re: A Couple Rumors: Bball

quote:

---

Alternative facts

---

those are not alternative facts. Those are a very narrow selection of additional facts. If you want Trump level alternative facts you are going to have to invent some final fours at the very least. We have a better history. all the other things are also true. It's still basically a lateral move.

And it's extremely debatable. If you took it off this board to the rant (which would be interesting) it would go more for than against. And it would blow up. Needs to be done.

quote:

---

SC to Mizzou is NOT a lateral move. For fricks sake. SC is one of the worst P5 basketball programs in the entire country. The Mizzou job is infinitely better.

---

This. South Carolina has never made it to the elite 8 and they've only been to the NCAA tournament 8 times total in program history. The last time they made the tourney was well over a decade ago.

quote:

---

Yet somehow the Mizzou job is now considered a bad job. A

---

who the hell said that? It's an upper tier P5 job, but not a top 5 blue chip job.

rank these programs.
Indiana
Purdue
Notre Dame
Michigan
Arizona
Washington
Cal
Ucla
Iowa
Villinova
Syracuse
Louisville
Virginia
Missouri

you could argue all day bout who is the 'bigger' program, but if I were to use the metrics you guys are using Mizzou would finish in the bottom fourth of that list. Imagine if someone described Missouri as a lateral move on a Virginia or Arizona or Michigan board. They would lose their shite. Cause fans are gonna fan. Sports boards are not where intellects go to expand. And yet all of those would basically be lateral moves, as would most major state schools in most of the P5 plus big east. So throw in tOSU, Oklahoma, Tejas, Tenner, SC, and about 30 more and they are all in roughly the same position, all trying to win. The only thing separating them being how good their coach is, and how good their last coach was.

And BTW the top blue chip programs are only one mediocre coaching hire away from being just like the rest of us. See Indiana and UCLA for examples

You may now return to losing what's left of your collective minds over the word 'lateral'

and anonymous downvotes are for gaping vag's

back to thread.

does 808 have any insight on why Martin would come here?

If we end up with Frank Martin, I might quit following the team.

He wins. But he's a world-class a-hole. I don't know if there's a coach in the country I hated more than when he was at ksu. I simply cannot see myself rooting for any team he's coaching.

We can do so much better. We don't need to bring a guy like that in to fix the program.

I actually agree with all of that.

He won at ksu but they parted ways over his assholery

I don't care if Barack Obama, the Pope and my grandma love him. I hate the guy, and I cannot root for him. There are better options out there.

I realize he's done some nice rebuilding at South Carolina, but in his 10 years as a head coach, I think he's had two teams in the top 25 of the Kenpom rankings. Only twice has a team he's coached finished in the AP top 25.

He coaches an extremely ugly brand of basketball that sometimes borders on physical assault. And the results are typically just above average.

If we're going to spend $3 million or more on a coach (what it would probably take to get him, as he's already making $2.5 million), we could do so much better than ugly, above-average results.

I really hope Sterk doesn't Alden us on this one. There are so many good names out there

Musselman, Davis, Miller, Cronin, Keatts, Dambrot, Bennett, Muller, McDermott, Jacobson

Martin would feel like a nut shot

quote:

---

And worse case scenario (for him), he Matt Painters us.

---

Well shite....if he does that we need to start a new series on MTV called "How to Punk the frick out of Mizzou"