Next Season

Just for the record, if you want to look at numbers alone, 50% of our members for next year were in the Tourney this year. We had less than half in the current Big East. It's true we won't have to play Cuse and such, but we will be playing teams like Creighton 2 times, to go along with 2 games against Marquette and Gtown etc.

Just for the record, if you want to look at numbers alone, 50% of our members for next year were in the Tourney this year. We had less than half in the current Big East. It's true we won't have to play Cuse and such, but we will be playing teams like Creighton 2 times, to go along with 2 games against Marquette and Gtown etc.

Cuse and Louisville are the best programs in the BE for another week or two. We will be getting a much easier schedule, because of this. That said, we will also have to win more games to impress the committee. Ole Miss went 12-6 in the SEC. They were a 12 seed. 11-7, or something like it, might not get you in if you look at the new BE.

That's where the OOC schedule comes in. SPanking Marist and squeaking by Assbag Fordham isn't going to cut it

That's where the OOC schedule comes in. SPanking Marist and squeaking by Assbag Fordham isn't going to cut it

Well, we're playing SU on the road. The game is at MSG. Maybe if everyone returns we can keep it to a 10 point loss?

Quote from: MCNPA on March 25, 2013, 09:21:50 AM

Playing Lipscomb doesn't deflect criticism from Lavin in any way. Not an iota.  It hasn't been used by the media to deflect criticism and I can't see how anybody could deduce that type of theory. It opened up a few minutes for a bench player to get minuscule court time in a meaningless post season game.   If this board is any indication, it is drawing criticism to Lavin.  I think that it is delusional to surmise that it is some sort of deflection tactic.   

Harrison's suspension has been cited by the media ad nauseum as the reason for the late season collapse. Crispino did it as late as yesterday and pointedly so. Playing the walk ons draws further attention to Harrison's absence. Res ipsa loquitur, except in your case obviously.   

I don't think Lipscomb draws attention to anything.  Balamou injured and so a hard working kid gets a few minutes in a game or two.  I don't think it's part of some self serving grand scheme.  It would have been more self serving to have not suspended Harrison at all instead of giving Harrison an ultimatum.  It all falls on Lavin and he is taking plenty of heat for it, not getting any sort of free pass.  If anything Lipscomb is drawing negative attention to him.

I'm not a big fan of the athletes showing up coaches nor ruining team chemistry.  Most coaches would have done the same. 

Quote from: Foad on March 25, 2013, 10:42:38 AM

Quote from: MCNPA on March 25, 2013, 09:21:50 AM

Playing Lipscomb doesn't deflect criticism from Lavin in any way. Not an iota.  It hasn't been used by the media to deflect criticism and I can't see how anybody could deduce that type of theory. It opened up a few minutes for a bench player to get minuscule court time in a meaningless post season game.   If this board is any indication, it is drawing criticism to Lavin.  I think that it is delusional to surmise that it is some sort of deflection tactic.   

Harrison's suspension has been cited by the media ad nauseum as the reason for the late season collapse. Crispino did it as late as yesterday and pointedly so. Playing the walk ons draws further attention to Harrison's absence. Res ipsa loquitur, except in your case obviously.   

I don't think Lipscomb draws attention to anything.  Balamou injured and so a hard working kid gets a few minutes in a game or two.  I don't think it's part of some self serving grand scheme.  It would have been more self serving to have not suspended Harrison at all instead of giving Harrison an ultimatum.  It all falls on Lavin and he is taking plenty of heat for it, not getting any sort of free pass.  If anything Lipscomb is drawing negative attention to him.

I'm not a big fan of the athletes showing up coaches nor ruining team chemistry.  Most coaches would have done the same. 

The walk on came into a game when Balamou was healthy. It was a bush league move, but then Lavin had already decided to ruin the season.

I don't think Lipscomb draws attention to anything. 

Of course you don't. Your worry meter is stuck on 30, you're wearing rose colored glasses and waving pom poms, and you believe Lavin is as infallible in basketball matters as Pope Francis is in the realm of the spirit. Which is all fine. I admire your optimism and envy you your faith. But there are other theologies: Kierkegaard called faith the leap into the absurd. I believe what I see with my eyes and fear and trembling comes upon me. I see walk ons playing in "meaningless" post season games where before there were none. Poof! They appear. That you choose to believe that a miracle doesn't make it one. Especially you.

Lavin used to play walk ons because they earned it. If that was the case here, I think we would have heard about it.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 25, 2013, 11:11:26 AM

Quote from: Foad on March 25, 2013, 10:42:38 AM

Quote from: MCNPA on March 25, 2013, 09:21:50 AM

Playing Lipscomb doesn't deflect criticism from Lavin in any way. Not an iota.  It hasn't been used by the media to deflect criticism and I can't see how anybody could deduce that type of theory. It opened up a few minutes for a bench player to get minuscule court time in a meaningless post season game.   If this board is any indication, it is drawing criticism to Lavin.  I think that it is delusional to surmise that it is some sort of deflection tactic.   

Harrison's suspension has been cited by the media ad nauseum as the reason for the late season collapse. Crispino did it as late as yesterday and pointedly so. Playing the walk ons draws further attention to Harrison's absence. Res ipsa loquitur, except in your case obviously.   

I don't think Lipscomb draws attention to anything.  Balamou injured and so a hard working kid gets a few minutes in a game or two.  I don't think it's part of some self serving grand scheme.  It would have been more self serving to have not suspended Harrison at all instead of giving Harrison an ultimatum.  It all falls on Lavin and he is taking plenty of heat for it, not getting any sort of free pass.  If anything Lipscomb is drawing negative attention to him.

I'm not a big fan of the athletes showing up coaches nor ruining team chemistry.  Most coaches would have done the same. 

The walk on came into a game when Balamou was healthy. It was a bush league move, but then Lavin had already decided to ruin the season.

Lavin decided to ruin the season.... Are your saying that under no circumstances should a player be suspended for disciplinary reasons if it will hinder our ability to win games? That's how you would like the program to run that's your opinion, Lavin chose otherwise. We were not playing for a national championship, we were short handed, the walk ons work just as hard as scholarship players, he chose to give then some minutes at the end of the season as this most likely will be their only chance of playing going forward. We didn't lose any games because of it.   

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

That's where the OOC schedule comes in. SPanking Marist and squeaking by Assbag Fordham isn't going to cut it

Thats why we have to schedule Iona LOL.

Or any other NCAA tourny team. Not St Francis or NJIT

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

Let's get rid of the labels please. They played 1 minute, Lipscomb played 3, in a game we lost by double digits. By the way, Lipscomb had more rebounds in 3 minutes than marco had in 17. There play didn't hurt us, we were not going to play in the CBI, IMO. It wasn't guaranteed that we would get an invite to the NIT. This was maybe the last shot the walkons had at playing. Only Lipscomb played in the first round NIT and he only played 7 minutes, and had one assist, one rebound, and no turnovers. Then again, in our last game, the walkons got some more playing time in their last game. It was a blowout and Lipscomb played 15 because we didn't have any other option at the PG position. This is a none issue, IMO.

Quote from: newsman13 on March 25, 2013, 12:42:34 PM

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

Let's get rid of the labels please. They played 1 minute, Lipscomb played 3, in a game we lost by double digits. By the way, Lipscomb had more rebounds in 3 minutes than marco had in 17. There play didn't hurt us, we were not going to play in the CBI, IMO. It wasn't guaranteed that we would get an invite to the NIT. This was maybe the last shot the walkons had at playing. Only Lipscomb played in the first round NIT and he only played 7 minutes, and had one assist, one rebound, and no turnovers. Then again, in our last game, the walkons got some more playing time in their last game. It was a blowout and Lipscomb played 15 because we didn't have any other option at the PG position. This is a none issue, IMO.

Lipscomb played before it was a blow out. He played in the first half.

Quote from: STJFAN on March 25, 2013, 01:09:52 PM

Quote from: newsman13 on March 25, 2013, 12:42:34 PM

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

Let's get rid of the labels please. They played 1 minute, Lipscomb played 3, in a game we lost by double digits. By the way, Lipscomb had more rebounds in 3 minutes than marco had in 17. There play didn't hurt us, we were not going to play in the CBI, IMO. It wasn't guaranteed that we would get an invite to the NIT. This was maybe the last shot the walkons had at playing. Only Lipscomb played in the first round NIT and he only played 7 minutes, and had one assist, one rebound, and no turnovers. Then again, in our last game, the walkons got some more playing time in their last game. It was a blowout and Lipscomb played 15 because we didn't have any other option at the PG position. This is a none issue, IMO.

Lipscomb played before it was a blow out. He played in the first half.

He travelled the first time he got the ball and it wasn't called.  The next time he caught it, they called it.  Not impressed.

I've heard a lot of speculation as to why the walk-ons have been played at the end of the season.  Did anyone hear a valid reason?

Quote from: Poison on March 25, 2013, 02:03:12 PM

Quote from: STJFAN on March 25, 2013, 01:09:52 PM

Quote from: newsman13 on March 25, 2013, 12:42:34 PM

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

Let's get rid of the labels please. They played 1 minute, Lipscomb played 3, in a game we lost by double digits. By the way, Lipscomb had more rebounds in 3 minutes than marco had in 17. There play didn't hurt us, we were not going to play in the CBI, IMO. It wasn't guaranteed that we would get an invite to the NIT. This was maybe the last shot the walkons had at playing. Only Lipscomb played in the first round NIT and he only played 7 minutes, and had one assist, one rebound, and no turnovers. Then again, in our last game, the walkons got some more playing time in their last game. It was a blowout and Lipscomb played 15 because we didn't have any other option at the PG position. This is a none issue, IMO.

Lipscomb played before it was a blow out. He played in the first half.

He travelled the first time he got the ball and it wasn't called.  The next time he caught it, they called it.  Not impressed.

I've heard a lot of speculation as to why the walk-ons have been played at the end of the season.  Did anyone hear a valid reason?

Lavin thought Harrison had his tattoos removed and put him in the game thinking it was him.

I've heard a lot of speculation as to why the walk-ons have been played at the end of the season.  Did anyone hear a valid reason?

Sending a message to everyone on the team specifically guys like Marco, Felix, Christian Jones for next year.  Your playing time is not guaranteed and I expect serious results next year or you are sitting.

The two biggest issues going into to next year are:

1) Getting the D'lo situtation resolved one way or another and as soon as possible.  Is he going to be on the team or not?

2) Getting these guys committed in the off-season to improving themselves and coming back stronger and ready to compete.

A possible 3rd issue is getting a late recruit like Jordan but to me that is not as critical as the first two.  That would be luxury.

Quote from: dR3w on March 25, 2013, 02:28:01 PM

I've heard a lot of speculation as to why the walk-ons have been played at the end of the season.  Did anyone hear a valid reason?

Sending a message to everyone on the team specifically guys like Marco, Felix, Christian Jones for next year.  Your playing time is not guaranteed and I expect serious results next year or you are sitting.

The two biggest issues going into to next year are:

1) Getting the D'lo situtation resolved one way or another and as soon as possible.  Is he going to be on the team or not?

2) Getting these guys committed in the off-season to improving themselves and coming back stronger and ready to compete.

A possible 3rd issue is getting a late recruit like Jordan but to me that is not as critical as the first two.  That would be luxury.

Wonder what the staff will be working on? Everyone needs to improve, correct?

Quote from: STJFAN on March 25, 2013, 01:09:52 PM

Quote from: newsman13 on March 25, 2013, 12:42:34 PM

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

Let's get rid of the labels please. They played 1 minute, Lipscomb played 3, in a game we lost by double digits. By the way, Lipscomb had more rebounds in 3 minutes than marco had in 17. There play didn't hurt us, we were not going to play in the CBI, IMO. It wasn't guaranteed that we would get an invite to the NIT. This was maybe the last shot the walkons had at playing. Only Lipscomb played in the first round NIT and he only played 7 minutes, and had one assist, one rebound, and no turnovers. Then again, in our last game, the walkons got some more playing time in their last game. It was a blowout and Lipscomb played 15 because we didn't have any other option at the PG position. This is a none issue, IMO.

Lipscomb played before it was a blow out. He played in the first half.

There were at least two trips where Lipscomb was wide open in the corner and Dom and then Phil chose to not pass the ball to him but rather to another player who was more closely guarded.  When he or White were out there we were basically playing four on five

so you're saying lavin gave up the instant he put in a walkon in prime time...which was in the BET?

I don't think he gave up, I think he wanted to make a point to the other players, even if doing that affected our chance to win the game.  If he couldn't make that point in practice and/or team meetings maybe he's not getting through to some of these guys, and whose fault is that?  And what does that tell the guys who are out there playing their butts off?  That Lavin's point is more important than the game?  Maybe he doesn't have the control over the team he should have.  I mean two starters late for the pre-game meal in the first round of the NIT?  Players getting chippy in several games through the year, especially down the stretch.  Your star player suspended for a pattern of bad behaivior.  Maybe there's a little lack of discipline from the top down.