Jump to content

Crying time is over

Huskerpapa

By Huskerpapa
in The Haymarket Hardwood

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

fred1212
fred1212

We may have just dodged a bullet....just sayin'  

HB
HB

If that's true that tells you the nature of the problem.  If Miles hadn't told him to stop shooting 3s he wouldn't be a basketball coach.   That's the whole point of coaching.  If we need to just let

Huskerpapa
Huskerpapa

Ed, Nick and Jeriah are gone.    Okay, it is time to move on, the crying time has passed.  I posted the following in another thread, I will start a new thread with the following as the topic

Posted Images

aphilso1

aphilso1

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, huskercwg said:

I am hoping the negative crap is now at an end.  I worry that we will lose Michael Lewis to Indiana.  I worry that once Ed left his other Illinois brothers could pack up and leave.  Heck who knows what may occur over the next several weeks.  Yet, that said, a bunch of good things could occur over the next month or so as well.  We could get positive news on Copeland.  We could learn that Palmer is good to go.  We could learn that a back up center is on the way.  We could find out that we have two new snipers coming in, one or both of whom will be a PG. 

 

Yeah, I am p*ssed that Ed is leaving.  What am I going to do?  Should I give up my six season tickets for basketball...I've missed only one home game since 1984,  So that ain't happening.  I've put up with the peaks and valleys of this program longer than most "fans" have been alive.  Soooo, am I upset, am I disappointed, am I hurt, am I confused...yup.  But I move on.

 

You make it to every home game?  That's a really long commute from Hogsmeade.  Do you travel via portkey, floo network, or apparition?

mwm89

mwm89

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, jimmykc said:

As much as I would like to feel the storm has been weathered, I am sort of dreading the next few days unless we get some positive news on the recruiting front. I sort of feel like Wile E. Coyote still thinking he will catch the Roadrunner as the next anvil plummets down.

Gotta love a good Wile E. Coyote reference.

cipsucks

cipsucks

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, jimmykc said:

As much as I would like to feel the storm has been weathered, I am sort of dreading the next few days unless we get some positive news on the recruiting front. I sort of feel like Wile E. Coyote still thinking he will catch the Roadrunner as the next anvil plummets down.

 

 

 

busticket

busticket

Posted
Posted

To answer the OP, I really hope we can land a JUCO combo guard that is a proficient shooter/scorer that can also play spot minutes at the point, basically addressing point #1 and #3 with a single player.  This may not be a popular comparison, but a kid like Johnny Mathies who played for Altman would fit the bill.  I don't know if any of the JUCO kids we recently offered meet this criteria, but the young man who got his release from the Wolfpack may be this kind of player.

 

I personally think with another off-season of working out, Jacobsen could back up Jordy in the post for 10 minutes a game or so in addition to playing some 4.

PimpMario

PimpMario

Posted
Posted
Ed, Nick and Jeriah are gone.  th?id=OIP.ZqDlP1vIWbG9wL9Fi297qgEsEe&w=78&h=78&c=7&pid=1.1
 
Okay, it is time to move on, the crying time has passed.  I posted the following in another thread, I will start a new thread with the following as the topic:
 
We have three openings.  What are our primary player needs:
*  We need a sniper; a shooter who can fill it up on a consistent basis
*  We need a back-up center.  It was going to be Jordy and Ed.  Ed is gone, so Jordy needs a back up.  I also predict Jordy will be exponentially better next year. 
*  We need a back-up PG.  Arguably our current back-ups are Isaiah and Evan.  Perhaps the back-up PG could be an elite shooter as well.
 
Losing the three aforementioned players create somewhat of a dumpster fire attitude.  Panic, anger, moaning, b*tching occur when players leave, especially if they were contributors.  But whether we want to believe it or not, transfers occur everywhere.  I went through my angst; it is now time to rally behind our staff, our team and our program.  Sorry, just had to get this off my chest.


I would also look for a coach who is good during games. And maybe one that is good at scouting teams and coming up with winning gameplans.
Bookie Killer

Bookie Killer

Posted
Posted
On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 3:19 PM, Norm Peterson said:

 

IMO, FWIW, I think if either Andrew White had chosen to stay OR we hadn't signed ourselves up for such a grueling non-con (which we wouldn't have if we'd known Andrew was jumping ship) I think our players would have won more games and been more confident heading into conference play.

 

We need to get momentum on our side next year.

We won our first 3 conference games so did it really effect our confidence heading into conference play?

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Bookie Killer said:

We won our first 3 conference games so did it really effect our confidence heading into conference play?

 

 I have explained this many times. We only had so much "bounce back" in the tank to use for the season.   They played really well despite losing a few games early on.   That grind, however, kind of took something out of them and they lost to Gardner Webb. They bounced back to win their first three conference games but then faced some more adversity when Ed went down.   They bounced back again against Purdue.    But that kind of emptied the tank of "bounce back."

 

That is not the kind of schedule that you would ordinarily want a young team to face, but at the time the coaches created that schedule, they did not realize they would be fielding as young of a team as they ended up fielding. That is why the Andrew White departure hurt so much.  

 

That is why I said above that either having Andrew White or not having such a hard schedule early on would've made a big difference going into conference play. I think there is also a factor  that the team was forcing things a bit too much at the end because they feared they were playing for their coach's job.  I think that added pressure is part of why they did not play as well towards the end of the season as they had at the beginning. 

Chuck Taylor

Chuck Taylor

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

 I have explained this many times. We only had so much "bounce back" in the tank to use for the season.   They played really well despite losing a few games early on.   That grind, however, kind of took something out of them and they lost to Gardner Webb. They bounced back to win their first three conference games but then faced some more adversity when Ed went down.   They bounced back again against Purdue.    But that kind of emptied the tank of "bounce back."

 

That is not the kind of schedule that you would ordinarily want a young team to face, but at the time the coaches created that schedule, they did not realize they would be fielding as young of a team as they ended up fielding. That is why the Andrew White departure hurt so much.  

 

That is why I said above that either having Andrew White or not having such a hard schedule early on would've made a big difference going into conference play. I think there is also a factor  that the team was forcing things a bit too much at the end because they feared they were playing for their coach's job.  I think that added pressure is part of why they did not play as well towards the end of the season as they had at the beginning. 

You haven't explained it, you just presented your opinion. Others may disagree, including Bookie Killer, a suspected troll.

Norm Peterson

Norm Peterson

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Chuck Taylor said:

You haven't explained it, you just presented your opinion. Others may disagree, including Bookie Killer, a suspected troll.

 

My opinion was what bookie killer quoted.  My explanation for that opinion was what you quoted.

 

I thought it was a reasonable question that bookie killer asked, but I didn't want to tire regular posters out by reiterating something I'd explained a number of times before, which is why I prefaced my response to bookie by saying it was ploughing old ground -- so that people who'd heard it before could skip over it if they did want to slog through it again.

Bookie Killer

Bookie Killer

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Norm Peterson said:

 

My opinion was what bookie killer quoted.  My explanation for that opinion was what you quoted.

 

I thought it was a reasonable question that bookie killer asked, but I didn't want to tire regular posters out by reiterating something I'd explained a number of times before, which is why I prefaced my response to bookie by saying it was ploughing old ground -- so that people who'd heard it before could skip over it if they did want to slog through it again.

thanks for answering Norm, makes sense...

Bookie Killer

Bookie Killer

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Chuck Taylor said:

You haven't explained it, you just presented your opinion. Others may disagree, including Bookie Killer, a suspected troll.

so let me get this straight... in your opinion I'm a suspected troll because I come on here and read what others have to say and seldom ever post myself?

MitchMcGaryMunchies

MitchMcGaryMunchies

Posted
Posted
On 4/3/2017 at 4:21 AM, Bookie Killer said:

so let me get this straight... in your opinion I'm a suspected troll because I come on here and read what others have to say and seldom ever post myself?

 

Technically, I think those actions would make you more of a "lurker" than a troll?  That said, it's feasible that a lurker could one day speak up and become a troll, but a troll cannot silence themselves to become a lurker.  Kind of like how a rectangle can sometimes be a square, but a square cannot be a rectangle.

hhcmatt

hhcmatt

Posted
Posted
On 4/3/2017 at 4:21 AM, Bookie Killer said:

so let me get this straight... in your opinion I'm a suspected troll because I come on here and read what others have to say and seldom ever post myself?

 

I don't necessarily think this is the case but the combination of the provocative screen name + basically introducing yourself with a  "through these gates walk some of the dumbest fans" comment off the bat doesn't necessarily point towards contributor. 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...