(11-27-2012 04:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-27-2012 12:45 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Coach Floyd is bringing better recruits than Barbee and Gillispie combined.

Really?

Which one's are those because I only know of one that is considered great but hasn't set foot on a college court yet.

I remember John Bomba was supposed to be a great recruit too.

Bomba was a 4-5 star recruit?

The only thing ruining UTEP athletics, are fans (alleged) like you.

Fitbud is so hilarious. Stupid, but funny nonetheless.

(11-28-2012 12:28 AM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  

(11-27-2012 04:44 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-27-2012 12:45 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Coach Floyd is bringing better recruits than Barbee and Gillispie combined.

Really?

Which one's are those because I only know of one that is considered great but hasn't set foot on a college court yet.

I remember John Bomba was supposed to be a great recruit too.

Bomba was a 4-5 star recruit?

The only thing ruining UTEP athletics, are fans (alleged) like you.

John Bomba may not have been a blue chipper but he was a highly regarded 7 foot center at the time.

He never panned out.

The point being is that we can get great recruits that don't pan out and we can get diamonds in the rough as well.

It comes down to how they play on the court.

John Bomba may not have been a blue chipper but he was a highly regarded 7 foot center at the time.

He never panned out.

The point being is that we can get great recruits that don't pan out and we can get diamonds in the rough as well.

It comes down to how they play on the court.

The point is...

Well, the point changes to suit your needs as your points get shredded for inaccuracies.

(11-28-2012 11:44 AM)mistabinks Wrote:  The point is...

Well, the point changes to suit your needs as your points get shredded for inaccuracies.

I'm simply giving my opinion.

Recruits still have to prove themselves on the court.


What exactly is inaccurate about my opinion?

I am sure your browser works similar to mine. You can review all the threads, including this one, where your posts are shredded and you have to change your point to keep your head above water. Then again, after your points are shredded, you resort to saying its just your opinion.

(11-28-2012 02:28 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  I am sure your browser works similar to mine. You can review all the threads, including this one, where your posts are shredded and you have to change your point to keep your head above water. Then again, after your points are shredded, you resort to saying its just your opinion.

That is exactly why I post on this forum. I want to present alternative opinions and see if I can back it up with facts.

Call it an intellectual exercise.

The only thing lacking is alternative positions.

I eagerly await your alternative.

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-28-2012 02:28 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  I am sure your browser works similar to mine. You can review all the threads, including this one, where your posts are shredded and you have to change your point to keep your head above water. Then again, after your points are shredded, you resort to saying its just your opinion.

That is exactly why I post on this forum. I want to present alternative opinions and see if I can back it up with facts.

Call it an intellectual exercise.

The only thing lacking is alternative positions.

I eagerly await your alternative.

The last card in the deck of the uber-troll is the "alternative opinions/alternative exercise" joker.

Well played, Fit, well played indeed.

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-28-2012 02:28 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  I am sure your browser works similar to mine. You can review all the threads, including this one, where your posts are shredded and you have to change your point to keep your head above water. Then again, after your points are shredded, you resort to saying its just your opinion.

That is exactly why I post on this forum. I want to present alternative opinions and see if I can back it up with facts.

Call it an intellectual exercise.

The only thing lacking is alternative positions.

I eagerly await your alternative.

oh fck....... really??????

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  That is exactly why I post on this forum. I want to present alternative opinions and see if I can back it up with facts.

You have a better chance at winning the powerball tonight.

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Call it an intellectual exercise.

I hope you were at least decent at physical exercises. You are not so hot at the intellectual ones.

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I eagerly await your alternative.

I bet.

(11-28-2012 05:48 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  That is exactly why I post on this forum. I want to present alternative opinions and see if I can back it up with facts.

You have a better chance at winning the powerball tonight.

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Call it an intellectual exercise.

I hope you were at least decent at physical exercises. You are not so hot at the intellectual ones.

(11-28-2012 03:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I eagerly await your alternative.

I bet.

I understand that my positions are unpopular.

However, that does not mean that the facts are incorrect.

It is 100% true that the difference between DC and AM was only two points.

It is also not out of the question that Floyd's first team would have done better if he had kept Moultree.

So I'm not sure what it is you have a problem with.

It's one thing to say that you disagree with my assessment but it's another to dismiss it and say there is nothing behind it.

So now it's about AM? Because before you were talking about Dante.

(11-29-2012 05:56 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  So now it's about AM? Because before you were talking about Dante.

Most people would agree that Culpepper was the best player on the team and DC was the second best player. I'm simply pointing out that AM was a good enough player to replace at least the points per game that DC gave the team.

If AM had stayed on the team, and Floyd had simply run Barbee's offense, they would have at least won CUSA and made the tournament.

We did neither.

You didn't see that season as a disappointment?

Your claim was that Coach Floyd underachieved with a championship team.

I disagreed simply because Coach Floyd didn't inherit the championship team. It was missing it's biggest impact player - DC.

Randy Culpepper, as a junior, was absolutely not a bigger offensive threat than DC. Randy was never tripled teamed. Regardless of who was technically a better player doesn't matter. Coach Floyd did not inherit the whole team. Any point you try to make about AM is purely speculation. Also, you do not speak for "most people." You speak for yourself. You think Cupepper was the best player. That is all you can say. You do not represent "most people."

(11-30-2012 04:26 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Your claim was that Coach Floyd underachieved with a championship team.

I disagreed simply because Coach Floyd didn't inherit the championship team. It was missing it's biggest impact player - DC.

Randy Culpepper, as a junior, was absolutely not a bigger offensive threat than DC. Randy was never tripled teamed. Regardless of who was technically a better player doesn't matter. Coach Floyd did not inherit the whole team. Any point you try to make about AM is purely speculation. Also, you do not speak for "most people." You speak for yourself. You think Cupepper was the best player. That is all you can say. You do not represent "most people."

You think DC was the best player and I think RC was the best player. Fair enough.

Tim Floyd may not have inherited a championship team but he inherited a championship team minus one player. The player that he let go ended up averaging only 2 points less than DC so it's not out of the question to think that Tim Floyd's first team at UTEP should have won the championship and should have gone to the NCAA. They didn't.

Would you happen to know how they were projected to finish?

I'm pretty sure they were picked to win the conference and make the big dance.

AM was part of the championship team, no?

So how can you use AM as an argument to replace DC?

His production was already accounted for.

(11-30-2012 06:16 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  AM was part of the championship team, no?

So how can you use AM as an argument to replace DC?

His production was already accounted for.

I'm saying that had TF kept AM, they would have won the championship and gone to the big dance. They didn't.

You see, I supported Tim Floyd until he ruined that team. '

We could have had back to back CUSA championships at a time when CUSA was still a decent basketball conference.

We will never see that again.

So you can see why I turned my back on Tim Floyd. He took a very good team and made it all about him.

Most coaches let their players play the same way they were taught and not try and change their style.

Tim Floyd didn't do that. He had to try and change the way they played and he cheated his team and the fans out of a chance for back to back titles.

That kind of thing doesn't happen alot.

AM was part of the championship team. Him staying does not replace the loss of DC. So how does AM staying guarantee another championship?

(12-03-2012 02:12 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-30-2012 06:16 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  AM was part of the championship team, no?

So how can you use AM as an argument to replace DC?

His production was already accounted for.

I'm saying that had TF kept AM, they would have won the championship and gone to the big dance. They didn't.

You see, I supported Tim Floyd until he ruined that team. '

We could have had back to back CUSA championships at a time when CUSA was still a decent basketball conference.

We will never see that again.

So you can see why I turned my back on Tim Floyd. He took a very good team and made it all about him.

Most coaches let their players play the same way they were taught and not try and change their style.

Tim Floyd didn't do that. He had to try and change the way they played and he cheated his team and the fans out of a chance for back to back titles.

That kind of thing doesn't happen alot.

Some of the worst reasoning ever... But I see who you are now; just someone wanting to always be bitchin about something. A true pessimist.