sweetness
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 834
|
Post by sweetness on Feb 27, 2017 14:01:20 GMT -5
There's always a risk when you hire a new coach. I think it's more risky to stick with something that clearly isn't working. JT3 has tried everything he can and he's out of moves - he has no answers at this point. Coaches/teams don't fall into this downward cycle and come back. It's over.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Feb 27, 2017 14:08:44 GMT -5
At this point, the players know where the boos and jeering are being directed. I do not advocate it on senior day, during a close game, but if the kids cared about JT3, maybe they should have avoided losing to Depaul and SJU. Talent alone should have won those games and 22 turnovers is a joke. Think of how many collegiate and pro teams rally around their besieged coach and play inspired for at least a game or two, did anyone see that in MSG? I find that interesting. Do you really think the kids looked like they weren't trying to win the DePaul or St. John's games? Against DePaul, we fought until the end and the players were extremely upset at losing. Against St. John's, we were down a significant margin before making a 17-0 run to get back in the game. If the guys weren't trying to win, the 17-0 run would've never happened and we would have lost by 20+. Do I think they were not trying? Tough question. Sure, in the moment, they were probably trying their hardest. But in the days leading up to the game, were they listening to the coach, working to install the gameplan, were they preparing themselves to play? - losing to Depaul at home and 22 turnovers to a bad SJU team says no they were not. Stop defending these guys like they are 12 year old middle school kids. To my knowledge they are all considered of adult age. They know the boos are not for them. Students and fans have made signs to make it very clear who is being booed. Should I even mention that I wrote to not show up for the game, versus booing the coach? Again, perhaps the players' energy should be used to rally around their coach and shut everyone up? I thought that was a real possibility against SJU, until I saw the first 10 minutes of the game and realized the only thing motivating them is avoiding personal embarrassment.
|
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Feb 27, 2017 15:03:16 GMT -5
As someone who is now firmly in the JT III must go camp I agree with 2003 completely. Fans support the kids on the floor and if I could, I would be there yelling hard for Reggie, Brad, and Pryor and thanking them for their efforts on behalf of the team. If people want/need to vent and make it clear to the Administration that a coaching change is necessary, I have no problem with that too, but it should not take away from the moment for these kids. Make it clear to the Administration through signs, petitions, even chants after the game, but when the whistle is blown cheer louder than the Nova fans and show these kids the respect they have earned. Reggie and Hayes have endured a lot through 4-5 years. Neither developed as hoped, though I think that Reggie took too much blame for his play and never liked the incredibly short leash he was given by the coach. Yet, neither transferred. Each remained far more committed to the school, the program and even the coach than some of JT III's desperation recruits who were given major minutes, such as J. Smith and Whittington. This coach has run his course here and absolutely needs to go, but that is not the fault of these kids or their families who gave a significant portion of their lives to the school and the program. Perfectly said. Although late to the party, I certainly agree at this point that there isno reason to expect any significant improvement in the near future, so we need a new coach and a new direction. But venting frustrations by trying to embarrass the coach and the administration on national TV - on a day meant to honor the seniors, who have given their time and effort for years to the school, and also the families who have supported them, shows an incredible lack of class at a college basketball game (yes it is also big business, but these are still kids in school, who will undoubtedly feel some of the embarrassment as well since it has been a combination of their poor play, together with the poor coaching/recruiting, that sunk us to this point). And one more point (IMO of course); while certainly any person has the right to advocate for, encourage, or participate in chants or signs - if you do, I do not want to hear or read how you feel JTIII "is still a good man". You don't embarrass a good man in public, and certainly not on national TV. I agree with this completely. I will be at the game. My dad is actually coming into town while my wife is away and I'm taking him to his first ever Hoya game in DC . We will be cheering them on to the end and thanking the seniors for their contributions. For those who want to make a scene, have at it. But I've long thought the merciless booing and jeering that has become commonplace across professional sports has no place in college athletics.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 27, 2017 15:08:15 GMT -5
Do I think they were not trying? Tough question. Sure, in the moment, they were probably trying their hardest. But in the days leading up to the game, were they listening to the coach, working to install the gameplan, were they preparing themselves to play? - losing to Depaul at home and 22 turnovers to a bad SJU team says no they were not. So basically because we lost and didn't play well, you just assume that in the days leading up to the game, they weren't trying or preparing. I bet if you talked to the guys on the team you'd probably get some disagreement. Based on this metric, teams like DePaul that lose a lot more than us must really not try. Newsflash: Trying doesn't equal winning games. Usually, both teams try hard and one team has to lose. Stop defending these guys like they are 12 year old middle school kids. To my knowledge they are all considered of adult age. They know the boos are not for them. Students and fans have made signs to make it very clear who is being booed. Should I even mention that I wrote to not show up for the game, versus booing the coach? You are the one treating them like kids - acting as though if only for a better coach, they'd work hard and try, but because they are doing poorly or because of JT3, they just aren't trying. Quite frankly, if that is the attitude our guys have, they are immensely immature. When I was at Georgetown as a student, I didn't have someone telling me what to do academically, when to study, and when to put in "extra" effort. Now, I realize sports are different, and that's one role of a coach, but players also need to self-motivate. And I think they probably do. But again, that doesn't mean wins come simply because you're trying. When they were down after St. John's 17-0 run they easily could've given up like St. John's did when we crushed them at home. But they didn't. They kept fighting and had a chance to win. And I don't think that's only because they were seeking to avoid embarrassment. You are basically making up speculation based on what you think you are seeing. Which is fine, but it's no more valid than any other speculation to the contrary.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Feb 27, 2017 15:38:03 GMT -5
Agreed hoyasaxa2003, I am speculating based on what I am seeing. To be clear, I am not doubting the effort of the Hoyas during the actual game, but I do believe a better coach could prepare and motivate this same group of young men to beat Depaul at home and beat SJU. I also wrote it would be better to stay home than be non-supportive at the game. You don't share this opinion on the coach/players and you want everyone to go to the game and be supportive.
I get it, let's agree to disagree on this and move on.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,378
|
Post by drquigley on Feb 27, 2017 16:24:36 GMT -5
Can we get back to the point of this thread? My earlier question still remains unanswered. Why not play Campbell and Mourning Tuesday night and Saturday for extended minutes just to see what they can do? I noticed JT3 started Johnson over MD this Saturday. Maybe give Caleb even more of MD's minutes. I noticed his foul shooting is better and he seems more comfortable around the hoop and running a break. Hey, what do we have to lose?
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Feb 27, 2017 17:01:26 GMT -5
Can we get back to the point of this thread? My earlier question still remains unanswered. Why not play Campbell and Mourning Tuesday night and Saturday for extended minutes just to see what they can do? I noticed JT3 started Johnson over MD this Saturday. Maybe give Caleb even more of MD's minutes. I noticed his foul shooting is better and he seems more comfortable around the hoop and running a break. Hey, what do we have to lose? At the same time, Marcus was at least slightly more aggressive Saturday than in the games before that. Kaleb may have started because it was felt he would be better able to defend quicker St. John's players. Or maybe it was similar to LJ last year - Marcus has been so foul prone, maybe sitting and watching the game develop would keep him around longer. While I don't entirely disagree about giving Tre and Trey minutes, getting some confidence back in Marcus is critical down the road. And while we fans have generally thrown in the towel on this season, I suspect the staff and the players have not, and are hopeful that they can generate at least a little momentum before going back to NYC, so it probably won't happen, at least for Trey, absent extreme circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Feb 27, 2017 17:04:54 GMT -5
Can we get back to the point of this thread? My earlier question still remains unanswered. Why not play Campbell and Mourning Tuesday night and Saturday for extended minutes just to see what they can do? I noticed JT3 started Johnson over MD this Saturday. Maybe give Caleb even more of MD's minutes. I noticed his foul shooting is better and he seems more comfortable around the hoop and running a break. Hey, what do we have to lose? I would analyze the two in different ways: Campbell: Setting aside whether he remains injured, we already have a pretty darned good idea what he does and doesn't give us. He was recruited over this year, and he was REALLY recruited over next year. I'm not sure what playing him a lot more does. Sure, maybe you catch "Xavier lightning in a bottle," but it seems clear it's not sustainable. Mourning: No argument from me.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 27, 2017 17:50:08 GMT -5
I do think that Campbell could get more time now that Mosely is out; but I don't imagine he'll get a ton of time for the reasons a lot of people have already stated above. In any case, I'll be at the game tomorrow.
|
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Feb 27, 2017 18:06:04 GMT -5
I do think that Campbell could get more time now that Mosely is out; but I don't imagine he'll get a ton of time for the reasons a lot of people have already stated above. In any case, I'll be at the game tomorrow. I imagine we will get quite a bit of Campbell tomorrow night. I'm disappointed that Jagan is hurt though. I actually do see him as someone who will make us better long term. And he's one of our best distributors. Think we missed him Saturday. Enjoy the game 2003. Lead them to victory.
|
|
|
Post by practice on Feb 27, 2017 18:09:35 GMT -5
Can we get back to the point of this thread? My earlier question still remains unanswered. Why not play Campbell and Mourning Tuesday night and Saturday for extended minutes just to see what they can do? I noticed JT3 started Johnson over MD this Saturday. Maybe give Caleb even more of MD's minutes. I noticed his foul shooting is better and he seems more comfortable around the hoop and running a break. Hey, what do we have to lose? I would analyze the two in different ways: Campbell: Setting aside whether he remains injured, we already have a pretty darned good idea what he does and doesn't give us. He was recruited over this year, and he was REALLY recruited over next year. I'm not sure what playing him a lot more does. Sure, maybe you catch "Xavier lightning in a bottle," but it seems clear it's not sustainable. Mourning: No argument from me. I think JT3 would be run out of town at this point if he finally played Mourning for significant minutes and Trey responded with a productive game.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Feb 27, 2017 18:47:31 GMT -5
I would analyze the two in different ways: Campbell: Setting aside whether he remains injured, we already have a pretty darned good idea what he does and doesn't give us. He was recruited over this year, and he was REALLY recruited over next year. I'm not sure what playing him a lot more does. Sure, maybe you catch "Xavier lightning in a bottle," but it seems clear it's not sustainable. Mourning: No argument from me. I think JT3 would be run out of town at this point if he finally played Mourning for significant minutes and Trey responded with a productive game. Hey they're already trying to run him out of town. What would a couple of extra pitchforks matter?!
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Feb 27, 2017 19:05:15 GMT -5
Like they say, if you're getting run out of town, grab a baton and call it a parade...
|
|
|
Post by practice on Feb 28, 2017 8:06:27 GMT -5
Like they say, if you're getting run out of town, grab a baton and call it a parade... Perhaps he can march to another year with Trey's triumphant performance tonight ... the secret weapon for the BE tourney run ...
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,271
|
Post by prhoya on Feb 28, 2017 9:04:11 GMT -5
As much as people might dislike JT3, I think the primary purpose of attending the game should be to support the team, support the seniors, and in the event that we keep the game close enough to win, to vocally support the team and try to give them an effective home court advantage. If people want to chant "Fire Thompson" nobody will stop them, and people can do whatever they want, but I think, during a game when you have players playing for a coach, and you vocally advocate for his dismissal that's not supporting the team on the floor. 2003, how do you propose the fans/students/alums express that they "are fed up" (like Elvado put it)? Bump. 2003, any suggestions? The next and last home game is on Saturday.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Feb 28, 2017 9:51:15 GMT -5
2003, how do you propose the fans/students/alums express that they "are fed up" (like Elvado put it)? Bump. 2003, any suggestions? The next and last home game is on Saturday. 1. The petition that's already making the rounds. It's a way of showing displeasure with what's going on. 2. On campus gatherings / demonstrations. I know there were some before Esherick was fired. 3. Alumni and/or donors can withhold their money or communicate with the administration or athletic department about the situation. 4. Individuals, Alumni groups or the various Georgetown Clubs can send a unified message to the administration through phone calls, emails, etc. Now, I don't think any of these are particularly effective but I don't think chanting "Fire Thompson!" is going to be effective either. The one exception is alumni donors - the big ones. I think if those individuals withheld money it could make a huge difference. Now, whether those donors even want a coaching changing is obviously unknown. I just think the main goal of attending a game should be to hopefully see your team win first. I also think signs and chants do nothing more than embarrass the university. And for all the concern about our "brand", I just don't see how this helps. I don't think it meaningfully affects the administration's decisions. And, in the event JT3 gets another year (which most seem to think is likely) it's easy to see how it could hurt with recruiting etc. this summer.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,378
|
Post by drquigley on Feb 28, 2017 10:35:45 GMT -5
If I'm not mistaken (a fairly regular occurrence) wasn't a big cause of Esherick's firing a story in the old Washington Star about how much money the basketball program was losing? I thought that prompted the University to come down on Esh and him to respond inappropriately. Anyway, I do think a big drop off in alumni donations and Verizon ticket sales will grab the administrations attention much more than signs and chanting. I know I am considering not purchasing my weekend mini- plan next year, something I would never have thought possible before this year.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,599
|
Post by guru on Feb 28, 2017 10:50:32 GMT -5
Bump. 2003, any suggestions? The next and last home game is on Saturday. 1. The petition that's already making the rounds. It's a way of showing displeasure with what's going on. 2. On campus gatherings / demonstrations. I know there were some before Esherick was fired. 3. Alumni and/or donors can withhold their money or communicate with the administration or athletic department about the situation. 4. Individuals, Alumni groups or the various Georgetown Clubs can send a unified message to the administration through phone calls, emails, etc. Now, I don't think any of these are particularly effective but I don't think chanting "Fire Thompson!" is going to be effective either. The one exception is alumni donors - the big ones. I think if those individuals withheld money it could make a huge difference. Now, whether those donors even want a coaching changing is obviously unknown. I just think the main goal of attending a game should be to hopefully see your team win first. I also think signs and chants do nothing more than embarrass the university. And for all the concern about our "brand", I just don't see how this helps. I don't think it meaningfully affects the administration's decisions. And, in the event JT3 gets another year (which most seem to think is likely) it's easy to see how it could hurt with recruiting etc. this summer. I have canceled my season tickets and told the AD that I would return when a new coach is hired. I don't expect it to change anything, but I think the more voices (and actions) expressing discontent with the current product the better. At this point, I can't imagine next season at Verizon Center if a change isn't made. Our home schedule will be an incremental funeral.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Feb 28, 2017 12:02:34 GMT -5
Bump. 2003, any suggestions? The next and last home game is on Saturday. 1. The petition that's already making the rounds. It's a way of showing displeasure with what's going on. 2. On campus gatherings / demonstrations. I know there were some before Esherick was fired. 3. Alumni and/or donors can withhold their money or communicate with the administration or athletic department about the situation. 4. Individuals, Alumni groups or the various Georgetown Clubs can send a unified message to the administration through phone calls, emails, etc. Now, I don't think any of these are particularly effective but I don't think chanting "Fire Thompson!" is going to be effective either. The one exception is alumni donors - the big ones. I think if those individuals withheld money it could make a huge difference. Now, whether those donors even want a coaching changing is obviously unknown. I just think the main goal of attending a game should be to hopefully see your team win first. I also think signs and chants do nothing more than embarrass the university. And for all the concern about our "brand", I just don't see how this helps. I don't think it meaningfully affects the administration's decisions. And, in the event JT3 gets another year (which most seem to think is likely) it's easy to see how it could hurt with recruiting etc. this summer. Agree with these sentiment but, unfortunately, I suspect the chants and signs will be there
|
|
McBricks
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
What Rocks.
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by McBricks on Feb 28, 2017 12:24:46 GMT -5
I would analyze the two in different ways: Campbell: Setting aside whether he remains injured, we already have a pretty darned good idea what he does and doesn't give us. He was recruited over this year, and he was REALLY recruited over next year. I'm not sure what playing him a lot more does. Sure, maybe you catch "Xavier lightning in a bottle," but it seems clear it's not sustainable. Mourning: No argument from me. I think JT3 would be run out of town at this point if he finally played Mourning for significant minutes and Trey responded with a productive game. #PlayTrey
|
|