TheMountaineer
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 18 |
| Registered on: | 4/8/2024 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Could AI Eventually Mimic People Who Have Passed Away?
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/15/24 at 12:28 pm
quote:
There's a Black Mirror episode about this... I certainly think it's possible but extremely psychologically damaging
I definitely see the pros and cons to it. There's definitely a psychological effect and I could see the moral argument being that people would use it as a crutch and would never true "move on" or accept that the person has truly died. But on the other end I think it would help a lot of people accept that the person has gone. I think it would truly make losing a family member or friend a more bearable process.
I know this isn't the first time this type of discussion has come up, but with AI for the first time it feels relatively achievable.
It hits at home for me because my dad is 79 and my mom is 75. Obviously the technology won't be there most likely before they pass, but especially for my mom I'd absolutely give up an inheritance to save an AI version of her that I could hear and talk to. It truly would be a new worls and psychologically there would be no way to know how it would truly impact people until it's actually available and used.
I guess the real question is, if/when it does become possible, is it something you would do for a loved one? Is it something you would do for yourself so that your husband/wife, children or other family members have an AI version of you to interact with? Or would you be too concerned about a psychological impact?
1
Could AI Eventually Mimic People Who Have Passed Away?
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/15/24 at 12:20 pm
This idea came up from the recent NCIS episode (yes I'll admit I'm one of those weird people who still watches some of the episodes, lol). The episode was a situation where there was self sustaining AI that was guiding military drones.
While that part of it was scary, there was one part of the story that I found fascinating. In the episode there was the wacky Elon Musk type character who had created AI that could literally mimic the voice of his dead son and how he would react. During the episode he was testing the AI with a woman who had passed away.
Obviously AI is nowhere near that currently, but could we actually get to the point where AI could realistically mimic a person who has passed away? I know some people would say it's cheating death. I wouldn't go that far, the actual person is still gone, but it's still a memory they can interact with. Some people would no doubt say it hurts the ability for people to move on. Like you ever truly move on from a loved one. You learn to live with it, the pain gets less, but you don't move on.
How many of us wish we had a voice recording from a loved one? How many of us wish we could hear a loved one's voice one more time? How many people literally save voicemails because it's the last time they heard a friend or family member's voice?
Of course for something like this to be accurate it would have to be done before the person passed away. The AI would probably have to record days and days of conversations included individual conversations to understand how the person interacted with various people. It would be a time consuming process to say the least.
Of course something like this would be stupid expensive at first. Most likely reserved just for the Elon Musk's, Bill Gate's and Jeff Bezo's of the world. But if it became more commercial and available would you do it? Would you try to get an AI version of a loved one developed before they pass away so that you would have it after their death? Would you buy one for yourself so that in some way you do live on after your physical body has died?
How much would you pay? Would you give up an entire inheritance to have an AI version of a loved one?
While that part of it was scary, there was one part of the story that I found fascinating. In the episode there was the wacky Elon Musk type character who had created AI that could literally mimic the voice of his dead son and how he would react. During the episode he was testing the AI with a woman who had passed away.
Obviously AI is nowhere near that currently, but could we actually get to the point where AI could realistically mimic a person who has passed away? I know some people would say it's cheating death. I wouldn't go that far, the actual person is still gone, but it's still a memory they can interact with. Some people would no doubt say it hurts the ability for people to move on. Like you ever truly move on from a loved one. You learn to live with it, the pain gets less, but you don't move on.
How many of us wish we had a voice recording from a loved one? How many of us wish we could hear a loved one's voice one more time? How many people literally save voicemails because it's the last time they heard a friend or family member's voice?
Of course for something like this to be accurate it would have to be done before the person passed away. The AI would probably have to record days and days of conversations included individual conversations to understand how the person interacted with various people. It would be a time consuming process to say the least.
Of course something like this would be stupid expensive at first. Most likely reserved just for the Elon Musk's, Bill Gate's and Jeff Bezo's of the world. But if it became more commercial and available would you do it? Would you try to get an AI version of a loved one developed before they pass away so that you would have it after their death? Would you buy one for yourself so that in some way you do live on after your physical body has died?
How much would you pay? Would you give up an entire inheritance to have an AI version of a loved one?
re: Dating as a 40 Year Old Man, How Realistic is it?
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/15/24 at 12:08 pm
Thanks for all the replies. I'll admit I've only gotten through about half since I headed off to work shortly after I started the thread. Great ideas though and it makes me feel more positive about the future in terms of finding a woman. I know it won't be easy and I'm definitely working on myself physically and mentally (one poster was right in that I do lack some self confidence with women and I do tend to overthink it). But I appreciate all the good advice so far.
re: Dating as a 40 Year Old Man, How Realistic is it?
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/15/24 at 7:22 am
quote:
I hope you have money.
I make decent money but I'm no OT baller if that's what you are insinuating. Definitely middle class, so not going to get a woman simply by money.
Dating as a 40 Year Old Man, How Realistic is it?
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/15/24 at 7:18 am
I know these threads are always around and it's probably been beaten to death, but put me in the group that's struggling right now.
Just turned 40 a few months ago and the dating scene seems pretty hopeless at this point. I'll admit a good amount of my situation is my own doing. I was definitely one of those immature boys in my 20s and even early 30s who didn't really know what I wanted and was afraid of commitment. I know in many ways I wasted my prime dating years.
After not bothering for a few years I decided to start using dating apps again. Tinder, Bumble, Facebook Dating, they are all a joke.
Many will say to meet a woman the traditional way, but is that even possible anymore? Let's look at it. 50, 40, 30, even 20 years ago there were essentially 5 traditional ways to meet a woman:
1) At Church/Religious Group
2) Through Family/Friends
3) At Work
4) Through Social Clubs/Groups
5) Bar/Club Scene
Considering that most of America is going away from religion the idea of meeting through "Church/Religious Group" seem slim to none. I'm religious but don't go regularly anyway. I also don't know a single person who met that way.
In the past through family and friends would've been a good angle but with most families not knowing as many people anymore it's hard. Needless to say in my case I've not met anyone through family and friends and the likelihood of that is slim to none.
Work until 10 years ago was a legitimate way to meet women. We see our coworkers at work more often and for longer periods of time than our family and friends. But in the post #MeToo era meeting through work is off limits and all but over.
Social Groups are a good option but less people are participating in those. Plus I feel too old to meet someone that way. And the bar/club scene has never been good unless you just want a quick hookup.
By and large in the post Covid world it's just the dating apps and those just suck the life out of me. They are completely awful.
With all that said, is it really possible for me as a 40 year old man (or any man in their 40s) to meet a decent looking kind woman anymore or am I pretty much done for?
Just turned 40 a few months ago and the dating scene seems pretty hopeless at this point. I'll admit a good amount of my situation is my own doing. I was definitely one of those immature boys in my 20s and even early 30s who didn't really know what I wanted and was afraid of commitment. I know in many ways I wasted my prime dating years.
After not bothering for a few years I decided to start using dating apps again. Tinder, Bumble, Facebook Dating, they are all a joke.
Many will say to meet a woman the traditional way, but is that even possible anymore? Let's look at it. 50, 40, 30, even 20 years ago there were essentially 5 traditional ways to meet a woman:
1) At Church/Religious Group
2) Through Family/Friends
3) At Work
4) Through Social Clubs/Groups
5) Bar/Club Scene
Considering that most of America is going away from religion the idea of meeting through "Church/Religious Group" seem slim to none. I'm religious but don't go regularly anyway. I also don't know a single person who met that way.
In the past through family and friends would've been a good angle but with most families not knowing as many people anymore it's hard. Needless to say in my case I've not met anyone through family and friends and the likelihood of that is slim to none.
Work until 10 years ago was a legitimate way to meet women. We see our coworkers at work more often and for longer periods of time than our family and friends. But in the post #MeToo era meeting through work is off limits and all but over.
Social Groups are a good option but less people are participating in those. Plus I feel too old to meet someone that way. And the bar/club scene has never been good unless you just want a quick hookup.
By and large in the post Covid world it's just the dating apps and those just suck the life out of me. They are completely awful.
With all that said, is it really possible for me as a 40 year old man (or any man in their 40s) to meet a decent looking kind woman anymore or am I pretty much done for?
re: tOfficial 2024 Masters Tournament Thread: Scottie Scheffler (-11) is your Masters Champion
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/14/24 at 6:56 pm
Enjoyed the Masters as always. Like many I don't play golf ( outside of mini-golf and Top Golf :lol: ), so really about the only time I watch golf is the Masters and to a lesser extent the other majors. Scheffler seems like a good guy, pretty basic personality though.
Also disappointed that no one really challenged him. Took away a lot of the drama. He was by far the best player today though.
The broadcast seemed to be trying to force him to be the next big star in golf. For him to be the face of golf and I just don't think he has the personality for it. It's obvious they are still desperate to find the next face of golf in the post Tiger Woods era.
Congrats though on both the Masters win and the birth of their child. I imagine he just has to be on cloud nine right now. Hope he enjoys it, typically there's only a few moments in your life when everything comes together so well and he's in one of those moments currently.
Also disappointed that no one really challenged him. Took away a lot of the drama. He was by far the best player today though.
The broadcast seemed to be trying to force him to be the next big star in golf. For him to be the face of golf and I just don't think he has the personality for it. It's obvious they are still desperate to find the next face of golf in the post Tiger Woods era.
Congrats though on both the Masters win and the birth of their child. I imagine he just has to be on cloud nine right now. Hope he enjoys it, typically there's only a few moments in your life when everything comes together so well and he's in one of those moments currently.
re: UFL is surprisingly entertaining
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/14/24 at 6:42 pm
This is a part I've never understood about the spring football leagues. I think it works best when the team cities are markets the NFL doesn't serve so it's more exciting for those areas.
If it was me it would be the following cities for the UFL:
San Diego
Salt Lake City
San Antonio (current)
Memphis (current)
Birmingham (current)
St. Louis
Orlando
Fort Lauderdale
Louisville
Columbus
All of these are essentially the top cities in the U.S. that do not have an NFL team and all are unlikely to get NFL teams going forward. All of these cities would also have college or other local stadiums that are ready to be used (without having to use MLS stadiums).
You would also have some potential ready made rivalries like San Diego-Salt Lake City, Birmingham-Memphis, Orlando-Ft. Lauderdale and Louisville-Columbus.
Putting teams in cities where the NFL already has a team is just a setup for failure. Those teams will always be second fiddle to the local NFL team and by a long shot.
If it was me it would be the following cities for the UFL:
San Diego
Salt Lake City
San Antonio (current)
Memphis (current)
Birmingham (current)
St. Louis
Orlando
Fort Lauderdale
Louisville
Columbus
All of these are essentially the top cities in the U.S. that do not have an NFL team and all are unlikely to get NFL teams going forward. All of these cities would also have college or other local stadiums that are ready to be used (without having to use MLS stadiums).
You would also have some potential ready made rivalries like San Diego-Salt Lake City, Birmingham-Memphis, Orlando-Ft. Lauderdale and Louisville-Columbus.
Putting teams in cities where the NFL already has a team is just a setup for failure. Those teams will always be second fiddle to the local NFL team and by a long shot.
re: Your Death... Would You Want To Know When Or How?
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/14/24 at 6:44 am
I think I would want to know just to take advantage of the time remaining. It would definitely stink as it got closer knowing I was running out of time but at first I think it would be for the best.
Say I had like 5 years remaining. It's not immediate and it's far enough out to where you could probably easily do most of the things you want to do. In the last couple of months it would be crazy hard knowing it's all coming to an end but for the first 4 1/2 years it would be good.
Say I had like 5 years remaining. It's not immediate and it's far enough out to where you could probably easily do most of the things you want to do. In the last couple of months it would be crazy hard knowing it's all coming to an end but for the first 4 1/2 years it would be good.
re: People who drive in the rain with their hazard flashers on should be flayed.
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/10/24 at 12:42 pm
quote:
Ok. I’ll correct, if you aren’t comfortable driving in rain, pull over.
This is always such a terrible argument. Have you seen Louisiana roads?
While I don’t 100% disagree it’s not always feasible to immediately pull over. To me it can put you in more danger.
I know for me I’ll wait until the next exit if it’s heavy rain. That way I can wait in peace until the storm passes. But for those miles until the exit I will have my hazard lights on. Sorry not sorry in the least. Deal with it and slow down.
re: People who drive in the rain with their hazard flashers on should be flayed.
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/10/24 at 12:07 pm
quote:
Alabama: The use of hazard lights is permitted while driving unless otherwise posted.
Alaska: The use of hazard lights is not permitted while driving.
Arizona: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except in an emergency situation.
Arkansas: Hazard light usage is not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
California: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
Colorado: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except if the vehicle speed is 25 mph or less.
Connecticut: Hazard light use is permitted while driving unless otherwise posted.
Delaware: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
District of Columbia: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Florida: The use of hazard lights is not permitted while driving.
Georgia: The use of hazard lights is permitted while driving.
Hawaii: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving.
Idaho: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except to indicate the presence of a vehicular traffic hazard requiring unusual care in approaching, overtaking or passing.
Illinois: The use of hazard lights is not permitted while driving.
Indiana: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except in emergency situations.
Iowa: The use of hazard lights are not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
Kansas: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving.
Kentucky: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Louisiana: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving.
Maine: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving unless to indicate a traffic hazard.
Maryland: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except in emergency situations.
Massachusetts: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving.
Michigan: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Minnesota: Hazard lights are not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
Mississippi: Hazard light usage is permitted while driving.
Missouri: Hazard light usage is permitted while driving.
Montana: Hazard lights are not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
Nebraska: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Nevada: Hazard light usage is not permitted while driving.
New Hampshire: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
New Jersey: The use of hazard lights is permitted while driving.
New Mexico: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving.
New York: Hazard light use is permitted while driving unless otherwise posted.
North Carolina: Hazard light use is permitted while driving unless otherwise posted.
North Dakota: Hazard light use is permitted while driving unless otherwise posted.
Ohio: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except when a hazardous condition is present.
Oklahoma: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except in emergency situations and to indicate a traffic hazard.
Oregon: Hazard light use is permitted while driving unless otherwise posted.
Pennsylvania: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Rhode Island: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving.
South Carolina: Hazard lights may be used while driving for the purpose of warning the operators of other vehicles of the presence of a vehicular traffic hazard requiring the exercise of unusual care in approaching, overtaking or passing.
South Dakota: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Tennessee: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except in emergency situations.
Texas: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Utah: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Vermont: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
Virginia: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except for emergency vehicles, stopped or slowed vehicles to indicate a traffic hazard, when traveling as part of a funeral procession, or traveling slower than 30 mph.
Washington: Hazard light use is not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard.
West Virginia: Hazard lights are not permitted while driving except in emergency situations.
Wisconsin: Hazard lights are not permitted while driving except to indicate a traffic hazard or when a hazardous condition is present.
Wyoming: Hazard light use is permitted while driving.
At least for Florida this is outdated information. The Florida law was changed in 2021:
Florida Law Changed in 2021
re: People who drive in the rain with their hazard flashers on should be flayed.
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/10/24 at 12:01 pm
quote:
Oh, and it's illegal.
That is all.
Not always. Several states it is legal. Here in Florida it's legal and expected during heavy rains.
I always put my flashers on during really heavy rain. It helps the person behind you to be able to see you when the wipers can't keep up.
And before someone here says it. When heavy rain hits it's not always possible to immediately pull over to a safe location.
re: One thing people forget about Dawn Staley
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 11:20 am
To me Dawn Staley is one of those people that you respect as a coach but not as a person. I don't debate at all that the top 3 coaches right now in WBB are Geno, Dawn and Kim (honestly the only 3 WBB coaches I really know :lol: ) and you could make an argument for any of them to be the best coach in the game currently.
With that said, I don't respect Dawn Staley as a person. If my university is going to sell it's soul in the very least I want it to be for football or men's basketball, not women's basketball.
Dawn Staley is a blatant racist and an ugly person inside. And it's sad she's in a position to pass on that hate to the next generation of women. Unlike MLK Jr., who wanted everyone judged as an individual and by their character, not their race, Dawn most likely teaches her players to see race in literally every aspect of life. She most likely causes her players (intentionally or unintentionally) to be victims and to blame any problem they have on white people, especially white men.
Without making this too political (which is hard any time you mention Dawn Staley), if I had a daughter in college basketball, I would not want her to play under Dawn. I know at the end of the day if it's a full scholarship I wouldn't have much say in the matter, but I would try my best. I wouldn't care how many National Titles she won, I'd spit at her right in the face. I simply have no respect for Dawn as a person.
If I had a daughter playing women's college basketball I'd absolutely steer her to Geno, Kim or pretty much any coach besides Dawn.
With that said, I don't respect Dawn Staley as a person. If my university is going to sell it's soul in the very least I want it to be for football or men's basketball, not women's basketball.
Dawn Staley is a blatant racist and an ugly person inside. And it's sad she's in a position to pass on that hate to the next generation of women. Unlike MLK Jr., who wanted everyone judged as an individual and by their character, not their race, Dawn most likely teaches her players to see race in literally every aspect of life. She most likely causes her players (intentionally or unintentionally) to be victims and to blame any problem they have on white people, especially white men.
Without making this too political (which is hard any time you mention Dawn Staley), if I had a daughter in college basketball, I would not want her to play under Dawn. I know at the end of the day if it's a full scholarship I wouldn't have much say in the matter, but I would try my best. I wouldn't care how many National Titles she won, I'd spit at her right in the face. I simply have no respect for Dawn as a person.
If I had a daughter playing women's college basketball I'd absolutely steer her to Geno, Kim or pretty much any coach besides Dawn.
re: Billy Donovan is the guy!
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 11:06 am
quote:
Mark Pope would be on the list well before Ford.
I could see that but I don't see him being high profile enough to really move the needle for UK fans. I wouldn't say he's an improvement over Cal besides just being a former UK player and just being someone different than Cal.
re: Iowa/South Carolina game transcended college basketball
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 11:03 am
quote:
I'm sorry that your favorite school is a basketball school and men's college basketball has been dying a slow death for the last 25 years.
It's still by far the second biggest college sport and the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament is the best tournament by far. The NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament blows away the College Football Playoff in terms of anticipation and excitement.
Plus with the way society is going basketball will still be played long after tackle football is probably banned. Heck more and more states are outright banning tackle football at the youth level. I hate it but within 10 years at least 1 state will most likely ban tackle football at the high school level, only allowing it for college and pros.
re: Greg Byrne... you're on the clock.
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 10:58 am
Oats isn't going to leave Bama yet but he just became more expensive. In addition to the new contract my guess is a new arena is going to have to be guaranteed and the timeline pushed up to now.
re: Billy Donovan is the guy!
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 10:55 am
quote:
Not a chance in hell Travis Ford gets hired at Kentucky.
Far more of a chance than Kentucky getting Hurley, Donovan, Wright or Stevens. And significantly more of a chance than Kentucky getting Oats (who everyone knows is waiting for the NBA or Michigan State).
Blue Blood Schools and Coaching Searches
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 10:52 am
I truly think UK fans are going to be surprised at what happens with their coaching search. While I don't debate UK is a blue blood in college basketball, with NIL I really think UK and the other blue bloods have lost a significant amount of the advantage and prestige they previously had.
With NIL the gap has been narrowed significantly and if a school devotes enough money and resources they can be a power in college basketball. It's flat out easier to ascend in college basketball than college football. Look at UConn. UConn was nothing as recently as the mid 1990's. Now look at them, if they win the National Title tonight I genuinely push them above UK, Kansas and Duke and put them just behind UNC in terms of blue blood programs.
Here's why each big name coach UK is going to consider at first won't go to UK:
Brad Stevens: He's set in the NBA, will never return to college basketball.
Jay Wright: Has too good of a gig as an analyst. Will never coach in college basketball again.
Billy Donovan: How quickly UK fans forget he turned them down to stay at Florida, a football school. He's not leaving the NBA for UK. He's not coming back to college basketball unless he was fired from the Bulls and couldn't get another NBA job.
Dan Hurley: Has absolutely no reason to leave UConn. UConn is the better job now compared to UK.
Nate Oats: He isn't a Southern guy at heart. He's waiting for the NBA or Michigan State. How bad would the meltdown be for UK fans if Oats went there for a few years only to dump UK for Michigan State. :lol: And it would happen. Everyone who knows Oats knows his dream job in college is Michigan State.
The more realistic options:
Will Wade: Would go to UK but it seems he's blacklisted essentially from the SEC for now.
Chris Beard: The one above all other that concerns me. Chris Beard would bring a title to UK. Like others have said though just not sure Mitch Barnhardt is okay with the baggage.
The most likely group:
Bruce Pearl: Will give Big Blue Nation the worship they demand. But he won't bring them a title.
Scott Drew: Identical to Bruce Pearl. I don't know why but Scott Drew at UK just doesn't scare me and I don't think will scare most of the SEC like UK fans think it would.
Travis Ford: UK job really is above him but he'll get considered and would instantly take it if offered.
At the end of the day UK fans look at the other Blue Bloods in college basketball who have hired coaches lately. There aren't many huge names out there like there used to be and the few huge names there are aren't coming back to college basketball or aren't coming to UK. Look at UNC, Duke and UCLA in recent years. They either hired assistants or mediocre coaches. Look at Syracuse, again an assistant.
Nothing points to UK getting the huge big name coach they want. It just hasn't happened in recent years.
With NIL the gap has been narrowed significantly and if a school devotes enough money and resources they can be a power in college basketball. It's flat out easier to ascend in college basketball than college football. Look at UConn. UConn was nothing as recently as the mid 1990's. Now look at them, if they win the National Title tonight I genuinely push them above UK, Kansas and Duke and put them just behind UNC in terms of blue blood programs.
Here's why each big name coach UK is going to consider at first won't go to UK:
Brad Stevens: He's set in the NBA, will never return to college basketball.
Jay Wright: Has too good of a gig as an analyst. Will never coach in college basketball again.
Billy Donovan: How quickly UK fans forget he turned them down to stay at Florida, a football school. He's not leaving the NBA for UK. He's not coming back to college basketball unless he was fired from the Bulls and couldn't get another NBA job.
Dan Hurley: Has absolutely no reason to leave UConn. UConn is the better job now compared to UK.
Nate Oats: He isn't a Southern guy at heart. He's waiting for the NBA or Michigan State. How bad would the meltdown be for UK fans if Oats went there for a few years only to dump UK for Michigan State. :lol: And it would happen. Everyone who knows Oats knows his dream job in college is Michigan State.
The more realistic options:
Will Wade: Would go to UK but it seems he's blacklisted essentially from the SEC for now.
Chris Beard: The one above all other that concerns me. Chris Beard would bring a title to UK. Like others have said though just not sure Mitch Barnhardt is okay with the baggage.
The most likely group:
Bruce Pearl: Will give Big Blue Nation the worship they demand. But he won't bring them a title.
Scott Drew: Identical to Bruce Pearl. I don't know why but Scott Drew at UK just doesn't scare me and I don't think will scare most of the SEC like UK fans think it would.
Travis Ford: UK job really is above him but he'll get considered and would instantly take it if offered.
At the end of the day UK fans look at the other Blue Bloods in college basketball who have hired coaches lately. There aren't many huge names out there like there used to be and the few huge names there are aren't coming back to college basketball or aren't coming to UK. Look at UNC, Duke and UCLA in recent years. They either hired assistants or mediocre coaches. Look at Syracuse, again an assistant.
Nothing points to UK getting the huge big name coach they want. It just hasn't happened in recent years.
re: Billy Donovan is the guy!
Posted by TheMountaineer on 4/8/24 at 10:36 am
I just don't see it. Neither Billy Donovan nor Brad Stevens are coming back to college. Jay Wright is too comfortable being an analyst, I think if Jay Wright went back into coaching he's going to the NBA or right back to Villanova.
UK fans conveniently forget that Jay Wright is absolutely a Philly guy. He's not leaving the Northeast/Philly area. Same with Dan Hurley. Dan Hurley has never lived or coached more than 100 miles outside of NYC. He's a Northeast/NYC guy at heart, never mind UConn really is more of a blue blood than UK at this point and there's nothing Hurley can accomplish at UK he can't accomplish at UConn.
Honestly Dan Hurley wouldn't be a good cultural fit at UK. I know many UK fans here will point to Pitino but that's still different.
UK fans, more than any other fan base in college basketball, need a coach who essentially kisses butt to Big Blue Nation. UK fans more than any other fan base wants a coach who essentially worships the fans.
To me that points to Scott Drew, Bruce Pearl or Travis Ford.
UK fans conveniently forget that Jay Wright is absolutely a Philly guy. He's not leaving the Northeast/Philly area. Same with Dan Hurley. Dan Hurley has never lived or coached more than 100 miles outside of NYC. He's a Northeast/NYC guy at heart, never mind UConn really is more of a blue blood than UK at this point and there's nothing Hurley can accomplish at UK he can't accomplish at UConn.
Honestly Dan Hurley wouldn't be a good cultural fit at UK. I know many UK fans here will point to Pitino but that's still different.
UK fans, more than any other fan base in college basketball, need a coach who essentially kisses butt to Big Blue Nation. UK fans more than any other fan base wants a coach who essentially worships the fans.
To me that points to Scott Drew, Bruce Pearl or Travis Ford.
Popular
36
