You absolutely can make the argument the big east wouldn't be.

The AFC is weak, but the Patriots have won 2 of the last 3 Super Bowls and the Broncos won the one in between. NFC fans can still call the AFC weak and respect the accomplishments of the Patriots, Broncos, or Steelers.

The A10 is weak, because of Duquense, Fordham, George Mason, etc. That doesn't mean people can't respect the recent accomplishments of VCU or Dayton. Of course the A10 would be stronger without conference realignment, but it exists and you have to deal with it.

steviep123 · Unread post by **steviep123** » 7 years ago

That still does not change the fact that the BE were able to remain strong by stealing from the A10. Yes we do have to deal with it and the A10 has done this well. Down, but not out and continuously rebuild. My point remains if you're a big east fan knocking the A10 being weak, then acknowledge you're stronger because you are stealing teams from the A10.

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 7 years ago

steviep123 wrote:That still does not change the fact that the BE were able to remain strong by stealing from the A10. Yes we do have to deal with it and the A10 has done this well. Down, but not out and continuously rebuild. My point remains if you're a big east fan knocking the A10 being weak, then acknowledge you're stronger because you are stealing teams from the A10.

Yeah, a Big East fan mocking the level of the A10 is the ultimate in stupidity.

Considering 3 of the 4 top programs in the New Big East were directly taken from the A10...Xavier, Butler, Villanova
3 more of the top level programs in the old Big East were also taken from the A10...West Virginia, Virginia Tech and Pitt
oh, and you also took Rutgers from the A10

So the "lowly" A10 gave the Big East a large chunk of its history and prestige

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

steviep123 wrote:That still does not change the fact that the BE were able to remain strong by stealing from the A10. Yes we do have to deal with it and the A10 has done this well. Down, but not out and continuously rebuild. My point remains if you're a big east fan knocking the A10 being weak, then acknowledge you're stronger because you are stealing teams from the A10.

But what curve do you want me to grade on? I can only acknowledge a conference based on what they do on the court. I don't grade a conference based on what they did 50 years ago or even 10 years ago. With so much realignment, it's all about what can you produce going forward.

This year the A10 had 3 Top 50 teams, 2-3 fringe Top 100 teams, and 7-8 100+ teams. That's not good in any universe. So sure, the A10 would be better if the Big East hadn't poached teams. But they did... so I grade the BE on what they have and the A10 on what they do. And if the BE expands and takes more, good for them, and we'll assess at that time. That would be like me saying I wouldn't take Gonzaga or Wichita because they played in bad conferences ... of course I would, as would you, because those are good programs in crappy conferences.

steviep123 · Unread post by **steviep123** » 7 years ago

rjsuperfly66 wrote:
steviep123 wrote:That still does not change the fact that the BE were able to remain strong by stealing from the A10. Yes we do have to deal with it and the A10 has done this well. Down, but not out and continuously rebuild. My point remains if you're a big east fan knocking the A10 being weak, then acknowledge you're stronger because you are stealing teams from the A10.
But what curve do you want me to grade on? I can only acknowledge a conference based on what they do on the court. I don't grade a conference based on what they did 50 years ago or even 10 years ago. With so much realignment, it's all about what can you produce going forward.

This year the A10 had 3 Top 50 teams, 2-3 fringe Top 100 teams, and 7-8 100+ teams. That's not good in any universe. So sure, the A10 would be better if the Big East hadn't poached teams. But they did... so I grade the BE on what they have and the A10 on what they do. And if the BE expands and takes more, good for them, and we'll assess at that time. That would be like me saying I wouldn't take Gonzaga or Wichita because they played in bad conferences ... of course I would, as would you, because those are good programs in crappy conferences.

I'm not asking anyone to do anything other than instead of merely making fun of a conference for being weak, to acknowledge the fact that you are stronger because you poached teams from a conference you are calling weak. Of course either conference would take Gonzaga or Wichita State. It's not the point. The point is you are what you are, but I'm tired of hearing the Anemic 10 jokes when the biggest reason for that is the Big East keeps poaching our teams. With out it, the Big East would be more like the Big Least.

PlayMikeMotenMore · Unread post by **PlayMikeMotenMore** » 7 years ago

The A10's best go to the Big East and what happens? They leapfrog the existing Big East teams and go right to the top of the standings. Doesn't reflect too well on PC, GTown, St. John's, etc. when Xavier, Butler, and Creighton (from The Valley) have come in and stomped those "traditional" Big East programs. (Villanova is the exception.) A few years ago Big East lovers thumbed their snobby noses at those programs saying they were not as good and would be average/below average Big East programs. Guess they were wrong.

What do they say about people living in glass houses?

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

It's about putting out the most competitive teams possible, doesn't matter where they come from. It's something you say because you have nothing else to fall back on ... You trash the "bad" Big East programs because they can take whoever they want and those teams will run along. You are the small group of fans that are still in denial about the A10 and can't accept the state of college basketball or college athletics in general so you latch on to whatever useless facts you can to make yourself feel better. If it makes you feel better that BE fans are "hypocrites" because they think they are so superior to the A10 (they are!), then so be it. Sleep better at night. If it makes you feel better the BE has used the A10 as it's AAA for roughly 30 years, than sure, so be it. I'll enjoy watching my competitive BE basketball where 50% or more of the league teams are competing for tournament births, and you can continue to enjoy your 1-2 conference home games against potential tourney teams.

RhowdyRam02 · Unread post by **RhowdyRam02** » 7 years ago

Because television executives were throwing around money like drunken sailors and they still act like the Big East is the Big East from the mid 80's?

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 7 years ago

rjsuperfly66 wrote:It's about putting out the most competitive teams possible, doesn't matter where they come from. It's something you say because you have nothing else to fall back on ... You trash the "bad" Big East programs because they can take whoever they want and those teams will run along. You are the small group of fans that are still in denial about the A10 and can't accept the state of college basketball or college athletics in general so you latch on to whatever useless facts you can to make yourself feel better. If it makes you feel better that BE fans are "hypocrites" because they think they are so superior to the A10 (they are!), then so be it. Sleep better at night. If it makes you feel better the BE has used the A10 as it's AAA for roughly 30 years, than sure, so be it. I'll enjoy watching my competitive BE basketball where 50% or more of the league teams are competing for tournament births, and you can continue to enjoy your 1-2 conference home games against potential tourney teams.

A PC fan lecturing about being delusional? Bahahaha

Go talk to your own fan base that acts like a blue blood despite having a mediocre history and a whopping ONE NCAA win in the last 20 years.

Same goes for you acting like the current Big East has any of the prestige as the original.

The original Big East is old man Hilton buidling a hotel empire...this Big East is Paris Hilton, a famous waste with no talent living on a name

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 7 years ago

Da_Process_Survivor wrote:
rjsuperfly66 wrote:It's about putting out the most competitive teams possible, doesn't matter where they come from. It's something you say because you have nothing else to fall back on ... You trash the "bad" Big East programs because they can take whoever they want and those teams will run along. You are the small group of fans that are still in denial about the A10 and can't accept the state of college basketball or college athletics in general so you latch on to whatever useless facts you can to make yourself feel better. If it makes you feel better that BE fans are "hypocrites" because they think they are so superior to the A10 (they are!), then so be it. Sleep better at night. If it makes you feel better the BE has used the A10 as it's AAA for roughly 30 years, than sure, so be it. I'll enjoy watching my competitive BE basketball where 50% or more of the league teams are competing for tournament births, and you can continue to enjoy your 1-2 conference home games against potential tourney teams.
A PC fan lecturing about being delusional? Bahahaha

Go talk to your own fan base that acts like a blue blood despite having a mediocre history and a whopping ONE NCAA win in the last 20 years.

Same goes for you acting like the current Big East has any of the prestige as the original.

The original Big East is old man Hilton buidling a hotel empire...this Big East is Paris Hilton, a famous waste with no talent living on a name

Of course it doesn't have the same prestige, but what am I supposed to do, sit and cry that PC can't play UCONN, Syracuse, or Notre Dame anymore? I can only comment based on how the conference is now, and what it might be in the future. The new Big East has far exceeded expectations from what people initially felt about it 5 years ago. It's produced 5.5 bids per season. It's produced a National Champion. So maybe it's not "old-school," but it's still pretty damn good. Doesn't mean there's not some little warts, it's not all sunshine and rainbows but I've enjoyed the product.

bigappleram · Unread post by **bigappleram** » 7 years ago

Then why do you spend so much time posting on a lowly A-10 team's board so much? Beat it.

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 7 years ago

The PC board, in their love of Cooley overlooks him coaching their team to a NCAA loss after holding a 17 point lead early in the 2nd half. If anybody comments something negative about Big Ed on their Board that person is immediately considered a troll. No question he has done a good job but let's allow some legitimate criticism.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 7 years ago

eli#10 wrote:The PC board, in their love of Cooley overlooks him coaching their team to a NCAA loss after holding a 17 point lead early in the 2nd half. If anybody comments something negative about Big Ed on their Board that person is immediately considered a troll. No question he has done a good job but let's allow some legitimate criticism.

How is that any different than this board? If you're not in love with Hurley or don't think we're going to make the tournament every year then you're called a PC fan...

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 7 years ago

Every college BB board in this country second guesses and criticizes their coaches from time to time....even the blue blood boards.....

The PC board is less tolerant than ours......although ours right now probably isn't as open to talking smack about the coaches or the program.

But it will happen...nothing goes smoothly all the time.....there's going to be bumps in the road even if we continue to dance in the near future.

And if we don't...those bumps will be rougher. Opinions are opinions...that's what this is for.

Login • Register