Started By
Message
re: official bye tony barbee thread
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:41 pm to GenesChin
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:41 pm to GenesChin
quote:
the only schools that stand a reasonable shot of making the tourny in a normal year are
Temple
Maryland
St Johns
Boston College
So we're not sure if they're gonna make the tourney?
1
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:41 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
quote:
That's not saying much, considering they had a worse year than us.
Changing the apparel deal from UA to Nike/Addidas wouldn't magically make either program respectable let alone competitive
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:43 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
quote:
So we're not sure if they're gonna make the tourney?
Quick notes
I am saying that those are the only 4 teams that normally are solid teams. Temple is having their first non NCAA team since signing with UA
Maryland is having trouble replacing an iconic coach for the school. St Johns isn't very good in general and actually improving under UA. Boston College was on a decline before they signed a deal with UA at the ending of the Skinner years
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:50 pm to GenesChin
quote:
I am saying that those are the only 4 teams that normally are solid teams. Temple is having their first non NCAA team since signing with UA
Maryland is having trouble replacing an iconic coach for the school. St Johns isn't very good in general and actually improving under UA. Boston College was on a decline before they signed a deal with UA at the ending of the Skinner years
So all these schools had success before signing the UA agreement? When did they sign on, and what were their records before/after? Curious, as I really don't know.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:57 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
quote:
So all these schools had success before signing the UA agreement? When did they sign on, and what were their records before/after? Curious, as I really don't know.
I am saying those schools are really the only "basketball schools" yet only Maryland had consistent success pre change. BC and Maryland both lost their high acheiving coaches, St Johns only made the tourny once in the 10 years before the deal
Temple on the other hand has significantly improved under UA. Despite not making the tourny from 2002-2008, they made the tourny every year 2009-2013
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:59 pm to HailToTheChiz
I think if we put a half decent product on the floor people would take interest. Most auburn fans love auburn, not just football. At the same time I'm not going to waste my free time on an abortion of a product that has been our basketball team.
I think football is partly so popular because there are only 12 games in a season and they're all (mostly) on Saturdays. If I could get liquored up and grill everytine we played a basketball game I would, but I can't on random Wednesdays.
My point is there is no reason we shouldn't be able to go .500 in the SEC every year, with a good season mixed in.
I think football is partly so popular because there are only 12 games in a season and they're all (mostly) on Saturdays. If I could get liquored up and grill everytine we played a basketball game I would, but I can't on random Wednesdays.
My point is there is no reason we shouldn't be able to go .500 in the SEC every year, with a good season mixed in.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 8:59 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
Sorry but I am not taking the time to look up and compare records. I can put down who made the tourny and who changed coaches though.
Under Armour is taking any school that will have them at a relatively decent price. They have a hard time going toe to toe consistently with Nike and Addidas for big time basketball programs. Especially since their focus is football first.
Put it this way, if Underarmour signed Kansas, Duke and Arizona, those three teams would still continue to be top 10 teams
Under Armour is taking any school that will have them at a relatively decent price. They have a hard time going toe to toe consistently with Nike and Addidas for big time basketball programs. Especially since their focus is football first.
Put it this way, if Underarmour signed Kansas, Duke and Arizona, those three teams would still continue to be top 10 teams
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:00 pm to GenesChin
quote:
When UA only has 19 of the 300 odd schools who are eligble for the tournament, and of those 19 only about 5 have made the tournament in 5-10 years before signing wtih UA, then you realize how stupid that argument is.
So UA has had a 6% chance of making the tourney and 2% made the tourney in the last 5 years?
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:02 pm to GenesChin
quote:
Under Armour is taking any school that will have them at a relatively decent price. They have a hard time going toe to toe consistently with Nike and Addidas for big time basketball programs. Especially since their focus is football first.
Which is my point that we can continue to change coaches, but the problem is much bigger.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:04 pm to GenesChin
quote:
Put it this way, if Underarmour signed Kansas, Duke and Arizona, those three teams would still continue to be top 10 teams
But they're not...wherein lies the problem, and the coaches who benefit from Nike.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:10 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
quote:
But they're not...wherein lies the problem, and the coaches who benefit from Nike.
Basically the point is you can't say "Look, UA causes schools to suck at basketball" because 75% of them always sucked at basketball and the other 25% either are doing better or had their successful coaches leave/retire.
There absolutely is a negative effect of having UA . I will admit that without hesitation. The effect though is not a "gamechanger" and is something easily overcome by a good coach. With out AAU problems and lack of history, Auburn would struggle recruiting even with Nike/Addidas. We are only getting out of this shithole by hiring a good coach not by changing sponsors
This post was edited on 3/12/14 at 9:13 pm
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:17 pm to GenesChin
When 95% of the tourney eligible teams are Nike, you can't deny it that those teams are having players steered towards them. You said it yourself when Wichita State, Butler and Gonzaga get better players. It's not coaching. Basketball is a different animal.
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:28 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:28 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
quote:
When 95% of the tourney eligible teams are Nike, you can't deny it that those teams are having players steered towards them
Nike/Addidas have a ton of shite programs under their label that don't have players steered towards them. Unlike football, Auburn doesn't have fertile recruiting grounds to draw from, we have fricked up any instate connections to the few quality players that are from the state and we have no real consistent history to draw from. Under Armour isn't holding back recruiting, Auburn is holding back recruiting
I said teams like Wichita, Butler and Gonzaga built their programs on elite coaching. Their program success has players go there now. Even so, they still don't recruit on elite levels except for maybe Gonzaga.
Like I said, if Duke up and changed to Under Armour today, neither their recruiting nor performance would be significantly affected. Also, Under Armour is starting to pour money into BBall but it is a process
This post was edited on 3/12/14 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:28 pm to NorthGwinnettTiger
when should we expect the announcement to come
Posted on 3/12/14 at 9:38 pm to Aujb
Did he make it to the bus? Somebody please tell me that Jacobs had the stones of Haden!!
Posted on 3/12/14 at 10:27 pm to greygoose
Was fired at the hotel
Posted on 3/12/14 at 10:34 pm to DecaturAU
Just heard that
Posted on 3/12/14 at 10:39 pm to HailToTheChiz
Good luck wherever you go.
Now, program overhaul!
Posted on 3/13/14 at 12:28 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:for at least one semester
Everyone please say some kind remarks... I'll start..
Tony, thanks for giving so many of our basketball players the opportunity to further their education and basketball careers at other schools
Page 2 of 3
Latest Auburn News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News