(02-26-2018 10:31 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 09:02 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Agents are interested in influencing players they think will provide a return on investment. The group that Tubby should focus upon are the three and four star players that will not likely make a lucrative living playing basketball, but will be good college players. A good example is Lomax (unless you think WSU cheated to sign him). Also, I surmise grad transfers are available without cheating. For example, there is no evidence Nick King took money or benefits to attend MTSU rather than Memphis.

I disagree that we shouldn't go after the best players we can get. When they put their hand out, then move on, but don't pass on them just because you think they're too good not to cheat. That, we don't know.

And stating that there is no evidence for something is a negative hypothesis, and you know about negative hypotheses. There wasn't any KNOWN evidence that any of these guys in the news took money or benefits until a few days ago.

Speaking of WSU, there is, apparently, evidence that they did something unlawful, as they were named in the FBI probe, so who is to say whether or not they paid Lomax.

I do agree with what I believe if your sentiment, though. We should do the best we can do without cheating. And I say that to commend you, because a lot of people on this board seem to have much higher standards about where they think the basketball program should be than they do about how we get there. UCLA doesn't hang Final Four banners because they have lots of national championship ones. We don't hang ours because most of them were vacated, and we aren't allowed to. I'd like to hang the next one we get. UConn's four NC banners looked pretty good hanging up there.

Accusing someone of cheating is a serious charge that requires evidence to accept. There is no evidence that MTSU or WSU cheated to sign King and Lomax, respectively, just as there is no evidence of cheating by Tubby in a failed attempt to obtain their services.

I am ok with Tubby reaching out to five stars under special circumstances (eg, an honest hometown hero), but realistically it is a waste of time competing with the Bluebloods for the very best talent who abide by the rules. Fortunately, we can win games in the Tourney without one and done type players.

(02-26-2018 11:10 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 10:31 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 09:02 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Agents are interested in influencing players they think will provide a return on investment. The group that Tubby should focus upon are the three and four star players that will not likely make a lucrative living playing basketball, but will be good college players. A good example is Lomax (unless you think WSU cheated to sign him). Also, I surmise grad transfers are available without cheating. For example, there is no evidence Nick King took money or benefits to attend MTSU rather than Memphis.

I disagree that we shouldn't go after the best players we can get. When they put their hand out, then move on, but don't pass on them just because you think they're too good not to cheat. That, we don't know.

And stating that there is no evidence for something is a negative hypothesis, and you know about negative hypotheses. There wasn't any KNOWN evidence that any of these guys in the news took money or benefits until a few days ago.

Speaking of WSU, there is, apparently, evidence that they did something unlawful, as they were named in the FBI probe, so who is to say whether or not they paid Lomax.

I do agree with what I believe if your sentiment, though. We should do the best we can do without cheating. And I say that to commend you, because a lot of people on this board seem to have much higher standards about where they think the basketball program should be than they do about how we get there. UCLA doesn't hang Final Four banners because they have lots of national championship ones. We don't hang ours because most of them were vacated, and we aren't allowed to. I'd like to hang the next one we get. UConn's four NC banners looked pretty good hanging up there.

Accusing someone of cheating is a serious charge that requires evidence to accept. There is no evidence that MTSU or WSU cheated to sign King and Lomax, respectively, just as there is no evidence of cheating by Tubby in a failed attempt to obtain their services.

I am ok with Tubby reaching out to five stars under special circumstances (eg, an honest hometown hero), but realistically it is a waste of time competing with the Bluebloods for the very best talent who abide by the rules. Fortunately, we can win games in the Tourney without one and done type players.

Prove it.

(02-26-2018 11:20 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:10 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 10:31 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 09:02 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Agents are interested in influencing players they think will provide a return on investment. The group that Tubby should focus upon are the three and four star players that will not likely make a lucrative living playing basketball, but will be good college players. A good example is Lomax (unless you think WSU cheated to sign him). Also, I surmise grad transfers are available without cheating. For example, there is no evidence Nick King took money or benefits to attend MTSU rather than Memphis.

I disagree that we shouldn't go after the best players we can get. When they put their hand out, then move on, but don't pass on them just because you think they're too good not to cheat. That, we don't know.

And stating that there is no evidence for something is a negative hypothesis, and you know about negative hypotheses. There wasn't any KNOWN evidence that any of these guys in the news took money or benefits until a few days ago.

Speaking of WSU, there is, apparently, evidence that they did something unlawful, as they were named in the FBI probe, so who is to say whether or not they paid Lomax.

I do agree with what I believe if your sentiment, though. We should do the best we can do without cheating. And I say that to commend you, because a lot of people on this board seem to have much higher standards about where they think the basketball program should be than they do about how we get there. UCLA doesn't hang Final Four banners because they have lots of national championship ones. We don't hang ours because most of them were vacated, and we aren't allowed to. I'd like to hang the next one we get. UConn's four NC banners looked pretty good hanging up there.

Accusing someone of cheating is a serious charge that requires evidence to accept. There is no evidence that MTSU or WSU cheated to sign King and Lomax, respectively, just as there is no evidence of cheating by Tubby in a failed attempt to obtain their services.

I am ok with Tubby reaching out to five stars under special circumstances (eg, an honest hometown hero), but realistically it is a waste of time competing with the Bluebloods for the very best talent who abide by the rules. Fortunately, we can win games in the Tourney without one and done type players.

Prove it.

Prove what? There is no evidence that Tubby cheated and I will not accuse him of it until there is just cause.

(02-26-2018 11:28 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:20 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:10 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 10:31 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 09:02 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  Agents are interested in influencing players they think will provide a return on investment. The group that Tubby should focus upon are the three and four star players that will not likely make a lucrative living playing basketball, but will be good college players. A good example is Lomax (unless you think WSU cheated to sign him). Also, I surmise grad transfers are available without cheating. For example, there is no evidence Nick King took money or benefits to attend MTSU rather than Memphis.

I disagree that we shouldn't go after the best players we can get. When they put their hand out, then move on, but don't pass on them just because you think they're too good not to cheat. That, we don't know.

And stating that there is no evidence for something is a negative hypothesis, and you know about negative hypotheses. There wasn't any KNOWN evidence that any of these guys in the news took money or benefits until a few days ago.

Speaking of WSU, there is, apparently, evidence that they did something unlawful, as they were named in the FBI probe, so who is to say whether or not they paid Lomax.

I do agree with what I believe if your sentiment, though. We should do the best we can do without cheating. And I say that to commend you, because a lot of people on this board seem to have much higher standards about where they think the basketball program should be than they do about how we get there. UCLA doesn't hang Final Four banners because they have lots of national championship ones. We don't hang ours because most of them were vacated, and we aren't allowed to. I'd like to hang the next one we get. UConn's four NC banners looked pretty good hanging up there.

Accusing someone of cheating is a serious charge that requires evidence to accept. There is no evidence that MTSU or WSU cheated to sign King and Lomax, respectively, just as there is no evidence of cheating by Tubby in a failed attempt to obtain their services.

I am ok with Tubby reaching out to five stars under special circumstances (eg, an honest hometown hero), but realistically it is a waste of time competing with the Bluebloods for the very best talent who abide by the rules. Fortunately, we can win games in the Tourney without one and done type players.

Prove it.

Prove what? There is no evidence that Tubby cheated and I will not accuse him of it until there is just cause.

I'm beginning to think you can't prove there's no evidence. Let me give you an easier one. Describe how to make a perpetual motion machine.

(02-26-2018 09:02 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 06:52 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 06:35 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 10:04 AM)bcspiker Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 01:12 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  It depends on who gets his way and three things:

1. Recruiting
2. Recruiting
3. Recruiting

The guys who hired Tubbs will want to ignore the overall results of this 'building year'.

But they won't be able to ignore recruiting results with two lame assistants sitting on the bench and Tubby not budging on making that better.

Butch will be recruiting next year to address both of those issues and have everyone doing what they are good at.

Sent from my LG-H811 using CSNbbs mobile app

I like the Calipari method best. Hire two AC's whose primary job is recruiting and one "x and o"/player development coach. However, Tubby is a terrible recruiter, so it might be best for him to hire three AC's very skilled at recruiting.

Given the resources at Memphis, it should be little problem landing the lion's share of Memphis area recruits, signing quality grad transfers, obtaining solid three and four star talent, and get good JUCO's for depth without cheating.

Without Tubby knowing about the cheating or not cheating at all...

Because I don't think he can do all of those things and the program be 100% clean...Tubby may not have cheated but some money will changed hands I am sure.

Agents are interested in influencing players they think will provide a return on investment. The group that Tubby should focus upon are the three and four star players that will not likely make a lucrative living playing basketball, but will be good college players. A good example is Lomax (unless you think WSU cheated to sign him). Also, I surmise grad transfers are available without cheating. For example, there is no evidence Nick King took money or benefits to attend MTSU rather than Memphis.

Example is WHO ?...no evidence WHO ?

(02-26-2018 04:10 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  What if he wants to leave? Strong Rumors from multiple sources said he tried last year.

Do we up his salary?

Absolutely not

(02-27-2018 12:35 AM)Cotten Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 04:10 PM)snowtiger Wrote:  What if he wants to leave? Strong Rumors from multiple sources said he tried last year.

Do we up his salary?

Absolutely not

HELL NO

(02-26-2018 11:30 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:28 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:20 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:10 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 10:31 PM)MTigerBlue Wrote:  I disagree that we shouldn't go after the best players we can get. When they put their hand out, then move on, but don't pass on them just because you think they're too good not to cheat. That, we don't know.

And stating that there is no evidence for something is a negative hypothesis, and you know about negative hypotheses. There wasn't any KNOWN evidence that any of these guys in the news took money or benefits until a few days ago.

Speaking of WSU, there is, apparently, evidence that they did something unlawful, as they were named in the FBI probe, so who is to say whether or not they paid Lomax.

I do agree with what I believe if your sentiment, though. We should do the best we can do without cheating. And I say that to commend you, because a lot of people on this board seem to have much higher standards about where they think the basketball program should be than they do about how we get there. UCLA doesn't hang Final Four banners because they have lots of national championship ones. We don't hang ours because most of them were vacated, and we aren't allowed to. I'd like to hang the next one we get. UConn's four NC banners looked pretty good hanging up there.

Accusing someone of cheating is a serious charge that requires evidence to accept. There is no evidence that MTSU or WSU cheated to sign King and Lomax, respectively, just as there is no evidence of cheating by Tubby in a failed attempt to obtain their services.

I am ok with Tubby reaching out to five stars under special circumstances (eg, an honest hometown hero), but realistically it is a waste of time competing with the Bluebloods for the very best talent who abide by the rules. Fortunately, we can win games in the Tourney without one and done type players.

Prove it.

Prove what? There is no evidence that Tubby cheated and I will not accuse him of it until there is just cause.

I'm beginning to think you can't prove there's no evidence. Let me give you an easier one. Describe how to make a perpetual motion machine.

I think there is a miscommunication. I believe a serious charge requires backup before it is accepted as fact. Just because someone states Tubby cheats does not mean he actually cheats. Understand?

(02-21-2018 10:43 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Finish the season with at least two straight wins (home vs. ECU and USF) then if they finish as the 6th seed in the AAC tourney, they will get ECU in the 1st game.

Just collecting wins.

Probably worst case would be 19-14. Can you can someone for going 19-14 his 2nd season?

Sure.

Pretty sure I said no somewhere in this thread. Where’s my cookie?

Okay, let's not start bumping every old Tubby thread....locking this one up.