Id like to put Pastner on the spot and ask him who is overrated? Because if every team in the AAC is underrated, that means several teams above aren't as good as they are rated, and he would have to down talk some D1 team out there

(02-24-2014 12:05 AM)tigergg Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 08:55 PM)boss man Wrote:  My comments in bold font.

Quote:I didn't hear the presser nor do I care to do so.

Okay, you CHOSE to not watch the presser posted in this link. Your mind is made up on Pastner's post game interviews. Roger that, fair minded TIGER fan.

Just commenting to the fact that folks here get all nutty anytime some might criticize the team, coach, effort, or whatever. There is nothing wrong with constructive or intelligent criticism.

Even if said criticism is repeated in 379 times in multiple threads for days after the game. Oh, and some of us have noticed that the complainers are not nearly as effusive intheir praise after a win than their consistent complaints after a loss. In fact, some posters never show after a win.

Why might that be?

Yes, some criticism is not intelligent but I've seen lots of attacks on people who make reasonable criticisms.

Okay, "reasonable" can be defined as....only 378 times repeated in various threads for days on end? Or complaining about Pastner's lack of cursing? Or using placards? Or clapping? Or "not working the refs" which any fair evaluation of recent games shows is COMPLETELY untrue? Or being a "bad interview" during or after games? Or Pastner's $2.7mm salary? Hell, I know posters who refuse to watch videos of Pastner chiding the media.

Yes, it is ok to criticize after a win or loss (doesn't matter).

Can YOU recognize or acknowledge that some choose to criticize after wins over the same issue in the same manner ALL THE TIME? Or is your point merely to say CRITICISM - regardless of frequency or duration - is perfectly fine? Balance doesn't mean a damn thing at all.

Yet some on here always praise and attack criticism's even if warranted.. So it goes both ways..So why even get upset and attack either side..I actually respected Transit more the other day when he actually said something that was a little critical, I about choked on my food..Anyway this place would be boring and most probably wouldn't even post or read here if it was all sunshine pumping or all critical..I know I wouldn't..This board is actually addicting because of all the entertaining remarks made.. Now I'll admit some posters on here have an agenda but it's very few IMO..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've made plenty of criticisms of Pastner and the current/recent players over the last few years. On the other end, Bossman is right. There are some who ONLY criticize (which is odd to me since this is our best season in Pastner's tenure) and do so loudly and repeatedly enough where all of the criticism just becomes white noise.

There was a game thread recently (the last UCF game) where I made a simple comment -"We'll be fine.". I didn't direct it at anyone. I just made that the comment to counter all of the 'The sky is falling' posts.
I was immediately pounced upon by 'the usual suspects'. "Ohhhhh here's Transitt to tell us how to think". Don't tell me the sunshine pumpers jump on every criticism when a simple optimistic post from me had folks on here telling me about what a POS human being I am.

I also notice that when the criticism gets personal and outlandish those who push for reasonable criticism don't say a word.

In the Rutgers game thread a poster referred to our team as 'a bench full of morons'. NO response from any of the more reasonable but critical posters. Several remarks lately about 'Clank' Crawford. Same lack of response. Those folks would rather jump me for supposed over the top positive responses than these personal attacks on players and coaches.

Some of the shots taken at Pastner and the players (especially Joe) over the past few seasons have been absolutely ridiculous. Those in this thread who talk about reasonable criticism are usually conspicuous in their silence when those shots are taken; the exception being Joe1 if someone takes a shot at Jackson.

It's gotten ridiculous. We have been ranked the entire season while playing in a much harder league. We had 20 wins by mid February. We've had several big wins. What is the response? Several 'Hire Bruce Pearl' threads.

(02-23-2014 09:04 PM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 04:55 PM)tigerjohn Wrote:  Ok just watched it . I like the fire in him but still hear the same thing. Everybody has good players and are well coached.


South Florida 3-11 9.5 12-15
UCF 2-12 10.5 10-15
Temple 2-12 10.5 7-19

This doesn't look like good teams based on what they have done this year.

We swept all of them. Try to enjoy winning.

I do enjoy the wins and was there very late Sat. night . My point is Pastner calling everyone good and great is a bit ridiculous and repetitive.

Pastner isn't being realistic with the media and the fans with his breakdown of his opponents. No, not all teams are great. Not all coaches are great. He knows that, but I don't know why he keeps saying it. Temple has some very fine players on its roster, but the team is not great. Something is amiss. But Pastner is right: Any team can beat you on any given night (example this year: Boston College's victory over Syracuse). More telling in the interview was the statement he said he made to Austin Nichols: Play harder and better or come take a seat on the bench. He needs to tell Nichols that every game because the kid had one of the best game of any Tiger this year. And Shaq was unbelievable.

(02-24-2014 07:16 AM)transitt Wrote:  

(02-24-2014 12:05 AM)tigergg Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 08:55 PM)boss man Wrote:  My comments in bold font.

Quote:I didn't hear the presser nor do I care to do so.

Okay, you CHOSE to not watch the presser posted in this link. Your mind is made up on Pastner's post game interviews. Roger that, fair minded TIGER fan.

Just commenting to the fact that folks here get all nutty anytime some might criticize the team, coach, effort, or whatever. There is nothing wrong with constructive or intelligent criticism.

Even if said criticism is repeated in 379 times in multiple threads for days after the game. Oh, and some of us have noticed that the complainers are not nearly as effusive intheir praise after a win than their consistent complaints after a loss. In fact, some posters never show after a win.

Why might that be?

Yes, some criticism is not intelligent but I've seen lots of attacks on people who make reasonable criticisms.

Okay, "reasonable" can be defined as....only 378 times repeated in various threads for days on end? Or complaining about Pastner's lack of cursing? Or using placards? Or clapping? Or "not working the refs" which any fair evaluation of recent games shows is COMPLETELY untrue? Or being a "bad interview" during or after games? Or Pastner's $2.7mm salary? Hell, I know posters who refuse to watch videos of Pastner chiding the media.

Yes, it is ok to criticize after a win or loss (doesn't matter).

Can YOU recognize or acknowledge that some choose to criticize after wins over the same issue in the same manner ALL THE TIME? Or is your point merely to say CRITICISM - regardless of frequency or duration - is perfectly fine? Balance doesn't mean a damn thing at all.

Yet some on here always praise and attack criticism's even if warranted.. So it goes both ways..So why even get upset and attack either side..I actually respected Transit more the other day when he actually said something that was a little critical, I about choked on my food..Anyway this place would be boring and most probably wouldn't even post or read here if it was all sunshine pumping or all critical..I know I wouldn't..This board is actually addicting because of all the entertaining remarks made.. Now I'll admit some posters on here have an agenda but it's very few IMO..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've made plenty of criticisms of Pastner and the current/recent players over the last few years. On the other end, Bossman is right. There are some who ONLY criticize (which is odd to me since this is our best season in Pastner's tenure) and do so loudly and repeatedly enough where all of the criticism just becomes white noise.

There was a game thread recently (the last UCF game) where I made a simple comment -"We'll be fine.". I didn't direct it at anyone. I just made that the comment to counter all of the 'The sky is falling' posts.
I was immediately pounced upon by 'the usual suspects'. "Ohhhhh here's Transitt to tell us how to think". Don't tell me the sunshine pumpers jump on every criticism when a simple optimistic post from me had folks on here telling me about what a POS human being I am.

I also notice that when the criticism gets personal and outlandish those who push for reasonable criticism don't say a word.

In the Rutgers game thread a poster referred to our team as 'a bench full of morons'. NO response from any of the more reasonable but critical posters. Several remarks lately about 'Clank' Crawford. Same lack of response. Those folks would rather jump me for supposed over the top positive responses than these personal attacks on players and coaches.

Some of the shots taken at Pastner and the players (especially Joe) over the past few seasons have been absolutely ridiculous. Those in this thread who talk about reasonable criticism are usually conspicuous in their silence when those shots are taken; the exception being Joe1 if someone takes a shot at Jackson.

It's gotten ridiculous. We have been ranked the entire season while playing in a much harder league. We had 20 wins by mid February. We've had several big wins. What is the response? Several 'Hire Bruce Pearl' threads.

^^^This^^^

INCLUDING ONE TODAY!!!!!

(02-24-2014 07:16 AM)transitt Wrote:  

(02-24-2014 12:05 AM)tigergg Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 08:55 PM)boss man Wrote:  My comments in bold font.

Quote:I didn't hear the presser nor do I care to do so.

Okay, you CHOSE to not watch the presser posted in this link. Your mind is made up on Pastner's post game interviews. Roger that, fair minded TIGER fan.

Just commenting to the fact that folks here get all nutty anytime some might criticize the team, coach, effort, or whatever. There is nothing wrong with constructive or intelligent criticism.

Even if said criticism is repeated in 379 times in multiple threads for days after the game. Oh, and some of us have noticed that the complainers are not nearly as effusive intheir praise after a win than their consistent complaints after a loss. In fact, some posters never show after a win.

Why might that be?

Yes, some criticism is not intelligent but I've seen lots of attacks on people who make reasonable criticisms.

Okay, "reasonable" can be defined as....only 378 times repeated in various threads for days on end? Or complaining about Pastner's lack of cursing? Or using placards? Or clapping? Or "not working the refs" which any fair evaluation of recent games shows is COMPLETELY untrue? Or being a "bad interview" during or after games? Or Pastner's $2.7mm salary? Hell, I know posters who refuse to watch videos of Pastner chiding the media.

Yes, it is ok to criticize after a win or loss (doesn't matter).

Can YOU recognize or acknowledge that some choose to criticize after wins over the same issue in the same manner ALL THE TIME? Or is your point merely to say CRITICISM - regardless of frequency or duration - is perfectly fine? Balance doesn't mean a damn thing at all.

Yet some on here always praise and attack criticism's even if warranted.. So it goes both ways..So why even get upset and attack either side..I actually respected Transit more the other day when he actually said something that was a little critical, I about choked on my food..Anyway this place would be boring and most probably wouldn't even post or read here if it was all sunshine pumping or all critical..I know I wouldn't..This board is actually addicting because of all the entertaining remarks made.. Now I'll admit some posters on here have an agenda but it's very few IMO..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've made plenty of criticisms of Pastner and the current/recent players over the last few years. On the other end, Bossman is right. There are some who ONLY criticize (which is odd to me since this is our best season in Pastner's tenure) and do so loudly and repeatedly enough where all of the criticism just becomes white noise.

There was a game thread recently (the last UCF game) where I made a simple comment -"We'll be fine.". I didn't direct it at anyone. I just made that the comment to counter all of the 'The sky is falling' posts.
I was immediately pounced upon by 'the usual suspects'. "Ohhhhh here's Transitt to tell us how to think". Don't tell me the sunshine pumpers jump on every criticism when a simple optimistic post from me had folks on here telling me about what a POS human being I am.

I also notice that when the criticism gets personal and outlandish those who push for reasonable criticism don't say a word.

In the Rutgers game thread a poster referred to our team as 'a bench full of morons'. NO response from any of the more reasonable but critical posters. Several remarks lately about 'Clank' Crawford. Same lack of response. Those folks would rather jump me for supposed over the top positive responses than these personal attacks on players and coaches.

Some of the shots taken at Pastner and the players (especially Joe) over the past few seasons have been absolutely ridiculous. Those in this thread who talk about reasonable criticism are usually conspicuous in their silence when those shots are taken; the exception being Joe1 if someone takes a shot at Jackson.

It's gotten ridiculous. We have been ranked the entire season while playing in a much harder league. We had 20 wins by mid February. We've had several big wins. What is the response? Several 'Hire Bruce Pearl' threads.

Thanks for Acknowledging me.

(02-23-2014 12:40 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 12:25 PM)tigerjohn Wrote:  I like Josh but he has become a damn broken record!

In THAT press conference?

Haters gonna hate.

(02-23-2014 01:10 PM)TripleA Wrote:  That was actually an intelligent, well explained, basketball strategy-strewn presser. Completely changed my mind about Pastner's interview skills. For the rest of the year, I really don't give a damn what he says or doesn't say to the media. Just win games. I'm fine with the other stuff now. Not an issue, if it ever was.

His press conferences are the subject of ridicule because there's not a lot else to ***** about given that we have 20 wins yet again, have been ranked the entire season and have ZERO bad losses. Those that are bitching about the losses seem to have forgotten that this is the toughest competition we've faced consistently since, well, since a long time ago. Anyone who expected we would romp through this schedule in this league is delusional.

I am concerned about the difficulties we faced putting away our last two opponents even though both teams played well above their current skill levels. If we're lacking anything this year, as in recent years past, it's that killer instinct to put teams in a hole and then bury them.

(02-23-2014 04:55 PM)tigerjohn Wrote:  Ok just watched it . I like the fire in him but still hear the same thing. Everybody has good players and are well coached.


South Florida 3-11 9.5 12-15
UCF 2-12 10.5 10-15
Temple 2-12 10.5 7-19

This doesn't look like good teams based on what they have done this year.

Like he said, you can't really go by their records this year, some have injuries, some have other issues that have kept them from winning but at this level ALL teams are good and have good talent, if they weren't they'd be division 2 teams. Temple played a great game against us regardless of how they've performed so far this season.

(02-24-2014 01:22 AM)alcalde Wrote:  Id like to put Pastner on the spot and ask him who is overrated? Because if every team in the AAC is underrated, that means several teams above aren't as good as they are rated, and he would have to down talk some D1 team out there

Good luck getting him, or any other responsible coach at this level, to do that. He is not an idiot and that would be something an idiot would do.

(02-23-2014 09:38 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 08:57 PM)80sTiger Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 01:10 PM)TripleA Wrote:  That was actually an intelligent, well explained, basketball strategy-strewn presser. Completely changed my mind about Pastner's interview skills. For the rest of the year, I really don't give a damn what he says or doesn't say to the media. Just win games. I'm fine with the other stuff now. Not an issue, if it ever was.

Well, this speaks volumes. With you being one of the handful of reasonable posters ever, I guess I have to watch this ...

Don't get your hopes up. We usually come at things from different perspectives, so I'm not sure that presser will hit you the same way. I would be interested to hear back from you on it.

I actually could stand it ... Few thoughts:

1. I like the edge he has during the Q&A. Glad to see him a little ticked. Would like to see that and even more projected to the team's personality. He's obviously weary of being 'second guessed'. It comes with the territory, but he has the right to reply as he wishes. Always respectful and professional as is his character from what I've seen.

2. As always, impressed by his intelligence around mastery of the data. He obviously analyzes key data points and understands some of those are indicative of performance.

3. One critical point - he can't have it both ways. He said the same thing about CUSA being "good teams with good players" and "underrated", etc. Now he alludes to them in the opposite trying to elevate our current conference. I have no problem with promoting the American, but you can't defend struggling against significantly weaker teams by saying "*NOW* we're in a really good conference where everyone's good, when before it was different ..." - when you said the exact same thing before too. What it boils down to is that from an offensive standpoint, I am pretty happy with his references to an "inside-out" strategy ... obviously works well and opens things up for us ... but we have issues stopping people. I'd like to hear him rattle off some statistics around how many layups we give up in a game (or shots *right at the rim*). It seems like a TON. Then follow that up with a stat of how many fouls our bigs get because our guards can't/won't/don't-know-how to stay in front of their man. We have defensive issues this year.

Overall, the video seemed much different than most of the post-game stuff I've heard previously before I stopped listening because I just couldn't take it. He actually answered questions that were asked - for the most part.

(02-24-2014 09:04 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(02-23-2014 04:55 PM)tigerjohn Wrote:  Ok just watched it . I like the fire in him but still hear the same thing. Everybody has good players and are well coached.


South Florida 3-11 9.5 12-15
UCF 2-12 10.5 10-15
Temple 2-12 10.5 7-19

This doesn't look like good teams based on what they have done this year.

Like he said, you can't really go by their records this year, some have injuries, some have other issues that have kept them from winning but at this level ALL teams are good and have good talent, if they weren't they'd be division 2 teams. Temple played a great game against us regardless of how they've performed so far this season.

sure, compared to the world as a whole the teams are good, but things don't work that way. Within high-major D1, these teams are not that good.

I get Pastner's reasoning for saying all teams are good, but that doesn't make the statement actually true.

He just talks too much about the same stuff, which leads to over-explaining which leads to saying silly stuff because he's already covered the basics.

If he just said "Temple's talent level isn't indicative of their record. They have a great coach and no reasonable person will argue that Fran Dunphy isn't a great coach. They have been playing much better as the season has progressed, and I would be willing to bet they will be preseason top 3 or 4 in the American next year. Pepper is a heck of a player and those kids came out to play tonight. A win is a win and I'm glad we made it #21 and on to Houston."

No need to start taking about Temple being "elite" (they aren't) or the American being the best conference (it isn't) or that teams 6-10 are better are ALL really good (they aren't). He's like Captain Queeg in that he just doesn't know when to stop talking. He'll learn.

You don't hear Shaka Smart or Kellog pimpin the A-10 in every interview talking about how good George Mason or Fordam really are. They focus on their team.

(02-24-2014 11:59 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  He just talks too much about the same stuff, which leads to over-explaining which leads to saying silly stuff because he's already covered the basics.

If he just said "Temple's talent level isn't indicative of their record. They have a great coach and no reasonable person will argue that Fran Dunphy isn't a great coach. They have been playing much better as the season has progressed, and I would be willing to bet they will be preseason top 3 or 4 in the American next year. Pepper is a heck of a player and those kids came out to play tonight. A win is a win and I'm glad we made it #21 and on to Houston."

No need to start taking about Temple being "elite" (they aren't) or the American being the best conference (it isn't) or that teams 6-10 are better are ALL really good (they aren't). He's like Captain Queeg in that he just doesn't know when to stop talking. He'll learn.

You don't hear Shaka Smart or Kellog pimpin the A-10 in every interview talking about how good George Mason or Fordam really are. They focus on their team.

they are going to come after you for saying that stuff about Josh, Saluki.

Whatever. I could have questioned JP for not getting King some minutes or expressed frustration about not imposing tempo on Temple and (again) letting other teams dictate pace. Another poster did that with little backlash. It was a completely valid point, but the username means so much to some.

Oh well. They got the win over an elite team.

(02-24-2014 12:03 PM)Joe1 Wrote:  

(02-24-2014 11:59 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  He just talks too much about the same stuff, which leads to over-explaining which leads to saying silly stuff because he's already covered the basics.

If he just said "Temple's talent level isn't indicative of their record. They have a great coach and no reasonable person will argue that Fran Dunphy isn't a great coach. They have been playing much better as the season has progressed, and I would be willing to bet they will be preseason top 3 or 4 in the American next year. Pepper is a heck of a player and those kids came out to play tonight. A win is a win and I'm glad we made it #21 and on to Houston."

No need to start taking about Temple being "elite" (they aren't) or the American being the best conference (it isn't) or that teams 6-10 are better are ALL really good (they aren't). He's like Captain Queeg in that he just doesn't know when to stop talking. He'll learn.

You don't hear Shaka Smart or Kellog pimpin the A-10 in every interview talking about how good George Mason or Fordam really are. They focus on their team.

they are going to come after you for saying that stuff about Josh, Saluki.

I don't know who they is but I think it's a reasonable critique and I'll buy it

(02-24-2014 12:12 PM)lenetzach Wrote:  

(02-24-2014 12:03 PM)Joe1 Wrote:  

(02-24-2014 11:59 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  He just talks too much about the same stuff, which leads to over-explaining which leads to saying silly stuff because he's already covered the basics.

If he just said "Temple's talent level isn't indicative of their record. They have a great coach and no reasonable person will argue that Fran Dunphy isn't a great coach. They have been playing much better as the season has progressed, and I would be willing to bet they will be preseason top 3 or 4 in the American next year. Pepper is a heck of a player and those kids came out to play tonight. A win is a win and I'm glad we made it #21 and on to Houston."

No need to start taking about Temple being "elite" (they aren't) or the American being the best conference (it isn't) or that teams 6-10 are better are ALL really good (they aren't). He's like Captain Queeg in that he just doesn't know when to stop talking. He'll learn.

You don't hear Shaka Smart or Kellog pimpin the A-10 in every interview talking about how good George Mason or Fordam really are. They focus on their team.

they are going to come after you for saying that stuff about Josh, Saluki.

I don't know who they is but I think it's a reasonable critique and I'll buy it

Thanks.

I do think Saluki pretty much nailed it. Pastner will figure it out at some point.

Still imho better than "Well when we were at UMass...." for five years.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2