Jump to content

Keep the team, kill the rumors


bk18

Recommended Posts

I was very confident about a lot of things when I was 15 too......I just hope you are taking your high school education as seriously as you are this message board. BTW....I predicted Vincent Smith leaving the program before he got here.

I dont see what my age has to do with anything. I follow the Billikens a lot more closely than a lot of people on this board and I have opinions just like them?

And yeah I understand you are joking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

All I know is that even though there are a TON of opinions all over the radar screen here, at least it is somewhat entertaining reading this board in the offseason. I'll be honest, I didn't hit billikens.com all last off season. Been on it just about every day so far this year. I don't think I'm the only one either. I've been a huge fan of the Bills since about 2 1/2 years old, but I feel the excitement building and whether you agree with anyone's opinion or not, it's fun to speculate/guess/throw out assinine comments about potential additions to the team. I've never looked more forward to an STL winter in my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You called it slashing. That is making a terrible accusation while having nothing to back it up with. You essentially accused Majerus of going into players rooms, throwing all their stuff out on the lawn and telling them get lost. If someone decides to leave it will be because they made the decision based on the information that they will not get the playing time they want.

Imagine that your playing at Arizona St.(random school to avoid emotional attatchment) and coach calls you in at the end of the year as he has every other player and says, "I'm going to be up front with you bk, we're going to have a hard time finding time for you on the floor next year. That being said you can stay on the team on scholarship or look elsewhere for maybe a better opportunity to get on the floor and play.

Now imagine that your playing for the same team. The coach doesn't tell you about expected PT for next year and you work your ass off expecting to get on the court and you ride the bench all season. Now there you've lost 2 complete seasons because coach didn't present you with the reality that you might get splinters in your ass all season.

So tell me again, how is being up front and telling the kid not to expect much PT and if he wants to play he might want to think about playing elsewhere.

I'm also positive that Majerus and staff would also help the kid find a place to play.

Zach, you don't understand the dynamics of this. I think it would be perfectly fair if coaches had "the talk" and kindly suggested them to leave if they forfeited the scholarship opening, but that's not how it works. Coaches have "the talk" because they want to use their scholarship on someone else.

Your wrong when you say coaches have "the talks" because they want to let them know they won't play. The reason for the talk is because they want to replace them with someone else. That's the implication you don't seem to understand here. They have a different player they want to add into it. That's why I call it slashing.

Using your example: Let's say i was a freshman at ASU. The ASU team has 0 scholarship room now. If the NCAA had the rule that if I transfer, then ASU still can't fill my spot with a new scholarship player, then the ASU coach wouldn't give me "the playing time talk" and he'd keep me and play me 3 games out of the year if that's all he needed me for. But that's not the reality- when a player leaves it means a new scholarship opening. So coaches don't say you need to leave and throw their stuff on the lawn, but they do have the talks and try to reason with the players to first do what is best for the team, then do what's best for the player. A lot of times this means saying hey, I think you are a great player, but I think you'd be more successful somewhere else. Then the player heads out and the coach gets his fresh recruit he was waiting to offer a scholarship to.

To me that is "slashing". It shows a lack of loyalty to players that coaches recruited themselves. I understand sometimes it is done to be competitive, but it's wrong.

In the context of SLU: the reason why I said "kill the rumors, keep the team" is because I like our team. The shine and alure of a fresh recruit doesn't appeal to me as much as the idea of everyone coming back. I thought we had great team chemistry and I hope that we work with the players to keep them here to preserve that. The rumors of people leaving and new people coming bothers me and I hope they are just rumors.

You've got a GF now right? So let's say some other (very attractive, appealing, etc.) girl came up to you and was like, "hey" I want to date you. You have 2 options:

1 - Do what you have to do to get this new girl. - So you go to your current gf and say hey I think your great, but I think there's someone else out there better for you. (and what you really mean is hey so yeah there's someone that is better than you and i gotta dump you now)

2 - You say to the new girl, sorry I'm sure your a great person, but I've got a great girlfriend right now and I'm very happy.

Option 1 sounds like you are being nice and trying to find what's best for both people but you are really its just "slashing" - such a rough word is used because someone is being replaced when loyalty was implied and expected.

When I say keep the team kill the rumors is I think its important to mention that the NY post mentioned Jett committed to SLU, but as fans we shouldn't talk about who should or may leave. We should assume the info was wrong/just a rumor until we hear official word from a more credible source about someone leaving and someone coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zach, you don't understand the dynamics of this. I think it would be perfectly fair if coaches had "the talk" and kindly suggested them to leave if they forfeited the scholarship opening, but that's not how it works. Coaches have "the talk" because they want to use their scholarship on someone else.

Your wrong when you say coaches have "the talks" because they want to let them know they won't play. The reason for the talk is because they want to replace them with someone else. That's the implication you don't seem to understand here. They have a different player they want to add into it. That's why I call it slashing.

Using your example: Let's say i was a freshman at ASU. The ASU team has 0 scholarship room now. If the NCAA had the rule that if I transfer, then ASU still can't fill my spot with a new scholarship player, then the ASU coach wouldn't give me "the playing time talk" and he'd keep me and play me 3 games out of the year if that's all he needed me for. But that's not the reality- when a player leaves it means a new scholarship opening. So coaches don't say you need to leave and throw their stuff on the lawn, but they do have the talks and try to reason with the players to first do what is best for the team, then do what's best for the player. A lot of times this means saying hey, I think you are a great player, but I think you'd be more successful somewhere else. Then the player heads out and the coach gets his fresh recruit he was waiting to offer a scholarship to.

To me that is "slashing". It shows a lack of loyalty to players that coaches recruited themselves. I understand sometimes it is done to be competitive, but it's wrong.

In the context of SLU: the reason why I said "kill the rumors, keep the team" is because I like our team. The shine and alure of a fresh recruit doesn't appeal to me as much as the idea of everyone coming back. I thought we had great team chemistry and I hope that we work with the players to keep them here to preserve that. The rumors of people leaving and new people coming bothers me and I hope they are just rumors.

You've got a GF now right? So let's say some other (very attractive, appealing, etc.) girl came up to you and was like, "hey" I want to date you. You have 2 options:

1 - Do what you have to do to get this new girl. - So you go to your current gf and say hey I think your great, but I think there's someone else out there better for you. (and what you really mean is hey so yeah there's someone that is better than you and i gotta dump you now)

2 - You say to the new girl, sorry I'm sure your a great person, but I've got a great girlfriend right now and I'm very happy.

Option 1 sounds like you are being nice and trying to find what's best for both people but you are really its just "slashing" - such a rough word is used because someone is being replaced when loyalty was implied and expected.

When I say keep the team kill the rumors is I think its important to mention that the NY post mentioned Jett committed to SLU, but as fans we shouldn't talk about who should or may leave. We should assume the info was wrong/just a rumor until we hear official word from a more credible source about someone leaving and someone coming.

Excellent post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because its the players' choice doesn't mean anything. Coaches play a hidden role. I don't know how it works, but the Kentucky's and the Kansas's of college basketball I would imagine basically have the coaches talk to players and say, "you can stay but I don't think its best for you. You probably won't play here. I think what's best for you is to play somewhere else." And there may be truth to that, but the coach wants their scholarship spot open more than anything. I know Tom Crean did this at Marquette and Indiana and I would imagine it happens more than you think. Pretty press releases make things look good.

I don't know what is being discussed on Nate's board, but let me know if there is a way to have all 13 of our scholarship players stay on scholarship and we still add more scholarship players.

and what's wrong with that if its true?

What would you like a coach to tell a player that probably won't play?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zach, you don't understand the dynamics of this. I think it would be perfectly fair if coaches had "the talk" and kindly suggested them to leave if they forfeited the scholarship opening, but that's not how it works. Coaches have "the talk" because they want to use their scholarship on someone else.

Your wrong when you say coaches have "the talks" because they want to let them know they won't play. The reason for the talk is because they want to replace them with someone else. That's the implication you don't seem to understand here. They have a different player they want to add into it. That's why I call it slashing.

Using your example: Let's say i was a freshman at ASU. The ASU team has 0 scholarship room now. If the NCAA had the rule that if I transfer, then ASU still can't fill my spot with a new scholarship player, then the ASU coach wouldn't give me "the playing time talk" and he'd keep me and play me 3 games out of the year if that's all he needed me for. But that's not the reality- when a player leaves it means a new scholarship opening. So coaches don't say you need to leave and throw their stuff on the lawn, but they do have the talks and try to reason with the players to first do what is best for the team, then do what's best for the player. A lot of times this means saying hey, I think you are a great player, but I think you'd be more successful somewhere else. Then the player heads out and the coach gets his fresh recruit he was waiting to offer a scholarship to.

To me that is "slashing". It shows a lack of loyalty to players that coaches recruited themselves. I understand sometimes it is done to be competitive, but it's wrong.

In the context of SLU: the reason why I said "kill the rumors, keep the team" is because I like our team. The shine and alure of a fresh recruit doesn't appeal to me as much as the idea of everyone coming back. I thought we had great team chemistry and I hope that we work with the players to keep them here to preserve that. The rumors of people leaving and new people coming bothers me and I hope they are just rumors.

You've got a GF now right? So let's say some other (very attractive, appealing, etc.) girl came up to you and was like, "hey" I want to date you. You have 2 options:

1 - Do what you have to do to get this new girl. - So you go to your current gf and say hey I think your great, but I think there's someone else out there better for you. (and what you really mean is hey so yeah there's someone that is better than you and i gotta dump you now)

2 - You say to the new girl, sorry I'm sure your a great person, but I've got a great girlfriend right now and I'm very happy.

Option 1 sounds like you are being nice and trying to find what's best for both people but you are really its just "slashing" - such a rough word is used because someone is being replaced when loyalty was implied and expected.

When I say keep the team kill the rumors is I think its important to mention that the NY post mentioned Jett committed to SLU, but as fans we shouldn't talk about who should or may leave. We should assume the info was wrong/just a rumor until we hear official word from a more credible source about someone leaving and someone coming.

who cares why he says it if it's true. What if the reason he says it is because if he doesn't he has this disease that will make him flash himself to players. (which may be true and would explain some things) Really, does it matter why he says it. If it's true that the kid won't play, he needs to be told.

Are you married to the girl friend?

I'm still wanting to know if the player has to stay if the coach wants him to? When Kevin Durant really wanted to leave UT should he have been required to stay if Rick Barnes wanted him to?

How about BT last year. If RM wanted him to stay, should he have been required to? Did BT inform RM that he might leave if the coach was a meanie to him at practice during the recruiting process? That's info coach may have wanted.

How about Ruben should he have been required to stay? Should he have told coach during his recruitment that if he wasn't starting by the 5th game he was leaving?

How can these players be so ethically challenged. Man, players are such jerks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you like a coach to tell a player that probably won't play?

keep your head up. stay positive. work hard in class and try to improve on the basketball court. never know what might happen. i am proud of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

keep your head up. stay positive. work hard in class and try to improve on the basketball court. never know what might happen. i am proud of you.

This makes me think of the tee-ball analogy someone used the other day.

I don't like the idea of "slashing" kids either, but it is the way the game is played. The kids are aware of the rules. It is all competitive. It's why we keep score during the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, and I know this is a different scenario, he did it a couple of years ago with AK, AM and DM. He has done it before, but I was not upset about it that time since he didn't recruit those kids. However, I am not naive enough to think that if a recruit wants to come here, and RM thinks he will help the team, he will not have a spot. Why do you think JJ is probably leaving? Because RM needs his scholarship.

I would bet people that if Jordair Jett comes he will end up transferring out. I'm serious, I am very confident he will end up transferring.

several sources close to the program have said JJ wants more PT, hence the reason to transfer. Why assume he's being pushed out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zach, you don't understand the dynamics of this. I think it would be perfectly fair if coaches had "the talk" and kindly suggested them to leave if they forfeited the scholarship opening, but that's not how it works. Coaches have "the talk" because they want to use their scholarship on someone else.

Your wrong when you say coaches have "the talks" because they want to let them know they won't play. The reason for the talk is because they want to replace them with someone else. That's the implication you don't seem to understand here. They have a different player they want to add into it. That's why I call it slashing.

Using your example: Let's say i was a freshman at ASU. The ASU team has 0 scholarship room now. If the NCAA had the rule that if I transfer, then ASU still can't fill my spot with a new scholarship player, then the ASU coach wouldn't give me "the playing time talk" and he'd keep me and play me 3 games out of the year if that's all he needed me for. But that's not the reality- when a player leaves it means a new scholarship opening. So coaches don't say you need to leave and throw their stuff on the lawn, but they do have the talks and try to reason with the players to first do what is best for the team, then do what's best for the player. A lot of times this means saying hey, I think you are a great player, but I think you'd be more successful somewhere else. Then the player heads out and the coach gets his fresh recruit he was waiting to offer a scholarship to.

To me that is "slashing". It shows a lack of loyalty to players that coaches recruited themselves. I understand sometimes it is done to be competitive, but it's wrong.

In the context of SLU: the reason why I said "kill the rumors, keep the team" is because I like our team. The shine and alure of a fresh recruit doesn't appeal to me as much as the idea of everyone coming back. I thought we had great team chemistry and I hope that we work with the players to keep them here to preserve that. The rumors of people leaving and new people coming bothers me and I hope they are just rumors.

You've got a GF now right? So let's say some other (very attractive, appealing, etc.) girl came up to you and was like, "hey" I want to date you. You have 2 options:

1 - Do what you have to do to get this new girl. - So you go to your current gf and say hey I think your great, but I think there's someone else out there better for you. (and what you really mean is hey so yeah there's someone that is better than you and i gotta dump you now)

2 - You say to the new girl, sorry I'm sure your a great person, but I've got a great girlfriend right now and I'm very happy.

Option 1 sounds like you are being nice and trying to find what's best for both people but you are really its just "slashing" - such a rough word is used because someone is being replaced when loyalty was implied and expected.

When I say keep the team kill the rumors is I think its important to mention that the NY post mentioned Jett committed to SLU, but as fans we shouldn't talk about who should or may leave. We should assume the info was wrong/just a rumor until we hear official word from a more credible source about someone leaving and someone coming.

Brian Kelly(since we're being out of line with using names and talking about girlfriends),

I'm sure you understand that the coaches have end of the year meetings with players to track progress on the court and in the classroom while also looking at the upcoming year.

I guess you are bff with Porter and Majerus since you KNOW why they have these talks.

What about lack of loyality a player shows to the program when he transfers because the team is not performing as a whole.

Ok Brian Kelly, Let's just burn down Billikens.com so there will no longer be any rumors! Thats sounds like so much fun doesn't. Also I think we should kill the rumors of SLU leaving the A-10 because its not fair to the players to speculate about their future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shared some adult beverages with PM on Saturday and he gave me the inside scoop. JJ is leaving for the NBA draft and his open scholarship will be given to Lebron James. Apparently, the coaches are really excited to have the King but not sure where he would fit in the mix position wise yet. He said they have the summer to figure it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

keep your head up. stay positive. work hard in class and try to improve on the basketball court. never know what might happen. i am proud of you.

"And, you know, you'll be so far down the depth chart that we may play a walkon player in front of you but hey, keep your chin up, and keep reaching for the stars."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes me think of the tee-ball analogy someone used the other day.

I don't like the idea of "slashing" kids either, but it is the way the game is played. The kids are aware of the rules. It is all competitive. It's why we keep score during the games.

If a kid's unhappy or displeased, eg Cotto and Thompson, they leave. But the moralists on here use a double standard and say an unhappy kid transferring on their own is ok. Doesn't matter if the coach was counting on the kid to be a contributor somewhere down the line. Can anyone say with certainty RM didn't expect Cotto and Thompson to help sometime in the future? But when the kid doesn't meet the coach's standards that's a different story. Why doesn't the coach receive the same consideration when he tells a player straight up, "you have to look elsewhere because I don't see you fitting in like I thought you would." ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And, you know, you'll be so far down the depth chart that we may play a walkon player in front of you but hey, keep your chin up, and keep reaching for the stars."

Rich, you forgot to add, "and I won't recruit over you." Which really meant, "However, it ain't gonna stop me from looking for a really good walkon."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And, you know, you'll be so far down the depth chart that we may play a walkon player in front of you but hey, keep your chin up, and keep reaching for the stars."

Participation ribbons for all!!! No child can be lesser than the other, all men were created equal!

Posted Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a kid's unhappy or displeased, eg Cotto and Thompson, they leave. But the moralists on here use a double standard and say an unhappy kid transferring on their own is ok. Doesn't matter if the coach was counting on the kid to be a contributor somewhere down the line. Can anyone say with certainty RM didn't expect Cotto and Thompson to help sometime in the future? But when the kid doesn't meet the coach's standards that's a different story. Why doesn't the coach receive the same consideration when he tells a player straight up, "you have to look elsewhere because I don't see you fitting in like I thought you would." ?

The player gets penalized, they have to transfer to a lower division or sit out a year. The school doesn't have any penalty, if they drop a player. They should both lose a year, but that will never happen, because the players are unrepresented in any decision-making.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith is a tweener (3 and 4). seems like he'd be better served playing a 4 at a Div 2 school

Couldn't disagree more. JS has d-1 ability. It may not be what RM looks for in his system, but JS has an enormous amount of upside. Whether he reaches his full potential is up to him and the amount of work he puts in at the gym and lifting. I'd hate to see him leave, his energy and pure athleticism helped us win several games this year. Certainly, he has lots to work on, but D-1 schools will line up for JS, if he is really leaving.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...