The bad mouthing of candidates is getting tiresome

by **Mitch McConnell** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:31 pm

Larry Brown would be fine.

Bruce Weber would have been fine.

Chris Collins would be fine.

Tony Benford would be fine.

Johnny Jones would be fine.

Scott Sutton would be fine.

I'm sure a coach will put in the effort to try and take this program to a competitive level in the Big East as long as he feels he has the internal support from the university to help get him there, surrounds himself with a quality staff and AS LONG AS THE AAU PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO GIVE HIM A CHANCE AND NOT AUTOMATICALLY BLACKBALL HIM BECAUSE HE'S NOT THEIR GUY.

Plus, all of us have to pretty much need to knock it off when it comes to ripping this or that about a guy. We just need to support whoever it is and hope it works out.

For anyone to suggest that somebody is a slam dunk hire is pretty much foolish. Maybe you could say that at Kentucky or UNC. At SMU and most other places? No.

Moving forward, that's the position I'm taking -- backhanded criticism be damned.

Like Jim Mora said, You think you know. But you don't know. And you never well.

by **CoxBizGrad** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:24 pm

Agreed that we shouldn't diss potential hires. As fans, we have to have trust in the donors making the ultimate hire or no hire decision.

by **hoopmanx** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:52 pm

Screw that. I'm basketball people and I know what I do & don't like. Rallying around bad candidates and/or decisions is for sheep. What SMU needs, both as a fan base, but particularly as an administration & athletic department, is to stop being so damn soft. The current regime can barely take criticism. That's the anti-Big East. Only way we get better is for people to care, voice their opinions, and let the AD know.

by **Junior** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 2:48 am

CoxBizGrad wrote:Agreed that we shouldn't diss potential hires. As fans, we have to have trust in the donors making the ultimate hire or no hire decision.

so you're arguing that having a lot of money makes you qualified to choose a quality coach? That's a ridiculous argument. I know plenty of people that are extremely wealthy that don't know jack about basketball.

by **couch 'em** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 2:57 am

I never understand why these threads come up. This is a message board. Half of discussion is criticism.

I do agree however that people have been overboard because of the buzz thing.

by **Mitch McConnell** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:37 am

Moving forward, let's only pound on all of the warts regarding each candidate...God help the game of basketball that the guy should have ever made this his profession. Now, wer'e all made to suffer. :roll:

Let's also give ZERO credibility to the things that the candidate has accomplished in his career because we know it was all done with smoke and mirrors to begin with. :roll:

I stand by my original post.

by **GiddyUp** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:21 am

this board is getting so lame

by **Comet** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:31 am

It's a message board... if we're all drinking the kool-aid 24/7, what's the point of coming here.

by **couch 'em** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:46 am

GiddyUp wrote:this board is getting so lame

All the quality discussion and info its on rivals now. All the spam and general entertainment time wasting is on cp. I think this board has lost its identity.

by **ponyscott** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:53 am

couch 'em wrote:
GiddyUp wrote:this board is getting so lame

All the quality discussion and info its on rivals now. All the spam and general entertainment time wasting is on cp. I think this board has lost its identity.

Agree couch em...rivals is best, but keep it secret....pf is struggling right now.

by **CoxBizGrad** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:20 am

Yep. The dollars will get some candidates to look our way when they wouldn't give us the time of day otherwise.

by **CoxBizGrad** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:23 am

The purpose of the board is to give everyone a chance to voice their opinions. Coaches know the criticism is part of the territory that goes along with the high visibility. High risk... high reward.

by **Digetydog** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:42 am

They all suck and will suck :shock:

Seriously, good point.

Nobody knows who will be a great hire and who will be an epic failure.

by **CalallenStang** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:45 am

CoxBizGrad wrote:The purpose of the board is to give everyone a chance to voice their opinions. Coaches know the criticism is part of the territory that goes along with the high visibility. High risk... high reward.

+1

by **DoakJimJerryPayne** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 5:36 pm

I was always of the opinion that the incessant bad mouthing of June jones was tiresome......