(07-06-2017 11:41 AM)Aargh Wrote:  Alabama offered Marshall $4.2 mill a year. They didn't get him. He turned down UCLA. Some programs (Texas, Kansas) won't consider him because his "attitude" wouldn't fit well in their athletic department. Marshall likes being the big dog in the department, so he wouldn't be real happy at a school where FB was king. Duke and UNC are both likely to replace coaches with someone from their own coaching tree. Kentucky might be tempting, but Marshall wouldn't do well with one-and-done players.

Marshall is one of the top-10 paid coaches in the nation. He's happy in Wichita. He has some baggage that some programs don't want. He lives in a semi-rural area. His house overlooks the fairway of Wichita's most exclusivwe country club. His house is the biggest in that development. He's a 15-minute drive from his office.

The one thing that was most likely to lure him away from WSU was being in the MVC. A 30-win team getting a 10 seed and getting Kentucky 2 out of 3 years in the round of 32 isn't appealing to a coach.

If Marshall should leave, WSU is a national brand with a history of paying premium prices for a successful coach. There would probably be a pretty solid list of applicants. I don't have the names or links right now, but Marshall leads all active coaches in having his former assistants being the head coach at a D1 school. Marshall has the largest coaching tree among active D1 basketbvall coaches.

Marshall, like Few, maybe one of the small number of coaches preferring to build his own legacy rather than follow in the footsteps of Blueblood legends. Good for him and WSU fans.

(07-05-2017 03:46 PM)FlyingTiger2016 Wrote:  Most Memphis fans are excited about David Nickelberry. He's the only AAC player to get invited to last years U18 national team camp. [1]

[1] - https://www.usab.com/news-events/news/20...begin.aspx

Quinton Rose was at the U19 camp. Unfortunately, despite being the best player there, he didn't make the team because he wasn't going to Kentucky, or wasn't being recruited by Kentucky.

https://www.usab.com/news-events/news/20...itees.aspx

(07-06-2017 12:49 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 11:31 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:56 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-05-2017 12:02 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  1. I have been skeptical of Tubby's hire from the start, but I want him to succeed (like all Tiger fans). I think he should be given more time to prove his worth, but meanwhile I do not think he should be immune to criticism like you seem to imply.

2. In effect, Keelon was demoted because he wanted the AC job and Tubby promoted his son instead. I think it is safe to state that Keelon was unhappy based on events later in the season, lol.

If you wish, I will be happy to continue this discussion, but I recommend taking it to the Tiger Forum.

I appreciate your insights and thank you for sharing it in a civil manner.

1. You were negative about Pastner's successor 2 years before Pastner left.

2. Keelon was NOT demoted, and he also pulled crap from the first day, so late season events couldn't be the cause for those things.

3. I don't post on the Tigers forum, precisely b/c I have to endure such negativity. Not healthy, nor fun.

Negativity balanced with objective analysis is fine. Persistent negativity 100% is a waste of my time. I'm out.

The first point is false.

IMO, Keelon was (in effect) demoted. I agree he was not technically demoted, but the effect was the same as a demotion since he was re-hired at a support position rather than the AC position that went to Tubby's son.

I hope you will reconsider posting on the Tiger Forum. I think you will find that not all the posts are negative, although criticism of Tubby's actions are present. Anyway, you are missed.

I disagree. You were posting strict standards for Pastner's successor as soon as Pastner got in trouble, which was 2 years before he left.

Keelon got a raise from $100K a year as an assistant to $120K as DBO. How is that a demotion for a man who didn't have a job in between, b/c his coach left and didn't take Keelon with him?

Tubby has every right to hire Saul, whether it is a good move or not. He will eventually be judged on results.

And you still are completely ignoring the things Keelon did to upset the cart, and I know you know some of them.

I am familiar (understandably) with the nature of my posts, but I befuddled by your statement about "strict standards." The theme behind my posts concerning Pastner's successor was we should hire someone with a reasonable expectation of surpassing Pastner's results. My focus was and is on performance.

It was a demotion (in effect) because an AC position is a higher position than a DBO. Instead of hiring Keelon as the AC and thus being in a better position to secure Keelon's quartet of talented sons, Tubby hired his own son whose main public splash was wading in D-2 waters.

It is too soon to make final judgements about Tubby's performance, but in the meantime I think it is appropriate to discuss his decisions and actions.

I am aware of rumors (not facts) about Keelon's behavior. I have also heard rumors (not facts) about Tubby and his loyal staff's behavior toward Keelon. Regardless, Tubby should have either hire Keelon as the AC or not hire him at all. The result of Tubby's decision was unfavorable to the program (to put it mildly).

I think we are at the point of repetition of our respective opinions. Let's just agree to respectfully disagree.

Smh

(07-03-2017 11:35 AM)Nevadanatural Wrote:  I think folks are underestimating Tulsa also. They have some talented kids who spent much of last season getting to know each other. They added a couple of good players to shore up weak spots and with an extra year to learn each other's moves plus strength training I think they will look like a different squad.

I am looking forward to seeing a stout team with more cohesiveness.
This could be a special year for us.

(07-07-2017 02:32 PM)TCH51 Wrote:  

(07-03-2017 11:35 AM)Nevadanatural Wrote:  I think folks are underestimating Tulsa also. They have some talented kids who spent much of last season getting to know each other. They added a couple of good players to shore up weak spots and with an extra year to learn each other's moves plus strength training I think they will look like a different squad.

I am looking forward to seeing a stout team with more cohesiveness.
This could be a special year for us.

I really think Tulsa, UCF, Houston, Temple and UConn are going to make a very formidable middle of the pack. As in, at-large quality middle of pack. Not all of them, but I could see 3 of them being decent, and 2 of them being at-large quality. The bigger that middle gets in this league, the more bids we'll have. If most of that group, plus WSU/UC/SMU can have good-great non-con performances, your teams finishing with 10-12 conference wins start having a shot at the NCAAs.

(07-07-2017 02:42 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 02:32 PM)TCH51 Wrote:  

(07-03-2017 11:35 AM)Nevadanatural Wrote:  I think folks are underestimating Tulsa also. They have some talented kids who spent much of last season getting to know each other. They added a couple of good players to shore up weak spots and with an extra year to learn each other's moves plus strength training I think they will look like a different squad.

I am looking forward to seeing a stout team with more cohesiveness.
This could be a special year for us.

I really think Tulsa, UCF, Houston, Temple and UConn are going to make a very formidable middle of the pack. As in, at-large quality middle of pack. Not all of them, but I could see 3 of them being decent, and 2 of them being at-large quality. The bigger that middle gets in this league, the more bids we'll have. If most of that group, plus WSU/UC/SMU can have good-great non-con performances, your teams finishing with 10-12 conference wins start having a shot at the NCAAs.

I hope it works that way rather than the larger middle bringing down the top tier. Not really bringing the top tier down but rather giving the P5 (which doesn't exist in MBB) lovers an excuse to again keep the AAC in their assigned station, not extending deserved bids, etc.

(07-07-2017 04:45 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 02:42 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 02:32 PM)TCH51 Wrote:  

(07-03-2017 11:35 AM)Nevadanatural Wrote:  I think folks are underestimating Tulsa also. They have some talented kids who spent much of last season getting to know each other. They added a couple of good players to shore up weak spots and with an extra year to learn each other's moves plus strength training I think they will look like a different squad.

I am looking forward to seeing a stout team with more cohesiveness.
This could be a special year for us.

I really think Tulsa, UCF, Houston, Temple and UConn are going to make a very formidable middle of the pack. As in, at-large quality middle of pack. Not all of them, but I could see 3 of them being decent, and 2 of them being at-large quality. The bigger that middle gets in this league, the more bids we'll have. If most of that group, plus WSU/UC/SMU can have good-great non-con performances, your teams finishing with 10-12 conference wins start having a shot at the NCAAs.

I hope it works that way rather than the larger middle bringing down the top tier. Not really bringing the top tier down but rather giving the P5 (which doesn't exist in MBB) lovers an excuse to again keep the AAC in their assigned station, not extending desrved bids, etc.

Either is possible. I think the middle will be strong enough to hand out losses to the top. So in that way, it could hurt. The important part is everybody racking up the wins in the non-conference.