Re: How do we get rid of Jake?
That's just the point. You aren't willing to give him 4 years to show us something since your bashing him (and have been) since the start of year 3.
Again the main arguments:
Jake was left with "plenty" of talent. FALSE. If that were true, why is it that just 2+ years after Mac left, that there are only 2 players on the roster that were here with Mac? It's not that Jake chased them off, it's that there really wasn't that much depth built up under Mac. Even Josten and Viet off last years' team were barely utilized by Mac.
The first two seasons were not "successful." Again, depends on your definition of success. The first year, the team was probably one win (either Travis Brown's last second miss at Southern Illinois or Bradley's last second prayer at the Valley Tourney to beat us) away from post-season. Of course they also weren't helped by the NCAA changing the rules for the NIT.
Last year was a very good job of coaching by Jake considering the injuries that forced personnel switches and playing different combinations. We still managed to win 18 games despite those problems.
This year is a "failure". I guess you can make an evaluation of an entire season after only a few games, but I can't. And yes, many of the people calling us a failure have been doing so for more than just this last game. Yet they fail to consider that we are starting three guards who came into the season with only four career D-I starts combined, and no D-I games played at all in over a year. They aren't accounting for injuries, suspensions, and ineligibility (by transfer) of players that haven't permitted the team to fully gel yet in game situations.
There is a lot of season yet to play.
I am hopeful that we will see more games played for 40 minutes like we saw for the last 30 against ISU.
That won't guarantee wins. Sorry, that just isn't possible to do, but it also doesn't mean the team sucks.
If they weren't giving a full effort, if they played all the time like they did for the first half yesterday, then maybe I could agree, but I guess I look for more of the positives and not only the negatives.
Originally posted by jman2004
View Post
Again the main arguments:
Jake was left with "plenty" of talent. FALSE. If that were true, why is it that just 2+ years after Mac left, that there are only 2 players on the roster that were here with Mac? It's not that Jake chased them off, it's that there really wasn't that much depth built up under Mac. Even Josten and Viet off last years' team were barely utilized by Mac.
The first two seasons were not "successful." Again, depends on your definition of success. The first year, the team was probably one win (either Travis Brown's last second miss at Southern Illinois or Bradley's last second prayer at the Valley Tourney to beat us) away from post-season. Of course they also weren't helped by the NCAA changing the rules for the NIT.
Last year was a very good job of coaching by Jake considering the injuries that forced personnel switches and playing different combinations. We still managed to win 18 games despite those problems.
This year is a "failure". I guess you can make an evaluation of an entire season after only a few games, but I can't. And yes, many of the people calling us a failure have been doing so for more than just this last game. Yet they fail to consider that we are starting three guards who came into the season with only four career D-I starts combined, and no D-I games played at all in over a year. They aren't accounting for injuries, suspensions, and ineligibility (by transfer) of players that haven't permitted the team to fully gel yet in game situations.
There is a lot of season yet to play.
I am hopeful that we will see more games played for 40 minutes like we saw for the last 30 against ISU.
That won't guarantee wins. Sorry, that just isn't possible to do, but it also doesn't mean the team sucks.
If they weren't giving a full effort, if they played all the time like they did for the first half yesterday, then maybe I could agree, but I guess I look for more of the positives and not only the negatives.


Comment