Started By
Message
1
Posted on 3/14/17 at 7:35 am to djsdawg
Harricks first team sucked, his second better but far from good and had DA Lane not been such a great shooter they'd have lost 20 games. They were a .500 team playing as a 9 seed. Sounds like a pretty weak field to me.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 10:46 am to DoubleDawg22
quote:
his second better but far from good and had DA Lane not been such a great shooter they'd have lost 20 games. They were a .500 team playing as a 9 seed. Sounds like a pretty weak field to me.
Don't act like you were around in 2001. Uga had the #1 SOS, #27 rpi, and 8 wins vs top 50 teams in 2001, which earned an 8, not 9, seed. Isn't that more than fox has had in his 8 years at uga? If that isn't good, then fox must be awful using your standard.
This post was edited on 3/14/17 at 11:45 am
Posted on 3/14/17 at 10:47 am to DawgCountry
quote:
lipstick on a pig. its one of the worst in the SEC
Let's see your rankings.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 10:54 am to Peter Buck
quote:
if you are counting possibilities, we actually beat ATM this year and our best player was hurt a third of the season, so, facts aside, we had a tournament team this year which puts Fox at 38% tourney rate and that falls in line with the program.
10/21 = 48%.
Not counting possibilities, but rather the facts that prove the 2002 and 2003 teams were highly thought of teams, certainly far better than any fox teams. Don't need hypotheticals to do it.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 11:35 am to djsdawg
this guy...
Posted on 3/14/17 at 11:42 am to Peter Buck
For some reason it bothers you 2002 and 2003 were really good teams. Odd guy.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 11:54 am to djsdawg
I don't mean to speak for him but what's bothersome is cherry picking years and counting vacated appearances and years we didn't even play in the tournament as evidence that our program now is somehow drastically worse than it has been historically.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 11:58 am to Barstools
NIT experimental rules
Rule changes to note
A few experimental rule changes will be in place for the NIT, allowing the NCAA to collect more data as it considers the impact of its current game format with two 20-minute halves. These rules break down the accumulation of team fouls into 10-minute segments, providing a snapshot of what college basketball with four quarters might look like.
The biggest change to take effect during the NIT is resetting team fouls to zero at the end of 10-minute segments during each half, the NCAA said in a statement announcing several experimental rule changes.
“The committee believes resetting the team fouls to zero at the 9:59 mark of each half may have the same effect as resetting the team fouls to zero at the end of each quarter, while at the same time allowing for men’s college basketball to retain the unique format of two 20-minute halves,” the NCAA statement said.
In these 31 NIT games, after a team commits its fifth personal or technical foul in each 10-minute segment (and all fouls after that), the other team will shoot two free throws -- essentially dividing the game into four quarters when it comes to how team fouls are counted, but not changing how the game itself is is timed.
Existing standard rules call for a team to shoot “1-and-1” free throws after its opponent commits seven team fouls in a half and and two free throws starting when a team commits 10 team fouls in a half.
The experimental rules will eliminate “1-and-1” free throws.
Another rule change put in place for the 2017 NIT: the shot clock will be reset to 20 seconds instead of 30 seconds when the ball is in-bounded in the front court.
Rule changes to note
A few experimental rule changes will be in place for the NIT, allowing the NCAA to collect more data as it considers the impact of its current game format with two 20-minute halves. These rules break down the accumulation of team fouls into 10-minute segments, providing a snapshot of what college basketball with four quarters might look like.
The biggest change to take effect during the NIT is resetting team fouls to zero at the end of 10-minute segments during each half, the NCAA said in a statement announcing several experimental rule changes.
“The committee believes resetting the team fouls to zero at the 9:59 mark of each half may have the same effect as resetting the team fouls to zero at the end of each quarter, while at the same time allowing for men’s college basketball to retain the unique format of two 20-minute halves,” the NCAA statement said.
In these 31 NIT games, after a team commits its fifth personal or technical foul in each 10-minute segment (and all fouls after that), the other team will shoot two free throws -- essentially dividing the game into four quarters when it comes to how team fouls are counted, but not changing how the game itself is is timed.
Existing standard rules call for a team to shoot “1-and-1” free throws after its opponent commits seven team fouls in a half and and two free throws starting when a team commits 10 team fouls in a half.
The experimental rules will eliminate “1-and-1” free throws.
Another rule change put in place for the 2017 NIT: the shot clock will be reset to 20 seconds instead of 30 seconds when the ball is in-bounded in the front court.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:27 pm to djsdawg
Get out of here with the nonsense that the team was good Harricks second year. They were better than his first but Jarvis Hayes, Rashad Wright and Ezra Williams made those last two teams.
People don't count them because we cheated! Wouldn't surprise me a bit if you were Jim Harrick or Jr. Harrick.
People don't count them because we cheated! Wouldn't surprise me a bit if you were Jim Harrick or Jr. Harrick.
This post was edited on 3/14/17 at 12:29 pm
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:30 pm to DoubleDawg22
Two new rules in the basketball portion of the rant...
1. Thou shalt hate Mark Fox forever and ever and despise his being.
2. Thou shalt never accuse Jim Harrick being being a cheater.
1. Thou shalt hate Mark Fox forever and ever and despise his being.
2. Thou shalt never accuse Jim Harrick being being a cheater.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:35 pm to Barstools
What you still don't understand that I am simply talking about the quality of the teams based upon the merits of their PLAY. That shouldn't bother anyone.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:45 pm to DoubleDawg22
quote:
here with the nonsense that the team was good Harricks second year. They were better than his first but Jarvis Hayes, R
Let's review the unbiased facts of the 2001 team:
#8 seed
8 top 50 wins
#1 SOS
#27 rpi
It's your job to explain why these numbers don't matter or you can pretend to be smart and accept them for what they are.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:50 pm to DoubleDawg22
You forgot rule #3 of the thread...
3. Thou shalt laugh at DD22 for making retarded statements in his ongoing pursuit to convince himself Fox is the best coach.
***All of this, while ignoring facts that Fox has been here for 8 years and has ZERO NCAA wins.***
3. Thou shalt laugh at DD22 for making retarded statements in his ongoing pursuit to convince himself Fox is the best coach.
***All of this, while ignoring facts that Fox has been here for 8 years and has ZERO NCAA wins.***
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:53 pm to DoubleDawg22
How do I know you're an idiot?
You keep returning to something that is factually incorrect.
I can't speak for everyone, but most of us *don't fricking hate Mark Fox*... I think he's the coach we hired to take us from the cellar to the middle of the pack... I don't believe he has the ability to push us beyond the middle of the pack, and for that it *should* mean that his time has come and gone. He's been well paid for his time here He's paid like a coach that makes it to the second weekend of the tournament, even though we don't even *go* regularly, and when we do, we don't win.
Well this is just stupid. Of course the team was found guilty of infractions... improper benefits to a player that was kicked off the team and 3 guys got A's in what was essentially a PE class (Basketball Strategy). To be completely fair, I was given an A/passing grade in my tennis class after only attending the first day, but it was because the lady teaching it realized there wasn't anything of value for me to learn as someone who had been an elite ranked junior player. Not entirely dissimilar to a college basketball player taking a basketball strategy course, though it doesn't change the fact that they probably shouldn't have offered it to begin with. You can try and tie the connection between Junior's mistakes/violations and Sr if you want but the NCAA apparently failed (didn't stop the university from ditching him)... But to say that the findings of the NCAA somehow invalidate that in 3 years he had some of the best teams to ever play for the university and had generated the best basketball attendance in our school's history is also ridiculous. In year 3 we had an average attendance of 94% capacity...
You can argue that the teams *shouldn't* have been in the tournament, but you can't argue that the quality of the teams were superior to any team that Fox has fielded in 8 years. Fox is also out of touch... he thinks that we need to "re-evaluate" what's important, when the NCAA has been pretty clear... don't go 1-9 against the RPI top 50 and don't go 1-11 against tournament quality teams. WINS matter... who you win against matters... just touting a difficult strength of schedule isn't enough. It's a pretty easy format. Win against good competition and don't lose against really bad competition... You can afford losses to the middle tier teams.
It's also amazing to me that so many people in the FB Recruiting thread are like "yeah... it's about time we start paying recruits... get on the same level", but want to crucify Harrick for what amounts to about $1,800 spent to cover phone bills and a PE class that people didn't have to attend. Yet, at UNC there is major academic fraud going back for over a decade. Louisville spent how much on hookers for recruits? This shite happens at every program... no one has zero skeletons in the closet. No one says "oh that UNC... all those tournaments that they did well in... guess those teams weren't very good. Roy Williams must be a shitty coach". Rick Pitino is *so* perfect for Louisville (Pitino/Petrino - both sleazy) , but no one is like... "well his teams aren't very good because he's slimy". Harrick at UGA wasn't any worse (not even close to as bad) than either of those guys and he legitimately had UGA in contention as a top tier basketball program in 3 seasons. You can get upset that the team had violations under him, but it doesn't change the success that he had.
You keep returning to something that is factually incorrect.
quote:
1. Thou shalt hate Mark Fox forever and ever and despise his being.
I can't speak for everyone, but most of us *don't fricking hate Mark Fox*... I think he's the coach we hired to take us from the cellar to the middle of the pack... I don't believe he has the ability to push us beyond the middle of the pack, and for that it *should* mean that his time has come and gone. He's been well paid for his time here He's paid like a coach that makes it to the second weekend of the tournament, even though we don't even *go* regularly, and when we do, we don't win.
quote:
2. Thou shalt never accuse Jim Harrick being being a cheater.
Well this is just stupid. Of course the team was found guilty of infractions... improper benefits to a player that was kicked off the team and 3 guys got A's in what was essentially a PE class (Basketball Strategy). To be completely fair, I was given an A/passing grade in my tennis class after only attending the first day, but it was because the lady teaching it realized there wasn't anything of value for me to learn as someone who had been an elite ranked junior player. Not entirely dissimilar to a college basketball player taking a basketball strategy course, though it doesn't change the fact that they probably shouldn't have offered it to begin with. You can try and tie the connection between Junior's mistakes/violations and Sr if you want but the NCAA apparently failed (didn't stop the university from ditching him)... But to say that the findings of the NCAA somehow invalidate that in 3 years he had some of the best teams to ever play for the university and had generated the best basketball attendance in our school's history is also ridiculous. In year 3 we had an average attendance of 94% capacity...
You can argue that the teams *shouldn't* have been in the tournament, but you can't argue that the quality of the teams were superior to any team that Fox has fielded in 8 years. Fox is also out of touch... he thinks that we need to "re-evaluate" what's important, when the NCAA has been pretty clear... don't go 1-9 against the RPI top 50 and don't go 1-11 against tournament quality teams. WINS matter... who you win against matters... just touting a difficult strength of schedule isn't enough. It's a pretty easy format. Win against good competition and don't lose against really bad competition... You can afford losses to the middle tier teams.
It's also amazing to me that so many people in the FB Recruiting thread are like "yeah... it's about time we start paying recruits... get on the same level", but want to crucify Harrick for what amounts to about $1,800 spent to cover phone bills and a PE class that people didn't have to attend. Yet, at UNC there is major academic fraud going back for over a decade. Louisville spent how much on hookers for recruits? This shite happens at every program... no one has zero skeletons in the closet. No one says "oh that UNC... all those tournaments that they did well in... guess those teams weren't very good. Roy Williams must be a shitty coach". Rick Pitino is *so* perfect for Louisville (Pitino/Petrino - both sleazy) , but no one is like... "well his teams aren't very good because he's slimy". Harrick at UGA wasn't any worse (not even close to as bad) than either of those guys and he legitimately had UGA in contention as a top tier basketball program in 3 seasons. You can get upset that the team had violations under him, but it doesn't change the success that he had.
Posted on 3/14/17 at 12:58 pm to djsdawg
Come on man. I'm not a Fox supporter but to say a 16-15 team is good is a big, big reach. That 2001 team got their doors blown off by Georgia State, Fresno, Cal, and I don't think they beat anyone who got beyond the second round in the tournament.
The 2002 team was legit. They got screwed by the selection committee by having to play Southern Illinois in a virtual road game (Chicago), but they did blow a 30-11 first half lead and lost.
There are plenty of arguments as to why Fox should not be the Georgia HC, but to act like Harrick had some elite level program at UGA is not one of them.
The 2002 team was legit. They got screwed by the selection committee by having to play Southern Illinois in a virtual road game (Chicago), but they did blow a 30-11 first half lead and lost.
There are plenty of arguments as to why Fox should not be the Georgia HC, but to act like Harrick had some elite level program at UGA is not one of them.
This post was edited on 3/14/17 at 1:02 pm
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:18 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
He's been well paid for his time here He's paid like a coach that makes
This is how I know you're an idiot. All you had to do was put a period after the word 'here' as I have done.
This post was edited on 3/14/17 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:19 pm to Glory, Glory
Hahah glory glory...to ole Georgia!
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:36 pm to DoubleDawg22
quote:
This is how I know you're an idiot. All you had to do was put a period after the word 'here' as I have done.
Bwahahaha. Your only response is regarding a missed period. Now I know you're not only an idiot, you're also a woman. Get the frick outta here with a grammatical error. The adults are having a conversation. I have no need, time, or desire to go back through the multitude of your threads that have been poorly typed to point out how hypocritical this would be for you. Fortunately I don't even have to... it's been quoted so many times at this point, it's pretty easy to repeat:
quote:
The people that want fox fired are the same people that want to change or colors to piss orange and smokey gray.
Holy shite... if only you'd have capitalized "Fox" and added a u to the word "our" the line would have been received so much better... no frick it. It still would have been one of the dumbest things written on the rant and that's including all the unintelligible shite that Jefferson posts.
Also: Go ahead and try teaching everyone how dual threat quarterbacks have no impact on the defensive scheme again... Seriously, start a new thread for it... it was amusing. Reasonable people can disagree, it's the manner in which you do so that gets you ridiculed here. I'm not saying there aren't "Fire Fox" people who make poor arguments, but if you'd like to dissect and/or discuss any of my actual points rather than my typographical mistakes, happy to oblige.
This post was edited on 3/14/17 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 3/14/17 at 1:47 pm to VADawg
Dd22 found a teammate? Embarrassing.
You really consider These facts to be evidence of a reach?
#8 seed
8 top 50 wins
#1 SOS
#27 rpi
At the very least, the numbers are better than fox's best 2 teams on every single level.
You really consider These facts to be evidence of a reach?
#8 seed
8 top 50 wins
#1 SOS
#27 rpi
At the very least, the numbers are better than fox's best 2 teams on every single level.
Page 109 of 116
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News