(11-17-2014 10:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:10 AM)Joe1 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:07 AM)Mick Light Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:05 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 09:51 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  Finch was canned after 1 bad season and honestly that "Bad" season he may have won the new C-USA Josh started in...He did finish tied for 1st in his division...Hell he went 5-0 vs. ranked teams that season.

Wow. Nothing at all about Finch's declining health or the fact that he couldn't recruit effectively? Your official answer is 1 bad season? If it was 1 bad season, how come Larry never coached again after that? How come he didn't have a single D1 offer after that?

Declining attendance as well. But you wouldn't know that.

Nope not from way over there he wouldn't

I hope that declining attendance isn't held against this coach. It will be interesting to see the turnout for the home opener. Last year there where several games of actual attendance in the low 10's. I hadn't seen games that sparsely attended since the 04-05 season.

He is accountable for everything. I won't be surprised if we take our lumps early, but I expect us to be very good by the end of the season. We are awesome at the 4/5; very good at the point, and have fully 4 players (King, Iverson, Hawkins, Burrell) at the 3; so someone should turn into a good player. I think Pookie will be a very good guard and I would play him at the 2; but that will obviously be the biggest question mark moving forward.

I have no idea what our identity is, and I see that as the major challenge for Pastner. We might have a lot of players that play to nearly the exact same level. It will be tricky to determine who gets the most playing time.

Pastner's body of work is questionable it just is...making the tournament out of the CUSA, not the worlds highest peak. The performance in the tournament, close wins, followed by all out ass kickings. a couple of head scratching non-competitive losses per year...all of this while being paid like a top ten coach. What's done is done when it comes to his contract (I don't think anyone could credibly defend the contract now with the benefit of hindsight), but I don't think anyone is going to be arguing for an extension, because his job performance has not merited it.

making the tournament out of the C-USA is making the tournament, no matter how you try to slice it. He not only made the tourney, but made it with a single digit seed 2 out of his 3 years.

(11-17-2014 10:36 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:10 AM)Joe1 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:07 AM)Mick Light Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:05 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Wow. Nothing at all about Finch's declining health or the fact that he couldn't recruit effectively? Your official answer is 1 bad season? If it was 1 bad season, how come Larry never coached again after that? How come he didn't have a single D1 offer after that?

Declining attendance as well. But you wouldn't know that.

Nope not from way over there he wouldn't

I hope that declining attendance isn't held against this coach. It will be interesting to see the turnout for the home opener. Last year there where several games of actual attendance in the low 10's. I hadn't seen games that sparsely attended since the 04-05 season.

He is accountable for everything. I won't be surprised if we take our lumps early, but I expect us to be very good by the end of the season. We are awesome at the 4/5; very good at the point, and have fully 4 players (King, Iverson, Hawkins, Burrell) at the 3; so someone should turn into a good player. I think Pookie will be a very good guard and I would play him at the 2; but that will obviously be the biggest question mark moving forward.

I have no idea what our identity is, and I see that as the major challenge for Pastner. We might have a lot of players that play to nearly the exact same level. It will be tricky to determine who gets the most playing time.

Awesome at the 4 and 5 based on Potential? I think that can go either way...Shaq is who he is...Austin may make great strides but that is up in the air.

(11-17-2014 10:39 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  making the tournament out of the C-USA is making the tournament, no matter how you try to slice it. He not only made the tourney, but made it with a single digit seed 2 out of his 3 years.

Joe Jackson by himself put the team on his back his freshman year and got Josh to the ncaa tournament. We had to win the cusa tournament to get there and Joe did that, coming off the bench no less.

(11-17-2014 10:36 AM)George CantStandYa Wrote:  Pastner's body of work is questionable it just is...making the tournament out of the CUSA, not the worlds highest peak. The performance in the tournament, close wins, followed by all out ass kickings. a couple of head scratching non-competitive losses per year...all of this while being paid like a top ten coach. What's done is done when it comes to his contract (I don't think anyone could credibly defend the contract now with the benefit of hindsight), but I don't think anyone is going to be arguing for an extension, because his job performance has not merited it.

(11-17-2014 10:36 AM)Stammers Wrote:  He is accountable for everything. I won't be surprised if we take our lumps early, but I expect us to be very good by the end of the season. We are awesome at the 4/5; very good at the point, and have fully 4 players (King, Iverson, Hawkins, Burrell) at the 3; so someone should turn into a good player. I think Pookie will be a very good guard and I would play him at the 2; but that will obviously be the biggest question mark moving forward.

I have no idea what our identity is, and I see that as the major challenge for Pastner. We might have a lot of players that play to nearly the exact same level. It will be tricky to determine who gets the most playing time.

I think this is where we will disagree.

Pookie may become good, and Kedren is not in good basketball shape. Iverson has shown nothing to believe he can play and apparently can't get out of Pastner's doghouse. Burrell and Hawkins have also showed nothing of date and you and I both have noted on numerous occasions how JUCO's take awhile to adjust and generally perform much better their second year.

Memphis should be 11-2 going into 2015. The only games of consequence will be WSU, Baylor, Oklahoma State and (maybe) Illinois.

(11-17-2014 10:32 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:13 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:05 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 09:51 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  Finch was canned after 1 bad season and honestly that "Bad" season he may have won the new C-USA Josh started in...He did finish tied for 1st in his division...Hell he went 5-0 vs. ranked teams that season.

Wow. Nothing at all about Finch's declining health or the fact that he couldn't recruit effectively? Your official answer is 1 bad season? If it was 1 bad season, how come Larry never coached again after that? How come he didn't have a single D1 offer after that?

Declining health is revisionist history...The fans knew about his bad health...You seriously believe that...That was his downfall the fans turning their backs on him.

You don't seem to have a clue what you are talking about. Maybe point form will help.

- The 1996 team was like our team last year. In very good shape until February and fell apart against Drexel
TRUE
- The 1997 team wasn't very good at all, and Cedric Henderson was a senior TRUE

- Larry didn't have any great recruits on the 1997 team TRUE

- Larry didn't have any great recruits lined up TRUE

- Larry's health was so bad that he was barely in charge of the huddle BullSh1t

Obviously, the firing wasn't handled properly, but the bottom line is that Larry wasn't able to coach anymore; his health was really bad. IF Larry had the capacity to coach, he would have had plenty of offers.

The point of the Larry Finch comparison is to say that Josh CAN be fired after going to 4 out of 5 NCAA tourneys.

Not unless there are extenuating circumstances. Pastner's don't come close to comparing to Larry's. Do you honestly think that there was any way that Larry was going to turn things around?

(11-17-2014 10:46 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:36 AM)Stammers Wrote:  He is accountable for everything. I won't be surprised if we take our lumps early, but I expect us to be very good by the end of the season. We are awesome at the 4/5; very good at the point, and have fully 4 players (King, Iverson, Hawkins, Burrell) at the 3; so someone should turn into a good player. I think Pookie will be a very good guard and I would play him at the 2; but that will obviously be the biggest question mark moving forward.

I have no idea what our identity is, and I see that as the major challenge for Pastner. We might have a lot of players that play to nearly the exact same level. It will be tricky to determine who gets the most playing time.

I think this is where we will disagree.

Pookie may become good, and Kedren is not in good basketball shape. Iverson has shown nothing to believe he can play and apparently can't get out of Pastner's doghouse. Burrell and Hawkins have also showed nothing of date and you and I both have noted on numerous occasions how JUCO's take awhile to adjust and generally perform much better their second year.

Memphis should be 11-2 going into 2015. The only games of consequence will be WSU, Baylor, Oklahoma State and (maybe) Illinois.

With Kedren in shape we are very good at the 1/4/5. That is much better than most programs can say. We both agree that it isn't reasonable to assume that individual players will produce right away; but out of Pookie, Iverson, Burrell, King, Hawkins, I don't think that it is unreasonable to think that one of them will become a good player. At that point you have most of what you need to be a good team.

(11-17-2014 10:48 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:32 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:13 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:05 AM)Stammers Wrote:  Wow. Nothing at all about Finch's declining health or the fact that he couldn't recruit effectively? Your official answer is 1 bad season? If it was 1 bad season, how come Larry never coached again after that? How come he didn't have a single D1 offer after that?

Declining health is revisionist history...The fans knew about his bad health...You seriously believe that...That was his downfall the fans turning their backs on him.

You don't seem to have a clue what you are talking about. Maybe point form will help.

- The 1996 team was like our team last year. In very good shape until February and fell apart against Drexel
TRUE
- The 1997 team wasn't very good at all, and Cedric Henderson was a senior TRUE

- Larry didn't have any great recruits on the 1997 team TRUE

- Larry didn't have any great recruits lined up TRUE

- Larry's health was so bad that he was barely in charge of the huddle BullSh1t

Obviously, the firing wasn't handled properly, but the bottom line is that Larry wasn't able to coach anymore; his health was really bad. IF Larry had the capacity to coach, he would have had plenty of offers.

The point of the Larry Finch comparison is to say that Josh CAN be fired after going to 4 out of 5 NCAA tourneys.

Not unless there are extenuating circumstances. Pastner's don't come close to comparing to Larry's. Do you honestly think that there was any way that Larry was going to turn things around?

Larry was tied to the talent IN Memphis...If Memphis went dry or a couple of kids bolted Larry would have been in trouble. That is what it was and I think everyone knew it. Larry with Talent was great...But Memphis was not producing the talent it does now so he would have had a hard time turning it around.

Pastner has 2 five stars on this team and a bunch of 4 stars...If he has a similar season with THIS team as Larrys last season do you think Pastner turns it around. Has he shown that he is capable of identifying and bringing in the talent HE needs to take this program to the next level.

That is the difference...If Josh loses with High level talent, do you continue to believe that it is the players or does the microscope turn to him. If these high level players are flawed why does he keep recruiting them...Is he recruiting based on stars or is he recruiting HIS guys that he feels will work in his system (Which I can't seem to figure out what it is as it changes)

(11-17-2014 10:39 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:36 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:10 AM)Joe1 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:07 AM)Mick Light Wrote:  Declining attendance as well. But you wouldn't know that.

Nope not from way over there he wouldn't

I hope that declining attendance isn't held against this coach. It will be interesting to see the turnout for the home opener. Last year there where several games of actual attendance in the low 10's. I hadn't seen games that sparsely attended since the 04-05 season.

He is accountable for everything. I won't be surprised if we take our lumps early, but I expect us to be very good by the end of the season. We are awesome at the 4/5; very good at the point, and have fully 4 players (King, Iverson, Hawkins, Burrell) at the 3; so someone should turn into a good player. I think Pookie will be a very good guard and I would play him at the 2; but that will obviously be the biggest question mark moving forward.

I have no idea what our identity is, and I see that as the major challenge for Pastner. We might have a lot of players that play to nearly the exact same level. It will be tricky to determine who gets the most playing time.

Awesome at the 4 and 5 based on Potential? I think that can go either way...Shaq is who he is...Austin may make great strides but that is up in the air.

Well, they did average 20.8 points and 10.8 rebounds in 50 minutes per game last year. They should improve. Throw in Godfrey's 13 points and 9 rebounds; reasonably expect King to be able to pinch in, and that is a very solid front line.

Again; you would have to think that all 4 players will improve.

(11-17-2014 10:58 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:39 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:36 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:16 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:10 AM)Joe1 Wrote:  Nope not from way over there he wouldn't

I hope that declining attendance isn't held against this coach. It will be interesting to see the turnout for the home opener. Last year there where several games of actual attendance in the low 10's. I hadn't seen games that sparsely attended since the 04-05 season.

He is accountable for everything. I won't be surprised if we take our lumps early, but I expect us to be very good by the end of the season. We are awesome at the 4/5; very good at the point, and have fully 4 players (King, Iverson, Hawkins, Burrell) at the 3; so someone should turn into a good player. I think Pookie will be a very good guard and I would play him at the 2; but that will obviously be the biggest question mark moving forward.

I have no idea what our identity is, and I see that as the major challenge for Pastner. We might have a lot of players that play to nearly the exact same level. It will be tricky to determine who gets the most playing time.

Awesome at the 4 and 5 based on Potential? I think that can go either way...Shaq is who he is...Austin may make great strides but that is up in the air.

Well, they did average 20.8 points and 10.8 rebounds in 50 minutes per game last year. They should improve. Throw in Godfrey's 13 points and 9 rebounds; reasonably expect King to be able to pinch in, and that is a very solid front line.

Again; you would have to think that all 4 players will improve.

10 and 5 are decent stats...If they do improve and Godfrey can maintain his statline then yes that frontline is stout. But I do not see Shaq doing much more...Don't know much about Godfrey as he is stepping up in competition. I see most of the potential improvement falling on Austins shoulders.

I don't see how anyone thinks Pastner will be fired.

Not anytime soon anyway unless he just has the worst season imaginable.

But he will never win big with his coaching.

Only way he wins big is to have a team of junkyard dogs who basically do it themselves.

Shaq had a pretty stellar year for us last season. If he only improves minimally, that'll mean he'll have another stellar year which I can easily accept.

(11-17-2014 11:05 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I don't see how anyone thinks Pastner will be fired.

Not anytime soon anyway unless he just has the worst season imaginable.

But he will never win big with his coaching.

Only way he wins big is to have a team of junkyard dogs who basically do it themselves.

The fans will have to fire Josh...

If they stop coming then the ball will start rolling...And Josh is a nice guy so he will cut us a deal on his buyout if it happens.

(11-17-2014 11:06 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 11:05 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I don't see how anyone thinks Pastner will be fired.

Not anytime soon anyway unless he just has the worst season imaginable.

But he will never win big with his coaching.

Only way he wins big is to have a team of junkyard dogs who basically do it themselves.

The fans will have to fire Josh...

If they stop coming then the ball will start rolling...And Josh is a nice guy so he will cut us a deal on his buyout if it happens.

The only time attendance really fell off at Memphis was when the team was barely NIT level talent and that was for a few years.

I think as long as they are winning more than losing, he is fine for the next two years at the very least.

(11-17-2014 11:09 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 11:06 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 11:05 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I don't see how anyone thinks Pastner will be fired.

Not anytime soon anyway unless he just has the worst season imaginable.

But he will never win big with his coaching.

Only way he wins big is to have a team of junkyard dogs who basically do it themselves.

The fans will have to fire Josh...

If they stop coming then the ball will start rolling...And Josh is a nice guy so he will cut us a deal on his buyout if it happens.

The only time attendance really fell off at Memphis was when the team was barely NIT level talent and that was for a few years.

I think as long as they are winning more than losing, he is fine for the next two years at the very least.

NCAA Sweet 16
NCAA First Round

Next season attendance fell through the floor and Larry got canned. Now I think the expectations of the team that was ranked #2 in the country the previous year soured many on Larry. But dang 1 year removed from having the #2 ranked team in the country you get fired...Sounds crazy right.

(11-17-2014 11:06 AM)MemphisCanes Wrote:  Shaq had a pretty steallr year for us last season. If he only improves minimally, that'll mean he'll have another stellar year which I can easily accept.

Stellar? 11 and 6.5 is solid, but hardly stellar. He pulled another Houdini in March (like the year before) averaging 6 ppg and shooting 37% from the field and 48% from the line. Not sure if it is a focus thing or what, but he needs to be solid all season long, not just against weak competition.

(11-17-2014 11:10 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 11:09 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 11:06 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 11:05 AM)HoopDreams Wrote:  I don't see how anyone thinks Pastner will be fired.

Not anytime soon anyway unless he just has the worst season imaginable.

But he will never win big with his coaching.

Only way he wins big is to have a team of junkyard dogs who basically do it themselves.

The fans will have to fire Josh...

If they stop coming then the ball will start rolling...And Josh is a nice guy so he will cut us a deal on his buyout if it happens.

The only time attendance really fell off at Memphis was when the team was barely NIT level talent and that was for a few years.

I think as long as they are winning more than losing, he is fine for the next two years at the very least.

NCAA Sweet 16
NCAA First Round

Next season attendance fell through the floor and Larry got canned. Now I think the expectations of the team that was ranked #2 in the country the previous year soured many on Larry. But dang 1 year removed from having the #2 ranked team in the country you get fired...Sounds crazy right.

I think he started out losing that year and also lost all the key recruits from the city in what was a massive recruiting class - one of the best in the past 25 years or so.

I'm not saying 0% chance Pastner gets fired, just saying it is highly unlikely.

(11-17-2014 10:55 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:48 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:32 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:24 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 10:13 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  Declining health is revisionist history...The fans knew about his bad health...You seriously believe that...That was his downfall the fans turning their backs on him.

You don't seem to have a clue what you are talking about. Maybe point form will help.

- The 1996 team was like our team last year. In very good shape until February and fell apart against Drexel
TRUE
- The 1997 team wasn't very good at all, and Cedric Henderson was a senior TRUE

- Larry didn't have any great recruits on the 1997 team TRUE

- Larry didn't have any great recruits lined up TRUE

- Larry's health was so bad that he was barely in charge of the huddle BullSh1t

Obviously, the firing wasn't handled properly, but the bottom line is that Larry wasn't able to coach anymore; his health was really bad. IF Larry had the capacity to coach, he would have had plenty of offers.

The point of the Larry Finch comparison is to say that Josh CAN be fired after going to 4 out of 5 NCAA tourneys.

Not unless there are extenuating circumstances. Pastner's don't come close to comparing to Larry's. Do you honestly think that there was any way that Larry was going to turn things around?

Larry was tied to the talent IN Memphis...If Memphis went dry or a couple of kids bolted Larry would have been in trouble. That is what it was and I think everyone knew it. Larry with Talent was great...But Memphis was not producing the talent it does now so he would have had a hard time turning it around.

Pastner has 2 five stars on this team and a bunch of 4 stars...If he has a similar season with THIS team as Larrys last season do you think Pastner turns it around. Has he shown that he is capable of identifying and bringing in the talent HE needs to take this program to the next level.

That is the difference...If Josh loses with High level talent, do you continue to believe that it is the players or does the microscope turn to him. If these high level players are flawed why does he keep recruiting them...Is he recruiting based on stars or is he recruiting HIS guys that he feels will work in his system (Which I can't seem to figure out what it is as it changes)

Whether the numbers worked out that way or Larry had a skill for it; or both; he was much much better than Josh as far as finding players at every position. The only year Pastner had a balanced roster was last year, and the guards underperforming and Pellom's injuries were killers.

The point is; that even though Pastner hasn't had the success that we all want; he has come close and has had 5 good seasons. If he has a bad season this year it will be an aberration. Larry wasn't going to turn things around.

I think Pastner should firmly be on the hotseat if we don't make the tournament. I don't consider this a rebuilding year. I think we have enough pieces to be ranked with a round of 32 as a minimum expectation.