Jump to content

Bitterwhiteguy

Full Members
  • Posts

    259
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bitterwhiteguy

  1. 4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

    If CDC can't handle #2, why is he even in charge?

    Sorry, I don't see it.

    I don't want the risk involved with Ivey.  He could be great, but he could just as easily flame out and then we fall FURTHER behind UH/Baylor/Tech in the pecking order.  And firing him risks his alumni buddies getting upset - we didn't give him a chance, we didn't give him what he needed, blah blah blah. 

    I'm not saying he can't, but I can see why he wouldn't want to deal with it if there's another path available.

  2. A couple of logistical reasons why Beard doesn't seem likely to me, neither of which have anything to do with what happens on the court:

    1. Hocutt is in some trouble right now; his football hire is failing and the boosters have been starting to talk of rebellion (remember the talk about hiring Briles a few months back) and he needs a W. If he loses Beard - especially to Texas - he might as well log into LinkedIn today. So Hocutt is motivated to keep Beard, and that's probably where (if true) the tenure-type offers are coming from.
    2. Texas paying their basketball coach more than their football coach could backfire for CDC because then Sark & Beard could play off each other every year about why they should be getting paid more than the other guy. If Sark wins 9+ games, he can go to CDC and say he's the big-money earner and deserves 6m+; if Beard follows with a S16 or E8 season, he can say he's winning more than Sark in his field and should leapfrog him again. It gets messy quickly for CDC, and a different basketball hire likely avoids all of this.

    Everything about the math for Beard doesn't make sense to me, the smarter play from CDC's POV is likely Ivey where he can sell an alumni returning home for way less cash and less fundraising requirements from boosters. I don't pretend to know what CDC will do but to me the choice is pretty clear, to the point I can see Beard and his April 1 buyout date being a helpful smokescreen that gives CDC time to vet/interview other candidates.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  3. Just now, Rockethorn1978 said:

    Beard has recruited some one and done guys I thought? 

    Recruiting isn't his issue, he's been landing top-50 guys; it's retaining guys. His roster churn every year is impressive; some of it is his focus on the transfer portal and some of it is running guys off. He has 2 leaving this year, 3 the year before, 4 the year before that. Tech's Verbal Commits page is large and full of grayed out names.

    image.thumb.png.9500c2c5c533c2088f1d9397fddddf09.png

  4. 16 minutes ago, boilerhorn said:

    That is also true.  Purdue was up at half and trailed most of the 2nd half, with Carsen Edwards keeping them in the game.  They were up 3 and missed a FT to go up 4 with 17 seconds left.  Purdue fouled w/ 5 seconds left (right call).  Virginia made the first, intentionally missed the 2nd, got the rebound and a tying bucket with 1 second left.  Virginia won in OT.

    In retrospect, I should have left Painter off the list.  It was a foolish emotional response of someone who has followed Purdue hoops since the 80s.  I've viewed Purdue as a chronic underachiever in the tourney.  The data does not support it for Painter.  Keady's #1 seeded teams (88, 94, 96) won 2, 3, and 1 game in the tournament.  That was influencing my comment.  Having Painter on that list was a bad take.

    Painter is in my eyes a lesser Barnes; he puts together good teams and makes the tourney most years, but doesn't usually make it as far as you expect. Texas could do worse, but it's not exactly swinging for the fences.

  5. 14 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

    Not saying the guy is coming here, just confused about the notion that the coach who has won two of the last four NCAA basketball championships is below our standard. He might be the best active coach in the sport. It'd be an absolute home run of a hire.

    It's not that he's below the Texas standard, it's that he's thoroughly not interested in leaving Nova and there's nothing Texas can offer that Nova can't match or beat. Maybe in 2015 it was possible (I doubt it, he was happy there back then too) but it's even less likely now.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  6. There were plenty of mistakes made, but I don't think Texas would have been helped by sending out the guy with the highest turnover rate on the team for more minutes against a team that loves taking charges.

  7. It was the biggest gut punch since I've been watching college basketball, replacing the 2011 Arizona '3 seconds' game. I don't know if it's the worst in program history - the season with the Chaminade loss also had the time Texas paid to play in the CBI so they could lose to Houston in the first round which was pretty embarassing, plus there's a laundry list of Bob Weltlich games to pick from - but the fact that it's in the conversation at all says plenty.

  8. 1 minute ago, Not a cat said:

    Seems the fact there's no extension in the works is a given and Sexton has to know that.  Only two options- Ari Gold gtfo gif or come back for another year on original contract.  CDC would be crucified if he did an extension.

    The only way an extension makes sense is if CDC reworked the guaranteed money to be more friendly to Texas; for example, hand him 2 extra years but sliced the guaranteed money in half so they could part ways next year and owe him $0 instead of $3m. I don't know why Shaka would agree to that - particularly with Sexton as his agent - but it would answer the "I need this for recruiting purposes" piece without being a bad deal for Texas. With 2 years left on the deal, Shaka is now at the point where he's starting to recruit players who would show up after his current deal expires, so something needs to happen one way or the other.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, Braff Zacklin said:

    If Baylor advances to the finals, maybe one of our guys can get a "false positive" or something so we can skip tomorrow and focus on the real tournament.

    Any team that gets positive tests after tomorrow is DQed from March Madness, so let's not hope for this.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  10. 35 minutes ago, boilerhorn said:

    Lunardi's graphic implies Baylor, Texas, and WVU in a single region.  While those might be the legitimate rankings for teams heading into the tournament, I don't see the committee seeding 3 teams from a single conference into the top-4 of a particular region.  Shuffling WVU to 16 or 17 solves that "problem."  I am definitely picking at nits.

    That wouldn't happen because of their guidelines about teams who have played each other 2+ times in the season not meeting before the S16 if they can help it, so that would put WVU at risk of being dropped to a 5 seed to avoid it. This (and geography in non-COVID years) is one of the primary reasons the teams don't get seeded exactly by the S-curve.

  11. On 3/2/2021 at 2:25 AM, DonkeyCigars said:

    I came here to post this question "What the heck happened and why does Mo Bamba suck?" after he didn't play today against the Mavs-- but really, what the heck happened? The dude was poised to be a good NBA player! Is it mental?

    He had a number of lingering effects from COVID that derailed him last season when the NBA bubbled up, I'm not sure if he's fully recovered or not.

  12. 5 hours ago, LTtxfan said:

    If we lose to Tech in B12 Tourney, wonder if Horns end up a  5 seed ??

    Probably not -- guessing we're a 4

    The number of Big 12 teams that will be in the running for top 4 seeds means it's possible one or more team gets bumped down a line to comply with the NCAA Tournament's rule that conference opponents who have played each other 2+ times don't see each other before the Sweet 16. Given that they start building the bracket from the top down, Baylor & WVU are unlikely to deal with this but the glut of Big 12 teams in 3-5 range (Kansas, OSU, Texas, maybe Tech or OU) it's possible one or more gets dropped a line to accomodate. The rule isn't always followed, but it's something they try to do as they can. With the number of Big 10 & Big 12 teams in the tourney, somebody's likely to get knocked down a line for reasons other than their resume.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. It's probably the risk-averse side of me speaking, but I'd kinda rather Texas get the 3/4 in the conference tourney and get bounced early so they can go bubble up than making a run in the conference tourney and put their March Madness bid in jeopardy by being around other teams and catching a positive test. Texas is probably a low-3/high-4 seed regardless of their conference tourney outcome (barring making the finals or winning) and a single positive test by a coach or player in the week before the NCAA tourney invokes a ton of contact tracing & potential exclusions. If Texas was on the bubble I would feel differently, but they're safely in and the bigger prize is on the horizon.

    • Like 2
  14. 8 minutes ago, Nolacycling said:

    He may have a grasp of basketball strategy, but imo he doesn't teach those concepts to his players so that they can use them in a game. He hasn't designed drills that mimic game situations. 

    I can't remember exactly what I was watching but it was a TV magazine show of "let's meet Shaka." The camera's followed him as he instructed the point guard to run a specific play. The kid looked at Shaka and said, "I don't know that one. " 

    I have literally watched him do this myself.

    • Fuck You 1
×
×
  • Create New...