(03-01-2015 10:09 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  Was it also the coach and system, then, that had us ahead for most of the game?

I don't really understand the logic sometimes-- if the players don't play hard and can't hang physically, then it's evidence the coach can't get the players to play for him and therefore sucks. But if the players DO play hard and DO make a good showing athletically, it's evidence they're actually better players and the coach and his system sucks by not getting more out of them.

I personally believe there is a LOT of confirmation bias going on when discussing the coach. Confirmation bias is natural. It's what makes us believe that every charge on us should've been a block, and every block on us should'e been a charge.

But it's not rational. Pastner's personality seems soft, so people watch the games expecting the team to be soft, and will find evidence of that anywhere, and unconsciously miss any evidence to the contrary. He was inexperienced when he got the job, so they STILL watch the games expecting to see him get outcoached, and will only see evidence of that even if an equal or greater amount of evidence to the contrary exists.

The coach and the system didn't make Austin get hurt. We got beat. We're not very good this year, especially without Austin. Deep down, most of us probably knew that was going to be the case from the very beginning of the season, before the first game.

We've actually come a LONG way from the team that lost to CBU, if you really look at how this team has developed. We went from "Couldn't beat a middling Division II team" to "compete with ranked teams and hang tough with the conference leaders".

So this is what has become of my BELOVED TIGERS If we all watched the same game, then the errors are on the players, but what about defenses and offensive plays. Demanding players to follow your commands is on the coach, there should not have been a three taken in the last 8mins of the first half. Two bigs out for Tulsa and we're jacking up threes, when we were killing on the inside. Coach should insist inside, no demand that they go inside. But AN runs the court, set down on the block and MC is more concerned with running a play than taking advantage of the post. A. Woodson wasted scholly, but 32mins of nothing, yet coach keeps him playing. They recruited these guys and now sell this down year . They are what you see and there will be no change till there is a change. CJP selling that, "get us this year, cause next year we'll be.... I say BS as long as he is here. So yes the players make the boneheaded plays, but I'm sick of the lost and clueless looks on defense, you know the ones where CJP holds up the card and suddenly the opposing player go to the paint for a lay-up. So is it really the players fault for playing the way the coach coaches? Just Sayin

Look, if you think all of this is NOT coaching or recruiting, then what is it? Don't say rebuilding, either. We lost to a Stephen Austin team at HOME and compare the recruiting stats on us vs them. Memphis would not have bothered to look at any SFA players during recruiting.

Uhmm... you cant get swept TWICE in the same year. Just sayin.

2 other stats to add:

Most home losses in 1 season since 2004.
- Worst avg home attendance in 15 years.

Those of you that want Josh gone and think Memphis can get a good coach who the heck do you think that is?

Pearl haha he isn't leaving auburn. Marshall I don't know if Memphis is even a better job right now. Smart he's already turned down better jobs.

Seriously who do you think would leave their job right now and come take this one. There is a reason nobody wanted it after Cal.

(03-01-2015 10:59 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:47 AM)M_Tiger Wrote:  Look, if you think all of this is NOT coaching or recruiting, then what is it?

Basketball?

Roy Williams has missed the tournament at North Carolina recently. Billy Donavan missed it for several years at Florida. UCLA was pretty bad for a recent stretch of several years. It happens. Good programs have down years. Good and even great coaches (not necessarily saying Pastner is either one) sometimes have down years and miss the tournament.

Injuries happen. Defections happen. Over-hyped players happen. Players that just turn out to be a poor fit for the system happen. Bad luck happens. Distractions happen.

It's basketball.

Look, anyone who came to the Tigers during the Calipari years has got to realize what a historical anomaly that run was.

This is going to ruffle some feathers, but-- historically, we're a program that hangs NIT banners. That hurts to say, but it's true. We've had greatness over our history, are probably a top 30 program all-time, but we are not Duke, Kansas, or UNC-- and even those programs have down years.

It's very rare that we've been able to succeed at an elite level without some form of cheating (probably true of most elite programs, to tell the truth). I think we can. We've got the facilities, we've got the history, we've got the fan base, etc. Maybe Pastner isn't the right guy. But to act like he's abnormally bad is just foolish. He's not.

Top 10 wins all time through 6 seasons as a D1 head coach. Top 5 all time in win total among Tiger coaches. Best win percentage of any coach in Tiger history (Calipari included). 5 NCAA tournament appearances in a row. No ethical black eyes on the program.

If you look at those measurables, it's hard to argue that he has been an "awful" coach for us.

We haven't had an exciting post-season deep run. That's true, and it sucks. But it's been roughly 10 years between good runs for us in the 64-team era, so that's also not a real anomaly.

Really? Roy Williams has won titles and make it far in NCAAs. Same with Billy Donavan, Jim Boheim, etc. Yes, they all have had bad years. But they have all had great years to offset it.

- How long was Roy Williams at UNC before he won a national title?

- Review the complete resumes on the coaches you mentioned, along with Pastner. If you can really state after that it's "just basketball", then there is no further use debating this.

- There are too many bullet points listed at the beginning of this thread to say we don't have a problem....read over those points again. Too many things that we haven't had happen in 20+ years....and they have all happened this year.

- And, Pastner has had 6 years to show something. If you're happy with what he's done and how the team is at this stage of his tenure, then you're happy with mediocrity and there's no use debating.

- but until the university gets serious about the bball program again, my season tix are available for purchase.

As for coaching last night wasn't coaching. The reason why we look so lost on offense a lot of the times is because we don't have a point guard. You give any team in the country our point guards and you'll see the exact same stuff.

Austin going down was a killer and yet with him going down we were able to build a 9 point lead. I guess that was just the players and Josh had absolutely zero to do with that.

I guess against south Florida a few weeks ago when we went to zone in the second half and buried them that was all the players Josh had nothing to do with that.

I'm not saying Josh isn't to blame, because there is blame to go around, but some you dislike him so much that you see what you want to see just to suit your opinions

(03-01-2015 11:17 AM)tigers0830 Wrote:  Those of you that want Josh gone and think Memphis can get a good coach who the heck do you think that is?

Pearl haha he isn't leaving auburn. Marshall I don't know if Memphis is even a better job right now. Smart he's already turned down better jobs.

Seriously who do you think would leave their job right now and come take this one. There is a reason nobody wanted it after Cal.

Yes there were reasons: 1) we were under investigation by the NCAA with sanctions waiting. (This is presumably no longer the case. 2) we played in CUSA (AAC ain't what it was last year and it isn't what the Big East was, but it IS an improvement in this area). 3) Good rule for CEOs, high profile leaders, etc One never wants to be the guy who follows the legend. You ALWAYs want to be the guy who follows the guy who followed the legend. (Stepping into Cal's shoes is a totally different job than stepping into Pastner's shoes. KY, DUKE, Mich St will all learn this in time, for further reference see UNC post smith.)

None of these barriers are present anymore, and this is a very competitive and attractive job. We can improve our position here, frankly given the lack of growth from Pastner and it would almost be impossible not to. We will find out in 13 months.

It's going to be a very long three years.

(03-01-2015 10:35 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  The thing is, I watch and I come to many of the opposite conclusions.

We both have the things we expect to see, and we see those things and somehow miss the others.

It's not "intellectually dishonest" to bring confirmation bias into it. We're humans. It's inevitable. And the phenomenon is NOT limited only to scientific studies. It's a fact of life that we all deal with every day. It's why political and religious discussions get the way they do. It's a fundamental part of human behavior.

I'm actually not trying to be a Pastner apologist-- results speak louder than anything, and we have not been a good enough postseason team. But LAST NIGHT we did not look like a poorly coached team to me.

Then let's just say our opinions differ. When you sling about the term confirmation bias it implies one side is wrong. Two reasonable people can witness the same set of events and come to dramatically different conclusions without anchoring or confirmation bias.

(03-01-2015 10:59 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:47 AM)M_Tiger Wrote:  Look, if you think all of this is NOT coaching or recruiting, then what is it?

Basketball?

Roy Williams has missed the tournament at North Carolina recently. Billy Donavan missed it for several years at Florida. UCLA was pretty bad for a recent stretch of several years. It happens. Good programs have down years. Good and even great coaches (not necessarily saying Pastner is either one) sometimes have down years and miss the tournament.

Injuries happen. Defections happen. Over-hyped players happen. Players that just turn out to be a poor fit for the system happen. Bad luck happens. Distractions happen.

It's basketball.

Look, anyone who came to the Tigers during the Calipari years has got to realize what a historical anomaly that run was.

This is going to ruffle some feathers, but-- historically, we're a program that hangs NIT banners. That hurts to say, but it's true. We've had greatness over our history, are probably a top 30 program all-time, but we are not Duke, Kansas, or UNC-- and even those programs have down years.

It's very rare that we've been able to succeed at an elite level without some form of cheating (probably true of most elite programs, to tell the truth). I think we can. We've got the facilities, we've got the history, we've got the fan base, etc. Maybe Pastner isn't the right guy. But to act like he's abnormally bad is just foolish. He's not.

Top 10 wins all time through 6 seasons as a D1 head coach. Top 5 all time in win total among Tiger coaches. Best win percentage of any coach in Tiger history (Calipari included). 5 NCAA tournament appearances in a row. No ethical black eyes on the program.

If you look at those measurables, it's hard to argue that he has been an "awful" coach for us.

We haven't had an exciting post-season deep run. That's true, and it sucks. But it's been roughly 10 years between good runs for us in the 64-team era, so that's also not a real anomaly.

the first thing to be aware of is that you are now running down the program to defend the coach. Ask yourself if a good coach should ever put you in that position.

I would point to Dana Kirk's hiring as the start of the modern era of tiger basketball. That happened in 1979. Since that time we have made the NCAA tournament 21 times and the NIT 8 times and missed the postseason 6 times. 21/35.

Your contention that "historically we are a team that has hung NIT banners" is absurd. The average year for this program is the NCAA tournament, no matter what was hanging from the rafters in the pyramid

(03-01-2015 11:48 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 11:45 AM)jgardne Wrote:  Then let's just say our opinions differ. When you sling about the term confirmation bias it implies one side is wrong.

Couldn't be further from the truth. What it implies (or more accurately, states outright) is that NOBODY has an unbiased view. I know what I expect to see, so I interpret the evidence through that lens. You know what you expect to see, and you interpret the evidence through that lens.

Neither of us are infallible, and neither of us are immune to confirmation bias. Nobody is. It's part of human nature. Citing confirmation bias isn't some sort of ad-hominem. I'm not "slinging it around" as a means to impugn the credibility of another person. I bring it up as a reminder that NONE of us are capable of seeing this truly objectively. It's actually beyond our mental capacities as humans.

Rather than denying that, I think it's sane to be as aware of it as possible at all times. It's a complicating factor in ANY subjective evaluation by humans. It's a built-in error to which nobody is immune.

Keeping that in mind (and part of the discussion) can actually help us step back, I feel, and find common ground (as opposed to just thinking one another are idiots)

Quote:Two reasonable people can witness the same set of events and come to dramatically different conclusions without anchoring or confirmation bias.

I'd disagree. I'd say that each person's confirmation bias is precisely WHY two people can witness the same evidence and come to dramatically different conclusions. In fact, that's built right into the definition of "confirmation bias."

To use the term confirmation bias, you are stating a predetermined conclusion was used to interpret events and filter them in such a way to make the results fit the pre-existing belief

I am saying that people are interpreting these events with an open mind and coming to the conclusion from an unbiased starting point, which was the beginning of the Pastner era. Do you see the difference?

People filter experience through their own unique worldview, that is why they come to different conclusions. It's not "confirmation bias."

(03-01-2015 10:21 AM)jgardne Wrote:  The confirmation bias argument is silly. We're not allowed to look for evidence to support our viewpoint or we're being biased? And it's just bias that makes us think that a charge should be a block or vice versa.

Every time I watch the team we seem chaotic and unstructured. Our offense is haphazard and we have frequent mental lapses on defense. Of course we have good offensive and defensive possessions but its not the majority of the time.

Every time I watch us against the American, despite how bad our guards are we look like the more talented team. We're bigger and more skilled inside and have bigger guards. Except maybe smu we should be beating all these other teams in the American. It's all coaching. You give an average coach our talent and he's finishing 1st or 2nd. we don't have the major talent advantage we did last year, just a very modest one, and pastner can't get it done consistently unless his team is waaay better

Whoa dere! +bigXII. ....^ This guy!......is a "realist"

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(03-01-2015 12:11 PM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 11:58 AM)jgardne Wrote:  To use the term confirmation bias, you are stating a predetermined conclusion was used to interpret events and filter them in such a way to make the results fit the pre-existing belief

I am saying that people are interpreting these events with an open mind and coming to the conclusion from an unbiased starting point, which was the beginning of the Pastner era. Do you see the difference?

People filter experience through their own unique worldview, that is why they come to different conclusions. It's not "confirmation bias."

What I'm saying is that "open-mindedness" is almost always an illusion (or self-delusion) where humans are concerned. I don't think anyone is immune. We view things within the context of what we already believe. We're pattern-seeking creatures. It's just what we do.

Yup. lol. It's what separates us from the animals. Animals in the wild don't decide beforehand what they believe in, or what they want to happen.

The older ones have past experiences which trigger physical reactions that get them some food or keep them from being food.

All I know is, this tiger's hongry..lol.

It was probably more apparent live than on television.

Pastner was coaching his ass off.

Especially after Nichols went down, Tulsa, for a rare time, had better players...not likely to happen much, but at that point they did. They start five Juniors, so next season should be fighting for the top of the league, as will we.

After losing Nichols, coach and players worked hard, coached hard. Kedren yet to break the habit of looseness...in spite of improving greatly. Sure, want to blame that on Pastner, that is a reasonable stance. Although lots of good players make mistakes. King's immediate turnover after that also hurt. Tulsa kid made two contested threes down the stretch and our kids missed way too many free throws keeping the door open. Reasonable again to blame that on Pastner, maybe not practicing them enough.

In the last two games, it is extremely arguable Memphis wins them, over the too two teams in the league this year, absent tough luck injuries, let alone the fifth foul on Kedren.

This hump is easier to get over, and probably will many more times next year. Last two season Pastner had really experienced point guard play, team was NCAA tournament locks, beat six ranked opponents, won thirty games, knocked off the defending champion a few times and won a couple of NCAA tourney games. Also fell short of reaching elite, something you can seize on if you choose, or lost a few too many games by wide margins something else. But there is a helluva lot of good stuff in there that bodes very well for next year.

Try and enjoy it.

Tulsa kid had a pretty bad turnover late in that game too.

It happens.

King played his heart out...all our junk yard tigers did.

I so wanted him to make that shot for the win.

I can't pin this on Pastner.

If we had hit a few more free throws and one maybe 2 less turnovers we win the game.

(03-01-2015 10:59 AM)NJ1 Wrote:  

(03-01-2015 10:47 AM)M_Tiger Wrote:  Look, if you think all of this is NOT coaching or recruiting, then what is it?

Basketball?

Roy Williams has missed the tournament at North Carolina recently. Billy Donavan missed it for several years at Florida. UCLA was pretty bad for a recent stretch of several years. It happens. Good programs have down years. Good and even great coaches (not necessarily saying Pastner is either one) sometimes have down years and miss the tournament.

Injuries happen. Defections happen. Over-hyped players happen. Players that just turn out to be a poor fit for the system happen. Bad luck happens. Distractions happen.

It's basketball.

Look, anyone who came to the Tigers during the Calipari years has got to realize what a historical anomaly that run was.

This is going to ruffle some feathers, but-- historically, we're a program that hangs NIT banners. That hurts to say, but it's true. We've had greatness over our history, are probably a top 30 program all-time, but we are not Duke, Kansas, or UNC-- and even those programs have down years.

It's very rare that we've been able to succeed at an elite level without some form of cheating (probably true of most elite programs, to tell the truth). I think we can. We've got the facilities, we've got the history, we've got the fan base, etc. Maybe Pastner isn't the right guy. But to act like he's abnormally bad is just foolish. He's not.

Top 10 wins all time through 6 seasons as a D1 head coach. Top 5 all time in win total among Tiger coaches. Best win percentage of any coach in Tiger history (Calipari included). 5 NCAA tournament appearances in a row. No ethical black eyes on the program.

If you look at those measurables, it's hard to argue that he has been an "awful" coach for us.

We haven't had an exciting post-season deep run. That's true, and it sucks. But it's been roughly 10 years between good runs for us in the 64-team era, so that's also not a real anomaly.

While there are certainly many who were first exposed to the program in the late 2000s, your overall response sells Memphis a bit short.

We are not North Carolina or Kansas, but we have been better than your response implies. And while even now our teams have been pretty good...down this season...but frustratingly short if elite, added experience by coaches, players and the like nodes very well as soon as next year.

Funny is, point has been an issue. More in shape Kedren etc...will address that pretty nicely. Looking forward to it.

(03-01-2015 10:45 AM)M_Tiger Wrote:  Man, you Pasterettes kill me. Wasn't coaching? In OT, Shaq going in to double coverage to take an ill shot when 2 guards were wide open, only to have a confused Memphis defense give up a wide open 3 on the next possession. And those aren't my words, that came from both announcers live in the game.

Shaq shoudn't have to be coached not to force a shot against a double team. Common sense should take over at some point.