|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Dec 4, 2019 22:33:01 GMT -5
You'all wanted Mac. Here's the keys to the HOUSE! You all wanted him, you gotta him! I sincerely hope people are blowing up that dbag’s twitter after tonight’s performance by Mac. Yes, we got him and we’re damn glad to have him.
|
|
Eurostar
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by Eurostar on Dec 4, 2019 22:49:30 GMT -5
Akinjo led the league in assists and was BE freshman of the year last year. I don't know how anyone (including his family) could have expected him to accomplish more than this. Did they think he was going to put up Trae Young numbers? His assists were down this season, but do you pull the plug after 7 games following a successful freshman season? I don't really understasnd it. Agreed. Not much more he could have asked for. Most minutes per game and most shots per game on the team this year. Of the 2 guards (Mac and James), James clearly had the longer leash with Coach Ewing. If he is unhappy with his playing situation, then it cant be from a lack of opportunity.
|
|
daytonahoya31
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,199
Member is Online
|
Post by daytonahoya31 on Dec 4, 2019 23:11:26 GMT -5
This may sound dramatic, but I believe James just changed the trajectory of his basketball life. I don’t think he will be given a similar opportunity again. I believe he will regret his behavior and decision, once he matures. You only get so many chances in life. Why not? He's a talented player, he'll get another shot, it's up to him to make the most of it... You aren't understanding what he's saying. James at Georgetown had the keys from minute one. He played 35 minutes a night, or close to it. The offense ran through him. Recruiting decisions were made around his skillset. What he's saying is James may not see that kind of autonomy again. Of course he's going to be on another roster. Of course he's going to be a starter on whatever team he goes to. But, is he every going to be the franchise player again? That's the question. Maybe, maybe not. And if the answer is no, that's going to have a negative affect on his basketball career as a whole, considering he's sacrificing a year before he can play again, and considering the NBA frowns on you as a prospect the longer you stay in college
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,650
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 4, 2019 23:20:58 GMT -5
James is never going to whiff the NBA, let’s get real. He struggled mightily from the new distance this year and he’s not going to finish at the rim in the league. Most of all, he’s a quitter and disrespects his coach and teammates.
|
|
smokeyjack
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,301
|
Post by smokeyjack on Dec 4, 2019 23:24:10 GMT -5
James is never going to whiff the NBA, let’s get real. He struggled mightily from the new distance this year and he’s not going to finish at the rim in the league. Most of all, he’s a quitter and disrespects his coach and teammates. Correct. I am going to miss the way he could kill a game by getting to the line, but he has ZERO chance of playing in the league.
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Dec 4, 2019 23:30:52 GMT -5
Akinj-who? Moving on...
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Dec 4, 2019 23:32:16 GMT -5
The real question is, what’s happened with Leblanc? He seemed like a diffferrnt player this whole year with a different attitude. He was clearly in the dog house but what shifted?
|
|
madhoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 289
|
Post by madhoya on Dec 4, 2019 23:32:33 GMT -5
Why not? He's a talented player, he'll get another shot, it's up to him to make the most of it... You aren't understanding what he's saying. James at Georgetown had the keys from minute one. He played 35 minutes a night, or close to it. The offense ran through him. Recruiting decisions were made around his skillset. What he's saying is James may not see that kind of autonomy again. Of course he's going to be on another roster. Of course he's going to be a starter on whatever team he goes to. But, is he every going to be the franchise player again? That's the question. Maybe, maybe not. And if the answer is no, that's going to have a negative affect on his basketball career as a whole, considering he's sacrificing a year before he can play again, and considering the NBA frowns on you as a prospect the longer you stay in college ....let’s hope we don’t see a Kenny Brunner story headline!!!
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Dec 5, 2019 7:19:41 GMT -5
We will see how the team progresses without these two players. To me, the biggest impact might be on the 20-21 team. with these two players, that team had a high ceiling, IF they had played together with the rest of the team and worked toward their potential. If that was not going to happen, however, we are better without them. It is a wasted opportunity, but not the end of the world. We will see what happens with these young men- and we will see what happens to the Hoyas over the next few years.
|
|
jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,204
|
Post by jwp91 on Dec 5, 2019 8:04:10 GMT -5
The following quote keeps coming to me.....if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. This situation is the perfect illustration.
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,689
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 5, 2019 8:39:28 GMT -5
Can we change the title to John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 no longer playing?
|
|
royski
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,297
|
Post by royski on Dec 5, 2019 15:49:07 GMT -5
. Nearly a third of the roster has been accused under oath of serious crimes in Court. 3 players / 16 rostered players at the time = 18.75% I guess that’s “nearly a third” if you round up to 33% 4/13 is 31% if we're not using walk-ons to fudge the numbers. So yes, nearly a third. And we should probably include Walker and Sodom if we really want to be honest about the state of this program. I've never seen anything like this at Georgetown and neither have you. Maybe you think it's acceptable that we're losing multiple players a year under credible suspicion of crimes. Or that even now, we have multiple players still playing on the team that a judge has determined have a substantial likelihood of losing at trial against claims of sexual harassment, burglary, assault, and battery of young women. I don't. Say I'm on a high horse all you want, I guess that's what having moral standards beyond "trust the program" is these days. One kid does something wrong, stuff happens. Five kids credibly accused of serious crimes in three years? There's a culture problem here, I wasn't a fan of JT3's on court results, but he ran a CLEAN program. I don't think an expectation that we avoid yearly legal trouble is too high a bar.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,219
|
Post by hoya9797 on Dec 5, 2019 16:05:19 GMT -5
3 players / 16 rostered players at the time = 18.75% I guess that’s “nearly a third” if you round up to 33% 4/13 is 31% if we're not using walk-ons to fudge the numbers. So yes, nearly a third. And we should probably include Walker and Sodom if we really want to be honest about the state of this program. I've never seen anything like this at Georgetown and neither have you. Maybe you think it's acceptable that we're losing multiple players a year under credible suspicion of crimes. Or that even now, we have multiple players still playing on the team that a judge has determined have a substantial likelihood of losing at trial against claims of sexual harassment, burglary, assault, and battery of young women. I don't. Say I'm on a high horse all you want, I guess that's what having moral standards beyond "trust the program" is these days. One kid does something wrong, stuff happens. Five kids credibly accused of serious crimes in three years? There's a culture problem here, I wasn't a fan of JT3's on court results, but he ran a CLEAN program. I don't think an expectation that we avoid yearly legal trouble is too high a bar. I agree with you. Winning the game last night was pretty cool but this idea that one good night ends the rot at the core of this team is nuts. And, that's not even mentioning the serious questions about the coaching staff and their ability to do the job at the level we need it done.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Dec 5, 2019 16:24:48 GMT -5
Wait - the level who needs it done? You? Fans? The University?
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Dec 5, 2019 16:48:32 GMT -5
3 players / 16 rostered players at the time = 18.75% I guess that’s “nearly a third” if you round up to 33% 4/13 is 31% if we're not using walk-ons to fudge the numbers. So yes, nearly a third. And we should probably include Walker and Sodom if we really want to be honest about the state of this program. I've never seen anything like this at Georgetown and neither have you. Maybe you think it's acceptable that we're losing multiple players a year under credible suspicion of crimes. Or that even now, we have multiple players still playing on the team that a judge has determined have a substantial likelihood of losing at trial against claims of sexual harassment, burglary, assault, and battery of young women. I don't. Say I'm on a high horse all you want, I guess that's what having moral standards beyond "trust the program" is these days. One kid does something wrong, stuff happens. Five kids credibly accused of serious crimes in three years? There's a culture problem here, I wasn't a fan of JT3's on court results, but he ran a CLEAN program. I don't think an expectation that we avoid yearly legal trouble is too high a bar. Did you even read the police reports? I wouldn't say anything in there that the victims are accusing anyone of would be considered a "serious crime". I'm not even sure any of it rises above a misdemeanor though I am sure there is a layer on here that can correct me.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,219
|
Post by hoya9797 on Dec 5, 2019 17:00:16 GMT -5
Wait - the level who needs it done? You? Fans? The University? At a minimum, it's what the university thinks justifies the investment in the team. But, it's more than that. I guess we all can have different expectations, and mine tend to be modest. In my opinion, we should be near the top of the Big East in most years, should be in the tournament in most years, and, on occasion, have a team that could legitimately make a Final Four run. What I have seen over the last 2 seasons and change have given me little hope that these expectations will be met. I'd love to be wrong. I don't think I am.
|
|
thedragon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 2,377
|
Post by thedragon on Dec 5, 2019 17:17:33 GMT -5
Hypothetical. 3 people go to one of their girlfriends house. The guy and his girlfriend get into an argument. The guy believes hes owed "money" from her and takes some things on his way out and makes a lewd gesture toward the woman. He tells the 2 friends sitting in the living room, "lets go". The girlfriend is furious. She tells her roommate who says you should call the police. The police arrive and tell the roommates to fill out reports on everyone who was there at the time of the alleged crime/act. After the police elect NOT to bring charges due to the he said/she said nature of events, the complainant asks for a TRO claiming fear of her own and roommates safety, as one of the gentleman has been texting her repeatedly to drop the whole thing or things will go badly for her. The TROs are granted out of an abundance of caution.
Now in this hypothetical, what should the culpability/punishment of the 2 friends be? What should the culpability/punishment of the male aggressor be? Is this a somewhat common lovers quarrel without any charged crime? Or is this a more heinous crime with greater repercussions warranted?
I am not saying these are the events related to Georgetown or anyone else associated with the program. What I am pointing out - is that there are many examples of circumstances, with the fact pattern we do know, that would not warrant public disciplinary action. Furthermore, these persons employee/school has to weigh the effects of a more explanatory statement. Is releasing 2 of the individuals from any wrongdoing implying that the alleged victims are not to be believed? Is holding one of the people to a higher standard than the employer/school would hold any other member to, appropriate under similar circumstances?
The amount of hand-wringing by people claiming that the administration is wrong, certain players should be suspended, or that we are owed a finite explanation is simply not grounded in reality.
We all have different opinions on an array of difficult issues - but the righteous indignation of many with a partial set of facts is a little hard to be on board with from my perspective.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Dec 5, 2019 17:49:26 GMT -5
Hypothetical. 3 people go to one of their girlfriends house. The guy and his girlfriend get into an argument. The guy believes hes owed "money" from her and takes some things on his way out and makes a lewd gesture toward the woman. He tells the 2 friends sitting in the living room, "lets go". The girlfriend is furious. She tells her roommate who says you should call the police. The police arrive and tell the roommates to fill out reports on everyone who was there at the time of the alleged crime/act. After the police elect NOT to bring charges due to the he said/she said nature of events, the complainant asks for a TRO claiming fear of her own and roommates safety, as one of the gentleman has been texting her repeatedly to drop the whole thing or things will go badly for her. The TROs are granted out of an abundance of caution. Now in this hypothetical, what should the culpability/punishment of the 2 friends be? What should the culpability/punishment of the male aggressor be? Is this a somewhat common lovers quarrel without any charged crime? Or is this a more heinous crime with greater repercussions warranted? I am not saying these are the events related to Georgetown or anyone else associated with the program. What I am pointing out - is that there are many examples of circumstances, with the fact pattern we do know, that would not warrant public disciplinary action. Furthermore, these persons employee/school has to weigh the effects of a more explanatory statement. Is releasing 2 of the individuals from any wrongdoing implying that the alleged victims are not to be believed? Is holding one of the people to a higher standard than the employer/school would hold any other member to, appropriate under similar circumstances? The amount of hand-wringing by people claiming that the administration is wrong, certain players should be suspended, or that we are owed a finite explanation is simply not grounded in reality. We all have different opinions on an array of difficult issues - but the righteous indignation of many with a partial set of facts is a little hard to be on board with from my perspective. This x1000. The fact that people continue to parade around here passing judgement on accusations and speculation is outrageous.
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Dec 6, 2019 11:13:10 GMT -5
I keep hearing the word "assault" in the context of the allegations. I think we need to be careful with how we perceive this. I have no legal experience and in my mind when I heard "assault" it immediately brought to mind physical harm being done: a punch, a kick, a push, or something else involving physical contact being made. Then when you take original language that was floating around the internet after this all surfaced, "sexual assault", obviously even more dire scenarios came to mind. Since then, "sexual" and "assault" have been separated (harm already done unfortunately), and now we hear "sexual harassment" and "assault" alone.
After looking into it a tiny bit it seems in DC "assault" can involve a threat of force alone, with no physical contact. From what I've read it seems like the assault in this case might refer to the alleged threat that was made. Clearly threats are serious and can be a criminal matter but I'm guessing that the nuance of the way "assault" is used in this matter is lost on many people, and that most casual readers will think the accusation involves players beating the accusers in some way, when it doesn't actually seem to. The situation is serious, and if proven there should be consequences. But I think when we discuss and think about the allegations it is important to keep the actual definition of "assault" in mind.
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Dec 6, 2019 11:18:45 GMT -5
I keep hearing the word "assault" in the context of the allegations. I think we need to be careful with how we perceive this. I have no legal experience and in my mind when I heard "assault" it immediately brought to mind physical harm being done: a punch, a kick, a push, or something else involving physical contact being made. Then when you take original language that was floating around the internet after this all surfaced, "sexual assault", obviously even more dire scenarios came to mind. Since then, "sexual" and "assault" have been separated (harm already done unfortunately), and now we hear "sexual harassment" and "assault" alone. After looking into it a tiny bit it seems in DC "assault" can involve a threat of force alone, with no physical contact. From what I've read it seems like the assault in this case might refer to the alleged threat that was made. Clearly threats are serious and can be a criminal matter but I'm guessing that the nuance of the way "assault" is used in this matter is lost on many people, and that most casual readers will think the accusation involve players beating the accusers in some way, when it doesn't actually seem to. The situation is serious, and if proven there should be consequences. But I think when we discuss and think about the allegations it is important to keep the actual definition of "assault" in mind. THANK YOU! You nailed it CenterCourt400s. I've been trying to get these same points across via multiple threads.
|
|