The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-07-2014 03:21 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:05 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  I hope GN is feeling well today.

I'm glad one poster can derail every thread for his own personal agenda. GN shouldn't even have to see this crap.

How can it be a "derail" when one uses the originator's cited article as basis for the point? I just called attention to a different section of that article's discussion and stated why I was concerned by it.

High school coaches are just as aware as college coaches that "you don't produce silk purses from sow's ears". As with college programs , the better secondary school athletes are willing partners in any inducements to encourage the building of top level high school programs in major sports. After all, it is to their benefit to look as good as possible to recruiters from the BCS schools, and they know where to look.

I believe it to be more than "good luck" that the only instate secondary school to have 3 of its athletes signed by AU and UA on Feb.5th was St Paul's somewhere in Mobile.

(03-07-2014 06:29 PM)backyardblazer Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 06:26 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  He doesn't have that bright of a future if he is only willing to take college jobs.

If not college, what type of job should he take?

I left out the word - Top college jobs.

If the guy wants to stay a head coach at a top high school instead of being an assistant at a lower level college program, there's no shame in that.

What he said is he would not consider any job at a lower level college.

The article is nothing more than a sales job by an Alabama loving reporter, promoting this ass for what he believes to be an upcoming opening at either Alabama or Auburn, most likely Alabama.

Given how Barbee has walked out the last couple of post game press, I'd think it would be Auburn first.

(03-08-2014 12:08 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 06:29 PM)backyardblazer Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 06:26 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  He doesn't have that bright of a future if he is only willing to take college jobs.

If not college, what type of job should he take?

I left out the word - Top college jobs.

Yeah.

I've got a news flash for him. Kentucky and Duke don't hire high school coaches.

The college that hires him as a head coach will be desperate.

That's no reflection of his abilities, but rather his seemingly unwillingness to "pay his dues".

Bucky won't leave MB, we have a system setup at the junior high where they play "Bucky Ball" as we call it, so as they get into the JV and Varsity levels they already know what to do. We take A LOT of time off the clock to get the most wide open shot possible(could that work in college, i doubt it), but Bucky is a defensive genius. The MB community has been asking this question for several years. Do I think he goes anywhere soon since I know Bucky, heck no.

(03-07-2014 11:53 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:21 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:05 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  I hope GN is feeling well today.

I'm glad one poster can derail every thread for his own personal agenda. GN shouldn't even have to see this crap.

How can it be a "derail" when one uses the originator's cited article as basis for the point? I just called attention to a different section of that article's discussion and stated why I was concerned by it.

High school coaches are just as aware as college coaches that "you don't produce silk purses from sow's ears". As with college programs , the better secondary school athletes are willing partners in any inducements to encourage the building of top level high school programs in major sports. After all, it is to their benefit to look as good as possible to recruiters from the BCS schools, and they know where to look.

I believe it to be more than "good luck" that the only instate secondary school to have 3 of its athletes signed by AU and UA on Feb.5th was St Paul's somewhere in Mobile.

The topic of the thread was Mtn Brook head coach as a college coach one day. Not, why do all rich, white, suburban schools get all the great, poor, black, athletes and win more games than inner city schools?

It doesn't matter what any thread topic is, you always find a way to make it about rich vs poor. Every, single, MF'n time.

(03-08-2014 11:08 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:53 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:21 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:05 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  I hope GN is feeling well today.

I'm glad one poster can derail every thread for his own personal agenda. GN shouldn't even have to see this crap.

How can it be a "derail" when one uses the originator's cited article as basis for the point? I just called attention to a different section of that article's discussion and stated why I was concerned by it.

High school coaches are just as aware as college coaches that "you don't produce silk purses from sow's ears". As with college programs , the better secondary school athletes are willing partners in any inducements to encourage the building of top level high school programs in major sports. After all, it is to their benefit to look as good as possible to recruiters from the BCS schools, and they know where to look.

I believe it to be more than "good luck" that the only instate secondary school to have 3 of its athletes signed by AU and UA on Feb.5th was St Paul's somewhere in Mobile.

The topic of the thread was Mtn Brook head coach as a college coach one day. Not, why do all rich, white, suburban schools get all the great, poor, black, athletes and win more games than inner city schools?

It doesn't matter what any thread topic is, you always find a way to make it about rich vs poor. Every, single, MF'n time.

Rich vs poor is what it's about in America and particularly in Alabama. "Class warfare"? That fight is over and the rich won -- AGAIN. "Income redistribution"? The stats all show that the top 10% got 90% of all growth in real income over the last half century. You don't like facts that displease you? Ignore them or call the statisticians liars. Continue to claim it all irrelevant that the upper income suburban schools dominate in the main sports. Hoover and Mountain Brook - and other similar schools around Alabama - continue each year to produce the great majority of players rated at the top of their sports. It's all just a happy coincidence - right?

You are right. It is an outrage that the rich dominate sports. It is a shame that there are no poor people who play in the NBA or NFL. They should allow poor people to play in the NBA and NFL. No they only allow the rich to play. Outrageous.

so you're mad that we had one black player on our team this year? Patrick Keim was the best player on the team.

(03-08-2014 02:36 PM)UABrandon Wrote:  so you're mad that we had one black player on our team this year? Patrick Keim was the best player on the team.

I think its mad that rich mt brook residents paying for players

Agreed, it's hilarious to see Mountain Brook flaunt their new school spirit as a basketball powerhouse with "Spartan Swag," when all it took was getting a couple of good players from Midfield some new housing acclamations, assuming they are more than a mailbox.

(03-08-2014 02:04 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  You are right. It is an outrage that the rich dominate sports. It is a shame that there are no poor people who play in the NBA or NFL. They should allow poor people to play in the NBA and NFL. No they only allow the rich to play. Outrageous.

That's right!! Every NBA or NFL team located in Alabama only signs players from rich university athletic programs which recruit primarily from suburban high schools with well financed athletic programs. And don't leave out the NHL teams in Alabama either.

The days of the Bobby Humphreys and Lee Roy Jordans from 1A or 2A class schools appears to be over. If a kid can't play for a Prattville, Auburn, Daphne, Madison Academy or Hoover type school's program, too bad, so sad.

NHL teams in Alabama? Wut?

(03-07-2014 11:16 AM)blazerjay Wrote:  

Quote:Mountain Brook plays in front of a big high school crowd most nights. The fan interest then explodes in the playoffs.

“I don’t know many college teams that are fortunate enough to play in front of 13,000 fans all dressed up in crazy neon,” McMillan said. “I love Mountain Brook.

13,000? Really? I would like to see the building in Mt. Brook that could hold a crowd that large.

There's no Southern Baptist church in Mountain Brook?

(03-08-2014 05:11 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 02:04 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  You are right. It is an outrage that the rich dominate sports. It is a shame that there are no poor people who play in the NBA or NFL. They should allow poor people to play in the NBA and NFL. No they only allow the rich to play. Outrageous.

That's right!! Every NBA or NFL team located in Alabama only signs players from rich university athletic programs which recruit primarily from suburban high schools with well financed athletic programs. And don't leave out the NHL teams in Alabama either.

The days of the Bobby Humphreys and Lee Roy Jordans from 1A or 2A class schools appears to be over. If a kid can't play for a Prattville, Auburn, Daphne, Madison Academy or Hoover type school's program, too bad, so sad.

I had to laugh. You realize MA is about a quarter of the size of those other schools? Unless you count down to the kindergarteners. Up until 5 years ago they were average at best. They made a commitment around 2008 and hired an outstanding coach and put a lot of resources into it.

(03-08-2014 11:08 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:53 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:21 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:05 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  I hope GN is feeling well today.

I'm glad one poster can derail every thread for his own personal agenda. GN shouldn't even have to see this crap.

How can it be a "derail" when one uses the originator's cited article as basis for the point? I just called attention to a different section of that article's discussion and stated why I was concerned by it.

High school coaches are just as aware as college coaches that "you don't produce silk purses from sow's ears". As with college programs , the better secondary school athletes are willing partners in any inducements to encourage the building of top level high school programs in major sports. After all, it is to their benefit to look as good as possible to recruiters from the BCS schools, and they know where to look.

I believe it to be more than "good luck" that the only instate secondary school to have 3 of its athletes signed by AU and UA on Feb.5th was St Paul's somewhere in Mobile.

The topic of the thread was Mtn Brook head coach as a college coach one day. Not, why do all rich, white, suburban schools get all the great, poor, black, athletes and win more games than inner city schools?

It doesn't matter what any thread topic is, you always find a way to make it about rich vs poor. Every, single, MF'n time.

Cut him some slack...he doesn't always make it about rich vs poor...sometimes he just makes it about The Bear

(03-08-2014 07:46 PM)biglizard Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 05:11 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 02:04 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  You are right. It is an outrage that the rich dominate sports. It is a shame that there are no poor people who play in the NBA or NFL. They should allow poor people to play in the NBA and NFL. No they only allow the rich to play. Outrageous.

That's right!! Every NBA or NFL team located in Alabama only signs players from rich university athletic programs which recruit primarily from suburban high schools with well financed athletic programs. And don't leave out the NHL teams in Alabama either.

The days of the Bobby Humphreys and Lee Roy Jordans from 1A or 2A class schools appears to be over. If a kid can't play for a Prattville, Auburn, Daphne, Madison Academy or Hoover type school's program, too bad, so sad.

I had to laugh. You realize MA is about a quarter of the size of those other schools? Unless you count down to the kindergarteners. Up until 5 years ago they were average at best. They made a commitme80nt around 2008 and hired an outstanding coach and put a lot of resources into it.

they also bought some players that turned the basketball team from a team that would get to maybe the second round of the playoffs to a team that won back to back state championships. its nothing new in the state. Thompson high school won a state football championship in the early 80s that way.
Its also not always the boosters buying players. I played at Pelham and we had a very good kicker who's father rented an apartment in Vestavia (that remained vacant) so his son could improve his chances at getting a scholarship.

(03-08-2014 01:51 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-08-2014 11:08 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 11:53 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:21 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(03-07-2014 03:05 PM)the_blazerman Wrote:  I hope GN is feeling well today.

I'm glad one poster can derail every thread for his own personal agenda. GN shouldn't even have to see this crap.

How can it be a "derail" when one uses the originator's cited article as basis for the point? I just called attention to a different section of that article's discussion and stated why I was concerned by it.

High school coaches are just as aware as college coaches that "you don't produce silk purses from sow's ears". As with college programs , the better secondary school athletes are willing partners in any inducements to encourage the building of top level high school programs in major sports. After all, it is to their benefit to look as good as possible to recruiters from the BCS schools, and they know where to look.

I believe it to be more than "good luck" that the only instate secondary school to have 3 of its athletes signed by AU and UA on Feb.5th was St Paul's somewhere in Mobile.

The topic of the thread was Mtn Brook head coach as a college coach one day. Not, why do all rich, white, suburban schools get all the great, poor, black, athletes and win more games than inner city schools?

It doesn't matter what any thread topic is, you always find a way to make it about rich vs poor. Every, single, MF'n time.

Rich vs poor is what it's about in America and particularly in Alabama. "Class warfare"? That fight is over and the rich won -- AGAIN. "Income redistribution"? The stats all show that the top 10% got 90% of all growth in real income over the last half century. You don't like facts that displease you? Ignore them or call the statisticians liars. Continue to claim it all irrelevant that the upper income suburban schools dominate in the main sports. Hoover and Mountain Brook - and other similar schools around Alabama - continue each year to produce the great majority of players rated at the top of their sports. It's all just a happy coincidence - right?

I'm not fighting numbers with you because you aren't good with them.

My point was you derailed a thread with your agenda once again.. I don't care how right or wrong you are. We all know how you feel we don't need to read it in every thread.