|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 12:50:18 GMT -5
Huh? You original point was that Eaves built his program around HS players that aren't ready to play and he didn't recruit enough transfers. So how does this prove your point? LOL ... and then you say HS players could do anything most of Eaves' transfers did, as if he should have recruited more HS players instead of transfers. I think I hear that Gnarls Barkley song playing again .... Nooooooooooooo. I was saying that the transfers he brought in were garbage for the most part and that is why the high schoolers could do what they did. Like, he should have left them where they were. And as far as how he built the program, I was saying that in this conference, to consistently win, you have to bring in transfers that are studs. Sorry that you misunderstood.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 8, 2009 12:56:22 GMT -5
Man, I think you misunderstood your own argument.
This has not been one of your best debates. LOL
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 13:03:40 GMT -5
There's nothing to misunderstand. Like everything I post. It's simple.
I'm not sure why you don't understand.
Transfers - must do, must be studs, MEAC winners do it.
C'mon smartest man in the world.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 8, 2009 13:09:02 GMT -5
No, I think I understand perfectly now. LOL
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Dec 8, 2009 13:25:29 GMT -5
bozeman, by far, has the most talent and size in the meac. so he can afford to play a tougher schedule because he'll have some 20 point wins in the meac. do you think eaves has the talent to leisurely run off 20 point wins in the meac? you think if he replaced the 3 cupcakes with more stiff competition, he'll leisurely run off 20 point wins in the meac? like i said, almost every college coach in america disagrees with your philosophy. yet, despite that, you still think you're right! its useless to even debate with you... There you go reading what you want to read again. I keep saying that I'm only referring to teams on our level! So 95% of coaches don't even qualify. I've also said that I don't think it directly correlates to championships. So all of that you typed means nothing man. ok, then 95% of college coaches "on our level" disagree with you. it doesn't really matter what level you're on. 95% of college coaches "on any level" disagree with you...
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 14:10:41 GMT -5
There you go reading what you want to read again. I keep saying that I'm only referring to teams on our level! So 95% of coaches don't even qualify. I've also said that I don't think it directly correlates to championships. So all of that you typed means nothing man. ok, then 95% of college coaches "on our level" disagree with you. it doesn't really matter what level you're on. 95% of college coaches "on any level" disagree with you... I agree......and thanks for proving my point because 95% (probably more) of college coaches on our level aren't championship winners. lol You're a certified genius.
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Dec 8, 2009 14:49:18 GMT -5
You put new sets in during practice and run it against people that know what's coming. That helps you to fine tune it. and one other thing, bigboy. would you care to explain what you meant by this statement? wouldn't you like to retract it? i mean, if you ask any high school or college coach if he/she fine tunes their offense by running it against their own players, they'd literally laugh you out the gym. man, where do you get this stuff from?
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 16:06:37 GMT -5
Yeah, it's obvious you're not as smart as I gave you credit for. I've heard several coaches say that before and it makes sense.
The premise is that if you can run your offense against people who know what you are about to do, then you can run it against anybody. But I guess that's too farfetched for you huh?
Pete Carrill believed in it wholeheartedly.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 8, 2009 16:28:32 GMT -5
Back to the strength of schedule debate, Del State is currently dead last in the nation in RPI this year.
Greg Jackson, I believe, is considered a top coach in this conference.
So far, their out-of-conference schedule has included Holy Family (you've got to be jokin), Wilmington (D2), and Mary Washington (huh?).
The more I investigate this debate, the more I think Eaves might be par for the course with his out-of-conference scheduling.
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 16:31:56 GMT -5
Back to the strength of schedule debate, Del State is currently dead last in nation in RPI this year. Greg Jackson, I believe, is considered a top coach in this conference. So far, their out-of-conference schedule has included Holy Family (you've got to be jokin), Wilmington (D2), and Mary Washington (huh?). The more I investigate this debate, the more I think Eaves might be par for the course with his out-of-conference scheduling. And Jackson isn't winning right now is he? lol Par for the couse doesn't win championships. Look at his schedule when he was cleaning the MEAC's clock in like '04, '05, '06 and tell me if you find those kind of cupcakes. You'll start to get my drift.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Dec 8, 2009 16:51:09 GMT -5
If that was a key to winning championships, why would he stop doing it?
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,207
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Dec 8, 2009 17:16:28 GMT -5
Yeah, it's obvious you're not as smart as I gave you credit for. I've heard several coaches say that before and it makes sense. The premise is that if you can run your offense against people who know what you are about to do, then you can run it against anybody. But I guess that's too farfetched for you huh? Pete Carrill believed in it wholeheartedly. naw, it's quite the opposite. if you can successfully run your offense against your own players and your players are honestly trying to stop it, then you've got some "dumb" azz players! for crying out loud! they know "exactly" where the ball is going and where the screens will be set! nobody would be able to set one single screen if your own team that's playing defense wanted to circumvent the offense. and gawd knows you can't possibly be talking about princeton offense perfectionist, pete carril! maybe you're talking about somebody else since you spelled his last name "carrill". but the pete carril that i'm talking about perfected the princeton offense (he didn't actually create it) which emphasizes "back door cuts". let me repeat "back door cuts"! i mean, what idiot that knows you're running the princeton offense is gonna overplay the passing lanes? geeesh! son, there would be no back door cuts! do you even know what a dummy defense is? well that's what your team plays when you're practicing your offense against your own teammates. the coach tells his players to "pretend" they don't know the offense. and you think running your offense against players who "pretend" they don't know your offense is how you "fine tune" your offense? omg! ....somebody just picked me up off the floor, 'cause i fell the hail outta my chair laughing at that one! and i still can't stop laughing...
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 17:45:37 GMT -5
If that was a key to winning championships, why would he stop doing it? I'm suggesting it's a component to a winning formula.......not a "key". And I have no idea why they stopped.
|
|
|
Post by aahhbigboy on Dec 8, 2009 18:01:07 GMT -5
Yeah, it's obvious you're not as smart as I gave you credit for. I've heard several coaches say that before and it makes sense. The premise is that if you can run your offense against people who know what you are about to do, then you can run it against anybody. But I guess that's too farfetched for you huh? Pete Carrill believed in it wholeheartedly. naw, it's quite the opposite. if you can successfully run your offense against your own players and your players are honestly trying to stop it, then you've got some "dumb" azz players! for crying out loud! they know "exactly" where the ball is going and where the screens will be set! nobody would be able to set one single screen if your own team that's playing defense wanted to circumvent the offense. and gawd knows you can't possibly be talking about princeton offense perfectionist, pete carril! maybe you're talking about somebody else since you spelled his last name "carrill". but the pete carril that i'm talking about perfected the princeton offense (he didn't actually create it) which emphasizes "back door cuts". let me repeat "back door cuts"! i mean, what idiot that knows you're running the princeton offense is gonna overplay the passing lanes? geeesh! son, there would be no back door cuts! do you even know what a dummy defense is? well that's what your team plays when you're practicing your offense against your own teammates. the coach tells his players to "pretend" they don't know the offense. and you think running your offense against players who "pretend" they don't know your offense is how you "fine tune" your offense? omg! ....somebody just picked me up off the floor, 'cause i fell the hail outta my chair laughing at that one! and i still can't stop laughing... Keep showing your lack of knowledge oldeschool. Back door cuts is only a part of the offense. It's a 5 man motion offense. There were several opponents that tried a sagging man against princeton only to run into 3-point shooting and mid range jumpers. Why do think it's worked so long Genius. Why do you think Georgetown made it to the Final Four a few years back running this offense? It's about execution. It doesn't matter if they know what you're trying to do. When you stop laughing.......take time to read up on it genius. See below. "Princeton offense From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search The Princeton offense is an offensive basketball strategy which emphasizes constant motion, passing, back-door cuts, and disciplined teamwork. It was used and perfected at Princeton University by Pete Carril, though its roots may be traced back to Franklin “Cappy” Cappon, who coached at Princeton in the late 1930s.[citation needed] The offense usually starts out with four players outside the three-point arc with one player at the top of the key. The ball is kept in constant motion through passing until either a mismatch allows a player to cut to the basket or a player without the ball cuts toward the unoccupied area under and around the basket, and is passed the ball for a layup. Having a strong post player is important because this player is critical to passing to backdoor cutters, and can draw help defense to open outside shots. The hallmark of the offense is the backdoor pass, where a player on the wing suddenly moves in towards the basket, receives a bounce pass from a guard on the perimeter, and (if done correctly) finds himself with no defenders between him and a layup. Alternatively, when the defensive team attempts to pack the paint to prevent backdoor cuts, the offense utilizes three point shots from the perimeter. All five players in the offense-- including the center-- should be competent at making a three point attempt, further spreading the floor.The offense is a very slow developing one, relying on a high number of passes, and is often used by teams facing opponents with superior athletic talent, to maintain a low-scoring game (believing that a high-scoring game would favor the athletically superior opponent)." Dummy defenses don't work........Genius.
|
|
|
Post by asdffdsa on Dec 8, 2009 19:33:12 GMT -5
If you look at the games that Eaves schedule some of the 'cupcake' games aren't really as easy as you think they are. If you take teams like Southern VA from 2 years ago, Taladega college from last year, and D&E they lose... These games could have been strategically put on the schedule. Which can be mini tests of his teams mental toughness and how well they execute down the stretch of games which in all three of these games with the exception of talledega they could have lost
|
|