Man to man?

[Zelda Zonk]

I'm having friends over for supper tonight with man to man principles.

 

[Townie72]

He might be the first elite recruit to ever say that, honestly. Thanks for proving our point.

"Our" point???

You mean the point of the tiny group of constant Boeheim critics on here that mistakenly believe they know better how to coach basketball?

Does "our point" refer to the collective opinion of a few guys who get frustrated at SU losses and struggle to come up with an alternative approach that they think "may have worked"?

 

[Zelda Zonk]

"Our" point???

You mean the point of the tiny group of constant Boeheim critics on here that mistakenly believe they know better how to coach basketball?

Does "our point" refer to the collective opinion of a few guys who get frustrated at SU losses and struggle to come up with an alternative approach that they think "may have worked"?

Jeezus, man. You'd have more credibility if every one of your posts were based on the 'law' that everything Boeheim thinks is 100% empirical, absolute truth, and any non-agreement represents heresy. Fact is, JB has been wrong, has changed his mind, has never been the best coach, and other coaches have done things differently with better results and fewer resources. And you'd be more interesting if you had your own thoughts instead of barnacling JB.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Jeezus, man. You'd have more credibility if every one of your posts were based on the 'law' that everything Boeheim thinks is 100% empirical, absolute truth, and any non-agreement represents heresy. Fact is, JB has been wrong, has changed his mind, has never been the best coach, and other coaches have done things differently with better results and fewer resources. And you'd be more interesting if you had your own thoughts instead of barnacling JB.

Has anyone wondered if maybe, just maybe, Townie IS JB?

 

[Townie72]

Jeezus, man. You'd have more credibility if every one of your posts were based on the 'law' that everything Boeheim thinks is 100% empirical, absolute truth, and any non-agreement represents heresy. Fact is, JB has been wrong, has changed his mind, has never been the best coach, and other coaches have done things differently with better results and fewer resources. And you'd be more interesting if you had your own thoughts instead of barnacling JB.

Between the opinions of Zelda Zonk and those of JB's, I'll stick with JB's.

I know that's frustrating for those who wish they were JB or that pretend to have these deep insights into the problems and the solutions.

Seems to me you ought to be worried about your own credibility.

The fact that Boeheim has been wrong, changed his mind, etc., in no way means you have a single correct answer.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Townie is already in mid January form.

 

[Kowbelkat]

Haven't seen it. Standing up in comparison to several seasons of a show is a tall order.

The genius of the show was the transformation of the characters over a perod of time. Swearingen went from pure evil to a somewhat sympathetic character.

The kidney stone episode, since I get the also made me squeamish as all heck

 

[Zelda Zonk]

Between the opinions of Zelda Zonk and those of JB's, I'll stick with JB's.

I know that's frustrating for those who wish they were JB or that pretend to have these deep insights into the problems and the solutions.

Seems to me you ought to be worried about your own credibility.

The fact that Boeheim has been wrong, changed his mind, etc., in no way means you have a single correct answer.

You still don't get the point. It's not "the opinions of Zelda Zonk." You must have missed the bit about the hundreds of other coaches, some with better results than JB.
My credibility isn't in question. Unless you know of a way to test my opinions.

The failure in logic is in the inability to accept that JB isn't omniscient, and that every choice he's made hasn't always resulted in the optimum result. You seem to need to take a 'career' overview and apply it to every thought, which is fine if you need to erect monuments, but in terms of critical thinking, it's spectacularly oversimplistic and cloying.

 

[HOFCeluck]

You still don't get the point. It's not "the opinions of Zelda Zonk." You must have missed the bit about the hundreds of other coaches, some with better results than JB.
My credibility isn't in question. Unless you know of a way to test my opinions.

The failure in logic is in the inability to accept that JB isn't omniscient, and that every choice he's made hasn't always resulted in the optimum result. You seem to need to take a 'career' overview and apply it to every thought, which is fine if you need to erect monuments, but in terms of critical thinking, it's spectacularly oversimplistic and cloying.

Your credibility on an independent college sports message board is now zero.

Tough loss bro.

 

[Townie72]

The kidney stone episode, since I get the also made me squeamish as all heck

I never really got the point of that unless they were trying to show the difficulty of life that period. Or maybe to make Al a more sympathetic character.

 

[Townie72]

You still don't get the point. It's not "the opinions of Zelda Zonk." You must have missed the bit about the hundreds of other coaches, some with better results than JB.
My credibility isn't in question. Unless you know of a way to test my opinions.

The failure in logic is in the inability to accept that JB isn't omniscient, and that every choice he's made hasn't always resulted in the optimum result. You seem to need to take a 'career' overview and apply it to every thought, which is fine if you need to erect monuments, but in terms of critical thinking, it's spectacularly oversimplistic and cloying.

I get your point. I just don't agree with it. I think you are completely and spectacularly wrong.

Your whole deal is that if you suggest that JB is sometimes wrong, that opens the door a crack for you to be right. And that's absurd on its face.

Afterall, you think if JB can be wrong, than who says you're not right? It's an argument suitable for most college sophomores.

Your "critical thinking" pretty much stops at, "Well if the zone didn't work tonight, there must be a better answer".

By the way, you are misusing the word, "cloying".

 

[Zelda Zonk]

I get your point. I just don't agree with it. I think you are completely and spectacularly wrong.

Your whole deal is that if you suggest that JB is sometimes wrong, that opens the door a crack for you to be right. And that's absurd on its face.

Afterall, you think if JB can be wrong, than who says you're not right? It's an argument suitable for most college sophomores.

Your "critical thinking" pretty much stops at, "Well if the zone didn't work tonight, there must be a better answer".

By the way, you are misusing the word, "cloying".

Everything you just wrote demonstrates you don’t get it.
Maybe your dictionary is broken. ‘Disgusting sentimentality’ toward JB is exactly what I meant. I guess you didn’t understand that either.

 

[Townie72]

Everything you just wrote demonstrates you don’t get it.
Maybe your dictionary is broken. ‘Disgusting sentimentality’ toward JB is exactly what I meant. I guess you didn’t understand that either.

You apparently don't know the difference between "sentimentality" and respect for excellence.

JB has a strategy. It's unique in major college basketball. Random fans without credentials disagree especially after losses.

These experts say, "My opinion is as good as anyone else's!" or "You can't prove I'm wrong. " (This tactic worked when they were sophomores.)

And at least on this board, some scream bloody murder when it's suggested that their opinions really aren't as good as a HOF coach.

 

[HOFCeluck]

You apparently don't know the difference between "sentimentality" and respect for excellence.

JB has a strategy. It's unique in major college basketball. Random fans without credentials disagree especially after losses.

These experts say, "My opinion is as good as anyone else's!" or "You can't prove I'm wrong. " (This tactic worked when they were sophomores.)

And at least on this board, some scream bloody murder when it's suggested that their opinions really aren't as good as a HOF coach.

The big difference its that I'm not whining about people taking opposing viewpoints.

 

[Townie72]

And I don't whine. I'm just telling them they are wrong. They are entitled to their wrong opinions. And they obviously don't like being told they are wrong and that's when the name-calling starts.

Whining would be attacking them by calling people JB syncophants or some such thing.

I like conflict. I don't shy away from it. It doesn't bother me to be told I'm wrong.

But "JB can't be right about everything" does not mean his critics are right about anything.

 

[orangecuse]

I get your point. I just don't agree with it. I think you are completely and spectacularly wrong.

Your whole deal is that if you suggest that JB is sometimes wrong, that opens the door a crack for you to be right. And that's absurd on its face.

Afterall, you think if JB can be wrong, than who says you're not right? It's an argument suitable for most college sophomores.

Your "critical thinking" pretty much stops at, "Well if the zone didn't work tonight, there must be a better answer".

By the way, you are misusing the word, "cloying".

Or... 'strenuously.'

 

[cuseinseattle]

Townie is already in mid January form.

I was just thinking that Zelda and Townie are. Impressive stuff. Love the passion.

 

[AlaskaSU]

Check the. Basketball Recruiting tab. There’s a five star recruit from Ohio, PF Jackson, stating that one of the principal reasons he is interested in SU is because of the Zone.

That’s my evidence. Where’s yours?

Something is wrong with your logic. Please explain how one example proves a point.

 

[moqui]

i'll leave the rest of zelda's argument alone, but this is just factually incorrect

other coaches have done things differently with better results and fewer resources.

946* division 1 wins, only 1 coach has more
57 ncaa tournament victories, only 3 have more
5 final fours, only 9 have more

and not one of them has done so with fewer resources

you want to fight the completely pointless jb basketball philosophy fight for the nth time go ahead, but attacking the man's absolute top flight accomplishments is the wrong way to do it, imho

 

[GooseMutt]

If there’s a Devils Advocate in this is you. I’m supporting the strategy of the HOF coach.

I actually didn’t take your post all that seriously. No one could actually be serious about wanting SU to change its strategy to alleviate the frustration of a single, random fan.

Did you not get hugs as a kid? Asking for a friend

 

[Townie72]

Did you not get hugs as a kid? Asking for a friend

You know you’ve won the argument when the opposition starts with the personal attacks.

 

[GooseMutt]

You know you’ve won the argument when the opposition starts with the personal attacks.

Sorry but my impression is that you go out of your way to be adversarial to most folks on this board. But it’s ok for you to refer to me as a single random fan,which you are as well, as if you are somehow more worthy lmao.

Gonna put you where you belong on ignore. Try not to be so angry as life is short. Bye Felicia

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Common sense is my unsupported evidence. Not everyone wants to play zone, especially NBA bound kids. Can you say with 100 percent certainty that zone does not affect recruiting? just because you cannot prove a point does not mean that it is wrong.

I still don't get this. There have been 2 kids that the board can think of that said they didn't want to play zone. Which is fine. Not everyone wants to come to Syracuse. Based on the fact we've recruited very well since 1997, I'm going with it's not really an issue. If anything, it seems to be a positive, since we are well known for having a very good defense.

 

[AlaskaSU]

It is, of course, unknown how well we might have recruited if we were not zone only.

 

[GooseMutt]

It is, of course, unknown how well we might have recruited if we were not zone only.

How many would have walked if we weren’t zone