|
Post by professorhoya on Sept 19, 2017 14:57:02 GMT -5
With the Hoyasaxa.com front page containing a hit piece on the program, rival programs do not have to bother to conduct negative recruiting against us -- we do it to ourselves! Isn't that site run by the same guy who runs this site? Or is that hoya report?
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Sept 19, 2017 15:20:43 GMT -5
I'm not sure where you have been the last 4 years but this is most certainly the case. This team needs no more experience losing to teams that are better than them. Beating Oregon did them no good last year. My POV is simple. I care not about making any post-season tournament nor the Big East conference's RPI (actually, the more we can screw our Big East bretheren the better. If we can't beat them this year, lets at least drag their numbers down even with a Loss), or even whether the media and country respect our schedule. I care that this team doesn't turn on each other and give up in January/February as per 3 of the last 4 seasons and actually has something positive to draw from going into the following season. I personally think an easy OOC paves the way for that goal much better than a challenging one, especially with a coach brand new to the college game. Because of this, I am fine with this type of schedule for this year and this year only. Personally, I would be fine with a 2004 like season w/l wise and exactly what I expect to be honest. So you're basically saying we stunk and didn't make the tournament for 3 out of 4 years because we played better teams in the OOC? That's nonsense. 2014: We went 9-3 in the OOC (including Michigan State). We went 8-10 in the Big East, and probably only missed the tournament because we lost to DePaul in the BET. The OOC certainly didn't keep us from succeeding. 2015: 8-3 in the OOC with no bad losses. 12-6 in the Big East. 4 seed in the NCAA's. 2016: 7-5 in the OOC. Okay, so this is a year where we probably could have used an easier OOC, but really the Radford loss was the only bad loss. We came close against Maryland, almost beat Duke, and lost to decent Monmouth and Asheville teams. At one point, we were 6-2 in the Big East. So I fail to see how the OOC, even if it might have been a little too strong, was a problem this year. The real problem was falling apart at the end of the year. 2017: 8-4 OOC. The Maryland loss and Arkansas State losses were demoralizing, I agree. But we had an OOC of 9-4. Again, the problem is we got wrecked in the Big East, starting out 0-4, and then losing our last five games. In sum, we've had problems because we've stunk in the Big East, not because the OOC has demoralized us, even when it's been a tough schedule. And your commentary on the Big East is ridiculous. Our ability to be a high level program is premised on a strong Big East. If all the weaker teams had the same attitude you suggest (screwing our Big East partners), the conference would quickly devolve into a weak one. Lastly, as noted elsewhere, I didn't see evidence of the team turning on each other in the past few years. Losing isn't enough evidence of that in my book. No, I'm saying the way our OOC was structured negatively impacted the way our season developed 3 of the last 4 years, resulting in teams that never had a chance to make the tournament because they weren't good enough. 2014: 9-3 included a lost to North Eastern that put us at 1-2 going into games against KSU and VCU. The team had to then play what should have been "gravy" games like must win games to prevent walking out of Puerto Rico 2-3 with the only Kansas as a potential decent win to make up for a bad bad loss. 2016: We lost to Radford the first game of the season putting us in a hole of being 1-3 going into Thanksgiving. 2017: 2-4 going into Thanksgiving thanks to losses to Arkansas St and an overwhelmingly difficult slate of games upfront. I'm not saying the loses or competition are what broke the proverbial camels back. I am saying that the way these schedules were structured put an incredible amount of pressure on the team from the get go that interfered in their ability to develop and improve because once Thanksgiving hit we were already in must win territory.
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Sept 19, 2017 15:52:10 GMT -5
This season's Nov/Dec schedule is a minor, minor issue in the larger world of Georgetown men's basketball. IMO, the disheartened (but passionate!) fans complaining so much about the schedule are overlooking the important things that Coach Ewing is trying to accomplish. Important things: - Teammates not giving up on each other in January/February, as sleepy said - Playing hard for 40 min every game - Learning to play solid, disruptive defense - Learning Coach Ewing's offense - Giving the new coach some time to settle in and learn the nuances of this flavor of his craft - Improving game by game so that the team plays better in March than they did at any other time in the year - Creating a foundation of confidence in the team and the coach, both for players and fans - Experiencing some success in order to have something to build on for following seasons - Creating a positive overall environment so that quality recruits will want to join the team Bemoaning a soft schedule in this season of so much transition is like complaining about the fire department trampling your flowerbed when they come to put your house fire out. Could we at least agree that the bemoaning is over a schedule near unprecedented in its softness (softicity?) for a D1 team, and not just over a merely soft one? And does it make sense to complain because the fire department crushed a prized rosebush and not just some daffodils? All the homeowner should care about is that the fire got put out. (Sorry, I like the analogy)
|
|
LCPolo18
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,406
|
Post by LCPolo18 on Sept 19, 2017 15:52:25 GMT -5
2016: 7-5 in the OOC. Okay, so this is a year where we probably could have used an easier OOC, but really the Radford loss was the only bad loss. We came close against Maryland, almost beat Duke, and lost to decent Monmouth and Asheville teams. Yes Monmouth and Ashville were decent teams in terms of RPI/KenPom, but to most fans those losses were unacceptable. 2017: 8-4 OOC. The Maryland loss and Arkansas State losses were demoralizing, I agree. Add in the demoralizing losses to Wisconsin and Oklahoma State. Sure they were good teams, but the Hoyas took a beating. For a lot of fans the season was over after Maui.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2017 16:12:40 GMT -5
2016: 7-5 in the OOC. Okay, so this is a year where we probably could have used an easier OOC, but really the Radford loss was the only bad loss. We came close against Maryland, almost beat Duke, and lost to decent Monmouth and Asheville teams. Yes Monmouth and Ashville were decent teams in terms of RPI/KenPom, but to most fans those losses were unacceptable. 2017: 8-4 OOC. The Maryland loss and Arkansas State losses were demoralizing, I agree. Add in the demoralizing losses to Wisconsin and Oklahoma State. Sure they were good teams, but the Hoyas took a beating. For a lot of fans the season was over after Maui. Last year was a bad year but the other season Sleepy is trying to pass off as being hurt by the scheduling are wrong.. 2013-14 the team won 10 of 12 after the loss to Northeastern.. They also beat #7 Mich State. & #13 Creighton later in the year.. In what world can that be construed as giving up or quitting? The 15-16 team was 6-2 in BE play to start with wins over Creighton & Xavier, how is that quitting after a tough non conference? Bottom line is the team hasn't been good these last two years, scheduling had nothing to do with it imo.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.html
|
|
LCPolo18
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,406
|
Post by LCPolo18 on Sept 19, 2017 16:25:24 GMT -5
Yes Monmouth and Ashville were decent teams in terms of RPI/KenPom, but to most fans those losses were unacceptable. Add in the demoralizing losses to Wisconsin and Oklahoma State. Sure they were good teams, but the Hoyas took a beating. For a lot of fans the season was over after Maui. Last year was a bad year but the other season Sleepy is trying to pass off as being hurt by the scheduling are wrong.. 2013-14 the team won 10 of 12 after the loss to Northeastern.. They also beat #7 Mich State. & #13 Creighton later in the year.. In what world can that be construed as giving up or quitting? The 15-16 team was 6-2 in BE play to start with wins over Creighton & Xavier, how is that quitting after a tough non conference? Bottom line is the team hasn't been good these last two years, scheduling had nothing to do with it imo.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.htmlI agree with you. Sorry I wasn't trying to further Sleepy's argument. I just felt that the post I was quoting glossed over some pretty bad OOC losses the past two years.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,329
|
Post by vv83 on Sept 19, 2017 16:33:07 GMT -5
Yes Monmouth and Ashville were decent teams in terms of RPI/KenPom, but to most fans those losses were unacceptable. Add in the demoralizing losses to Wisconsin and Oklahoma State. Sure they were good teams, but the Hoyas took a beating. For a lot of fans the season was over after Maui. Last year was a bad year but the other season Sleepy is trying to pass off as being hurt by the scheduling are wrong.. 2013-14 the team won 10 of 12 after the loss to Northeastern.. They also beat #7 Mich State. & #13 Creighton later in the year.. In what world can that be construed as giving up or quitting? The 15-16 team was 6-2 in BE play to start with wins over Creighton & Xavier, how is that quitting after a tough non conference? Bottom line is the team hasn't been good these last two years, scheduling had nothing to do with it imo.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.htmlUNC Asheville was a solid mid major team that we should still have beaten.But I would say we would have lost 7 of 10 against that Monmouth team. They were better than us, just much quicker with the ball. The late era JTIII teams struggled against any team with players that could attack the rim off the dribble and hit open shots, and monmouth had quite a few of these kind of guys. I don't know if it qualifies as a "bad loss" or not, but it was apparent within the first 5 minutes of that game that monmouth was simply a better team than us, in part because of talent, in part because of the specific strength/weakness matchup. The Radford loss was the unforgivable one that season. they had two good offensive guards, but we played such awful defense on them. And we both missed wide open shots and failed to defend the perimeter at all in the closing minutes of that game. I will always look at that game as the beginning of the end for the JTIII era. We had always been able to beat these kind of teams at Verizon during his tenure. Playing such a dumb, lackluster game at home against such an inferior opponent took the existing concerns with JTIII up to full red alert for me, and it was pretty much straight downhill from there for him.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Sept 19, 2017 16:36:11 GMT -5
Yes Monmouth and Ashville were decent teams in terms of RPI/KenPom, but to most fans those losses were unacceptable. Add in the demoralizing losses to Wisconsin and Oklahoma State. Sure they were good teams, but the Hoyas took a beating. For a lot of fans the season was over after Maui. Last year was a bad year but the other season Sleepy is trying to pass off as being hurt by the scheduling are wrong.. 2013-14 the team won 10 of 12 after the loss to Northeastern.. They also beat #7 Mich State. & #13 Creighton later in the year.. In what world can that be construed as giving up or quitting? The 15-16 team was 6-2 in BE play to start with wins over Creighton & Xavier, how is that quitting after a tough non conference? Bottom line is the team hasn't been good these last two years, scheduling had nothing to do with it imo.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.htmlI didn't say the teams gave up or quit right after those loses. None if them did, at least in my opinion. I'm saying the awful starts seriously impeded their ability to improve and grow they way they needed to by going from "gravy games" to must win games in November. That kind of pressure and stress wasn't helpful as far as I could see.
|
|
hoyasaxa2003
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,886
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Sept 19, 2017 16:55:08 GMT -5
No, I'm saying the way our OOC was structured negatively impacted the way our season developed 3 of the last 4 years, resulting in teams that never had a chance to make the tournament because they weren't good enough. 2014: 9-3 included a lost to North Eastern that put us at 1-2 going into games against KSU and VCU. The team had to then play what should have been "gravy" games like must win games to prevent walking out of Puerto Rico 2-3 with the only Kansas as a potential decent win to make up for a bad bad loss. 2016: We lost to Radford the first game of the season putting us in a hole of being 1-3 going into Thanksgiving. 2017: 2-4 going into Thanksgiving thanks to losses to Arkansas St and an overwhelmingly difficult slate of games upfront. I'm not saying the loses or competition are what broke the proverbial camels back. I am saying that the way these schedules were structured put an incredible amount of pressure on the team from the get go that interfered in their ability to develop and improve because once Thanksgiving hit we were already in must win territory. I guess we just view things different. In 2014, the Northeastern loss was bad, but it certainly didn't put pressure on us that caused us to have problems immediately. As of January 11, 2014, we were 11-4, and 3-1 in the Big East, and were 10 for our previous 12. In 2016, Radford was terrible, but again we were 6-2 in the Big East on January 26. In other words, by the time it mattered, any pressure from the 7-5 OOC should have dissipated. And in 2017, I really just think we weren't a good team and I don't see how a different OOC schedule would've helped. Yes, the Maryland loss was bad, but if we could replay that last minute, we'd have won that 9 times out of ten. I guess a more general way of saying it is that I don't think different OOC schedules would have resulted in us making the NCAA tournament. In fact, part of the reason we almost made it in 2014 was because of the strong schedule. Had we done a schedule in 2014 like we will have this season, we wouldn't have even been in the discussion.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,402
|
Post by iowa80 on Sept 19, 2017 17:06:08 GMT -5
Could we at least agree that the bemoaning is over a schedule near unprecedented in its softness (softicity?) for a D1 team, and not just over a merely soft one? And does it make sense to complain because the fire department crushed a prized rosebush and not just some daffodils? All the homeowner should care about is that the fire got put out. (Sorry, I like the analogy) Well, OK, but this schedule isn't a crushed rosebush, it's a Carrera Cabriolet. I've seen one credible assessment tweeted (sorry, no link) that it's the second worst D1 schedule since the turn of this century--#1 being the Baylor team in the middle of a murder investigation. To me, that goes way beyond just "soft." Soft would be fine.
|
|
boxout05
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 573
|
Post by boxout05 on Sept 19, 2017 17:16:31 GMT -5
No, I'm saying the way our OOC was structured negatively impacted the way our season developed 3 of the last 4 years, resulting in teams that never had a chance to make the tournament because they weren't good enough. 2014: 9-3 included a lost to North Eastern that put us at 1-2 going into games against KSU and VCU. The team had to then play what should have been "gravy" games like must win games to prevent walking out of Puerto Rico 2-3 with the only Kansas as a potential decent win to make up for a bad bad loss. 2016: We lost to Radford the first game of the season putting us in a hole of being 1-3 going into Thanksgiving. 2017: 2-4 going into Thanksgiving thanks to losses to Arkansas St and an overwhelmingly difficult slate of games upfront. I'm not saying the loses or competition are what broke the proverbial camels back. I am saying that the way these schedules were structured put an incredible amount of pressure on the team from the get go that interfered in their ability to develop and improve because once Thanksgiving hit we were already in must win territory. Scheduling Northeastern, Radford, and Ark St was too much? That set us up for failure? Jeez. If you want to be a tournament team, go out and win those games. I can maybe see where LC is coming from with getting creamed in Maui last season, but am I missing something?
|
|
bigskyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by bigskyhoya on Sept 19, 2017 19:00:29 GMT -5
It's not fair or accurate to compare any two year period in the past with last year and this year. Our team completely fell apart last year, we have a new coach and for the most part a new and untested team. Nobody knows how this team will perform this year. Personally, I wish the schedule was a bit tougher but I understand avoiding the meat grinder right off the bat.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2017 19:27:53 GMT -5
Last year was a bad year but the other season Sleepy is trying to pass off as being hurt by the scheduling are wrong.. 2013-14 the team won 10 of 12 after the loss to Northeastern.. They also beat #7 Mich State. & #13 Creighton later in the year.. In what world can that be construed as giving up or quitting? The 15-16 team was 6-2 in BE play to start with wins over Creighton & Xavier, how is that quitting after a tough non conference? Bottom line is the team hasn't been good these last two years, scheduling had nothing to do with it imo.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.htmlI didn't say the teams gave up or quit right after those loses. None if them did, at least in my opinion. I'm saying the awful starts seriously impeded their ability to improve and grow they way they needed to by going from "gravy games" to must win games in November. That kind of pressure and stress wasn't helpful as far as I could see. Here's the schedule, outside of last season pick the year that supports your perception/theory best.. It's hard to discuss without specifics.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.html
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Sept 19, 2017 20:58:17 GMT -5
I didn't say the teams gave up or quit right after those loses. None if them did, at least in my opinion. I'm saying the awful starts seriously impeded their ability to improve and grow they way they needed to by going from "gravy games" to must win games in November. That kind of pressure and stress wasn't helpful as far as I could see. Here's the schedule, outside of last season pick the year that supports your perception/theory best.. It's hard to discuss without specifics.. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/georgetown/2016-schedule.htmlI've been through this same discussion multiple times, multiples threads, multiple years. You may not agree but I don't feel the need to rehash my thoughts for the second time on the same page. I really don't think III's schedule helped his teams improve and likely ended up costing him games to experiment with line-ups, schemes, and playing time. They certainly paid off come seeding time, there is no denying that, but I really never saw the benefit in quality of play that the overly aggressive schedules had. Specifically the last 4 years, seasons have been particularly unenjoyable with the amount of pressure the team has to win once Thanksgiving hits. If I feel that as a fan, I can only imagine how much fun it was to deal with as a player and a coach. My mind is not going to change and hasn't in 7 years. III's scheduling stunk.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Sept 19, 2017 21:14:11 GMT -5
No, I'm saying the way our OOC was structured negatively impacted the way our season developed 3 of the last 4 years, resulting in teams that never had a chance to make the tournament because they weren't good enough. 2014: 9-3 included a lost to North Eastern that put us at 1-2 going into games against KSU and VCU. The team had to then play what should have been "gravy" games like must win games to prevent walking out of Puerto Rico 2-3 with the only Kansas as a potential decent win to make up for a bad bad loss. 2016: We lost to Radford the first game of the season putting us in a hole of being 1-3 going into Thanksgiving. 2017: 2-4 going into Thanksgiving thanks to losses to Arkansas St and an overwhelmingly difficult slate of games upfront. I'm not saying the loses or competition are what broke the proverbial camels back. I am saying that the way these schedules were structured put an incredible amount of pressure on the team from the get go that interfered in their ability to develop and improve because once Thanksgiving hit we were already in must win territory. I guess we just view things different. In 2014, the Northeastern loss was bad, but it certainly didn't put pressure on us that caused us to have problems immediately. As of January 11, 2014, we were 11-4, and 3-1 in the Big East, and were 10 for our previous 12. In 2016, Radford was terrible, but again we were 6-2 in the Big East on January 26. In other words, by the time it mattered, any pressure from the 7-5 OOC should have dissipated. And in 2017, I really just think we weren't a good team and I don't see how a different OOC schedule would've helped. Yes, the Maryland loss was bad, but if we could replay that last minute, we'd have won that 9 times out of ten. I guess a more general way of saying it is that I don't think different OOC schedules would have resulted in us making the NCAA tournament. In fact, part of the reason we almost made it in 2014 was because of the strong schedule. Had we done a schedule in 2014 like we will have this season, we wouldn't have even been in the discussion. 2014: Yes we had recovered by January, we also peaked at that point and I don't think it is coincidence. My point, which keeps either being ignored or missed, is that the two games that followed it went from games to test your bench and unusual line-ups against decent competition early in the season to must wins. That was development lost. It also put a lot more pressure on Big East games like DePaul, a pressure our teams didn't handle well, because we had already lost an RPI killer game. We over compensated in December and January to "fix" a NorthEastern blunder, instead of just steadily improving and potentially peaking a bit later and improving. 2016: Again, we after a 1-3 start the team really has to come together to recover, giving themselves very little room for error going into the reset of non-conference. I really don't think the pressure from the 7-5 non-conference schedule ever dissipitated. Every loss in Big East play just amplified every previous loss, making recovering from them that much more difficult. 2017: I really couldn't disagree more. Were we a good team? No. Could we have become? Idk. The Maryland loss is should still haunt JTIII's dreams. We win that, I'm not sure I see us losing that Arkansas State game. A completely different tenor and tone to the season starting 3-0. Maybe in this case we don't beat Oregon but maybe we would have been better off not facing Oklahoma State. Who knows, really. Look, you may not agree. That is fine. But I don't see the resurgences we had as evidence of early losses not impacting the season. I actually see them as evidence that we usually had to right a ship that wasn't sinking too quickly. III was great when he was able to do well with these impossible schedules. The problem was he didn't know what to do when they lost and that is bound to happen.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2017 21:35:12 GMT -5
I've been through this same discussion multiple times, multiples threads, multiple years. You may not agree but I don't feel the need to rehash my thoughts for the second time on the same page. I really don't think III's schedule helped his teams improve and likely ended up costing him games to experiment with line-ups, schemes, and playing time. They certainly paid off come seeding time, there is no denying that, but I really never saw the benefit in quality of play that the overly aggressive schedules had. Specifically the last 4 years, seasons have been particularly unenjoyable with the amount of pressure the team has to win once Thanksgiving hits. If I feel that as a fan, I can only imagine how much fun it was to deal with as a player and a coach. My mind is not going to change and hasn't in 7 years. III's scheduling stunk. Cool, we can agree to disagree but your perceptions on this subject never stand up to scrutiny..
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Sept 19, 2017 21:48:51 GMT -5
This season's Nov/Dec schedule is a minor, minor issue in the larger world of Georgetown men's basketball. IMO, the disheartened (but passionate!) fans complaining so much about the schedule are overlooking the important things that Coach Ewing is trying to accomplish. Important things: - Teammates not giving up on each other in January/February, as sleepy said - Playing hard for 40 min every game - Learning to play solid, disruptive defense - Learning Coach Ewing's offense - Giving the new coach some time to settle in and learn the nuances of this flavor of his craft - Improving game by game so that the team plays better in March than they did at any other time in the year - Creating a foundation of confidence in the team and the coach, both for players and fans - Experiencing some success in order to have something to build on for following seasons - Creating a positive overall environment so that quality recruits will want to join the team Bemoaning a soft schedule in this season of so much transition is like complaining about the fire department trampling your flowerbed when they come to put your house fire out.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Sept 19, 2017 21:50:12 GMT -5
I've been through this same discussion multiple times, multiples threads, multiple years. You may not agree but I don't feel the need to rehash my thoughts for the second time on the same page. I really don't think III's schedule helped his teams improve and likely ended up costing him games to experiment with line-ups, schemes, and playing time. They certainly paid off come seeding time, there is no denying that, but I really never saw the benefit in quality of play that the overly aggressive schedules had. Specifically the last 4 years, seasons have been particularly unenjoyable with the amount of pressure the team has to win once Thanksgiving hits. If I feel that as a fan, I can only imagine how much fun it was to deal with as a player and a coach. My mind is not going to change and hasn't in 7 years. III's scheduling stunk. Cool, we can agree to disagree but your perceptions on this subject never stand up to scrutiny.. I mean, the results speak for themselves. The only thing that doesn't stand up to scrutiny are III's results against these schedules the last 5 years, unfortunately for us.
|
|
dchoya72
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,488
|
Post by dchoya72 on Sept 20, 2017 6:34:00 GMT -5
How about letting the coach implement his strategy and get his feet wet in the NCAA. I think this season is just a transition and testing ground. The tests will come in the Big East. Are we then playing coherent basketball, strong defense, getting the 50-50 balls, taking good shots, defending the rim, sharing the ball, and everybody involved with the offense, not watching one or two people carrying the load, playing as a team with a healthy respect and trust in one another, and without the circus choreography that has taken place on offense over the past several years. I'm believing in Patrick, his sense of competition and the knowledge that all eyes are on him and the team. If we get a few more solid, skilled hungry players the Hoyas will be fine going forward.
|
|
|
Post by FromTheBeginning on Sept 20, 2017 8:41:57 GMT -5
I agree - the schedule is what it is - like it or not (for the record I don't like it). Let's let PE run his program as he sees fit and see what happens - I'm sure there will be plenty of time for complaining later. Hopefully he will surprise us all and have a competitive team we can all get behind. This recruiting weekend is much more important in the grand scheme of things.
|
|