Obviously there's homerism when it comes to the local paper. There actually needs to be some of that to appeal to the fan base.
But there are times where homerism is not beneficial to the fans and actually detrimental.
Personally, I am not a fan of homerism. Curt Dudley is about as close as it comes to JMU yet when he announces you can tell he's trying to be as fair and objective as possible. It's one of the many reasons I love the guy.
For years we had the Schick. He was a pretty big homer, but he felt like one of us. He screwed up a lot, but I thought he could be pretty honest when it came to his takes on things.
Now we have Dave Thomas. I have zero issues with him as a person. He seems like a stand up guy. He had big shoes to fill and has done so the best one can. However, I feel like perhaps he is getting too close to the program to report objectively. He constantly plays defense and throws softballs at the staff. I get he's essentially on the JMU payroll, but he doesn't even attempt to be critical. As a result I think he is doing a major disservice to the fans.
When it comes to the debacle that is MBB he is constantly trying to give Rowe an excuse for why things are the way they are. I think he has gotten too close to the team to be critical. I think he truly likes Rowe and the team and doesn't want to hurt them.
What are your thoughts? Am I being too critical of Thomas? Everyone knows I am VERY critical of the way things are going, but I do wish Thomas would do a better job of being at least a little critical because everyone can see the train wreck and it's a bit insulting for Thomas to ignore that fact and always focus on the positive. Rowe is getting let off the hook.

(02-05-2020 09:42 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  Obviously there's homerism when it comes to the local paper. There actually needs to be some of that to appeal to the fan base.
But there are times where homerism is not beneficial to the fans and actually detrimental.
Personally, I am not a fan of homerism. Curt Dudley is about as close as it comes to JMU yet when he announces you can tell he's trying to be as fair and objective as possible. It's one of the many reasons I love the guy.
For years we had the Schick. He was a pretty big homer, but he felt like one of us. He screwed up a lot, but I thought he could be pretty honest when it came to his takes on things.
Now we have Dave Thomas. I have zero issues with him as a person. He seems like a stand up guy. He had big shoes to fill and has done so the best one can. However, I feel like perhaps he is getting too close to the program to report objectively. He constantly plays defense and throws softballs at the staff. I get he's essentially on the JMU payroll, but he doesn't even attempt to be critical. As a result I think he is doing a major disservice to the fans.
When it comes to the debacle that is MBB he is constantly trying to give Rowe an excuse for why things are the way they are. I think he has gotten too close to the team to be critical. I think he truly likes Rowe and the team and doesn't want to hurt them.
What are your thoughts? Am I being too critical of Thomas? Everyone knows I am VERY critical of the way things are going, but I do wish Thomas would do a better job of being at least a little critical because everyone can see the train wreck and it's a bit insulting for Thomas to ignore that fact and always focus on the positive. Rowe is getting let off the hook.

That's the way it's going to be in Harrisonburg. At one point the DNR had Chris Simmons who would publish his beliefs whether he agreed with JMU or not which actually pissed some alums off.

I have no issue with Curt. He works for JMU and is employeed by JMU. Curt's a great guy and I'd be sad if he were not around.

In reality these days the DNR is just another arm of the athletic department. The more they "work with JMU", the more access they get. Obviously the biggest topic on Men's basketball is the coaching situation, and I don't believe they've written anything about the situation this year.

I don't care if we have homers announcing games, I just want a winning Men's basketball program.

(02-05-2020 10:11 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2020 09:42 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  Obviously there's homerism when it comes to the local paper. There actually needs to be some of that to appeal to the fan base.
But there are times where homerism is not beneficial to the fans and actually detrimental.
Personally, I am not a fan of homerism. Curt Dudley is about as close as it comes to JMU yet when he announces you can tell he's trying to be as fair and objective as possible. It's one of the many reasons I love the guy.
For years we had the Schick. He was a pretty big homer, but he felt like one of us. He screwed up a lot, but I thought he could be pretty honest when it came to his takes on things.
Now we have Dave Thomas. I have zero issues with him as a person. He seems like a stand up guy. He had big shoes to fill and has done so the best one can. However, I feel like perhaps he is getting too close to the program to report objectively. He constantly plays defense and throws softballs at the staff. I get he's essentially on the JMU payroll, but he doesn't even attempt to be critical. As a result I think he is doing a major disservice to the fans.
When it comes to the debacle that is MBB he is constantly trying to give Rowe an excuse for why things are the way they are. I think he has gotten too close to the team to be critical. I think he truly likes Rowe and the team and doesn't want to hurt them.
What are your thoughts? Am I being too critical of Thomas? Everyone knows I am VERY critical of the way things are going, but I do wish Thomas would do a better job of being at least a little critical because everyone can see the train wreck and it's a bit insulting for Thomas to ignore that fact and always focus on the positive. Rowe is getting let off the hook.

That's the way it's going to be in Harrisonburg. At one point the DNR had Chris Simmons who would publish his beliefs whether he agreed with JMU or not which actually pissed some alums off.

I have no issue with Curt. He works for JMU and is employeed by JMU. Curt's a great guy and I'd be sad if he were not around.

In reality these days the DNR is just another arm of the athletic department. The more they "work with JMU", the more access they get. Obviously the biggest topic on Men's basketball is the coaching situation, and I don't believe they've written anything about the situation this year.

I don't care if we have homers announcing games, I just want a winning Men's basketball program.

I understand that. I don't really have too much of an issue with the DNR. I feel like Madia is probably one of the best writers they've ever had covering JMU football. Even Shane isn't that bad.
As for Dave Thomas, he isn't affiliated with the DNR. He's got his own show on the local ESPN affiliate. I get that he's essentially employed by JMU on game days to announce.
The issue I have is Curt Dudley who is incredibly tied to JMU is more objective than Thomas. I think he asks questions to help understand why things are done the way they are. When Thomas asks questions it seems like he is wanting to give Rowe an out. To be fair, many times Rowe has not taken the bait. On a Monday presser, I recall Thomas asking Rowe about the problem with having so much youth on the team and the problems it can have on the results (not the exact question, but you get the idea). Rowe corrected him and said this team isn't that young.

Dave Thomas isn't even objective any more. He was all on the JMU is young train earlier tonight during 2nd Half against Drexel.

(02-06-2020 08:40 PM)JMU1987UVA1998 Wrote:  Dave Thomas isn't even objective any more. He was all on the JMU is young train earlier tonight during 2nd Half against Drexel.

Sad. JMU is not a young or inexperienced team. They are simply a poorly coached team without a defensive or offensive identity...that is if you can look past not playing defense or not playing with a high basketball IQ as the Duke’s “identity”

There is some athletic talent on the team. They look pretty in their uniforms. And they’re nice young men. But they play D1 MBB like the Italian Army fought in WWII. No real strategy. No follow-through. No skill in executing any game plan with precision and force. But they do know how to lose, even when holding a big lead. All-in-all, they’re just patsies and pretend D1 players. Kinda like the HC.

Time to clean house as suggested in an earlier post. Pretend JMU is just starting it’s MBB program. The time for a reset starts with the opening of the new arena.

I’m not sure what you guys expect.

These are jmu staff members calling these games.
They more than likely have long time personal relationships with coaches.

Do you all make it a habit of going in public and ripping your colleagues that you have relationships with?

Be a homer, and get ripped.
Be objective and taint relationships.

It’s a no win gig they have right now.

Madia is different, he’s working for a publication outside the school. He can be more objective.

I just think Thomas likes his job. Go with the flow:keep your job::rock the boat:look for a new job

(02-07-2020 06:44 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  I’m not sure what you guys expect.

These are jmu staff members calling these games.
They more than likely have long time personal relationships with coaches.

Do you all make it a habit of going in public and ripping your colleagues that you have relationships with?

Be a homer, and get ripped.
Be objective and taint relationships.

It’s a no win gig they have right now.

Madia is different, he’s working for a publication outside the school. He can be more objective.

That reminds me of somebody who broadcasts college and minor league sports. He said he will criticize pros in ways he won't criticize students. He broadcasted the NBA G League when it was the D League and soccer below MLS.

(02-07-2020 06:44 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  I’m not sure what you guys expect.

These are jmu staff members calling these games.
They more than likely have long time personal relationships with coaches.

Do you all make it a habit of going in public and ripping your colleagues that you have relationships with?

Be a homer, and get ripped.
Be objective and taint relationships.

It’s a no win gig they have right now.

Madia is different, he’s working for a publication outside the school. He can be more objective.

We all like Buck as the Wizards broadcaster, and he never said little if anything negative about the Wizards through a lot of bad years.

Once again - homer is fine and the norm for local college and professional broadcasters. A winning program with a homer broadcaster is fine with me. If there was an argument to be made, it would be the newspaper reporting. Once again the better the coverage, the better the access for them. What do ya do?

It's ultimately up to the admin to fix things not the broadcasters......

(02-07-2020 06:44 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  I’m not sure what you guys expect.

These are jmu staff members calling these games.
They more than likely have long time personal relationships with coaches.

Do you all make it a habit of going in public and ripping your colleagues that you have relationships with?

Be a homer, and get ripped.
Be objective and taint relationships.

It’s a no win gig they have right now.

Madia is different, he’s working for a publication outside the school. He can be more objective.

Exactly......it is no different than listening to a Redskins broadcast with Sonny and the boys......when are are employed by the school and the home team broadcast crew you are gonna be very slanted in how you call the game and conduct interviews.....well if you like your job and want to stay employed there.

Dudley is the closest to the program and there's a way to be a homer but still putting out a respectable product. My current issue with Thomas is he is trying to sell the JMU fans a narrative that we are young. Coach Rowe isn't even buying that narrative, but Thomas continuously tries to convince us otherwise.
Look, I have no problem with an announcer being a homer. Schick was a homer and loved listening to his broadcasts. The problem here is I think he is doing the fans a disservice by going all in on a narrative that isn't true. He's done it in football as well.
I think you can be a homer and still be honest and acknowledge the struggles. It's a fine line that some do better than others. I used to really, really like listening to Thomas call games. It just seems in the last few months he has tried to sell excuses for things not going well instead of the truth and it's frustrating to hear.

@JMad03 I mean, if you look at it by class we have 1 Senior and sophomore, 4 Juniors, and 7 freshmen... so he's not wrong. Is he making excuses? Absolutely perhaps. But to say that we are a young team is not false. As you pointed out, Rowe has dismissed youth as a reason for poor performance.

(02-07-2020 10:20 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote:  @JMad03 I mean, if you look at it by class we have 1 Senior and sophomore, 4 Juniors, and 7 freshmen... so he's not wrong. Is he making excuses? Absolutely perhaps. But to say that we are a young team is not false. As you pointed out, Rowe has dismissed youth as a reason for poor performance.

It's a younger team than we've had for sure. However, the problems with this team are not related to youth. In fact the younger players have outplayed the veterans at times. If the majority of the problems were coming from the Freshmen or Sophmores, then I think its completely reasonable to blame youth as the reason our team isn't playing better.
The truth is that isn't the problem. The problem is and has always been coaching. They make silly mistakes. They look lost out there- even the upperclassmen. Rowe claims to be a defensive guy, but the team's defensive statistics are among the worst in Division I.
Most people here agreed before the season started that this was the year this team needed to turn the corner. Not only have they not turned a corner, but have gotten significantly worse.

nothing to refute there!

When I look at the "youth" of a team, I don't look at the entire roster. I look at the top 7 or 8 players in the rotation that get 90% of the time on the court. The fact we have 2 or 3 freshmen either never getting any time or getting just a few minutes a game doesn't play into the equation (just my opinion I admit).

This team returned 4 starters from last year and 3 of those 4 starters (Lewis, Banks, Wilson) have either been starters for the previous 2 seasons (Lewis, Banks) or at minimum was a starter the previous season and played significant minutes his freshman season (Wilson). Parker came off the bench for about the first 10 games his freshman season, but then started around the last 20-ish a year ago.

Jacobs has started and played a lot in his 2 seasons heading into this year. That's 5 of the top 7 in the normal rotation. The young"ness" comes into play with Christmas and Wooden for the remainder of the rotation.

I think calling the team young the last 2 seasons (especially in Rowe's 2nd year 2 years ago) may have some merit regarding the top 7-8 rotation. Not this year. Sounds more like excuse-making.

(02-07-2020 10:52 AM)Wear Purple Wrote:  When I look at the "youth" of a team, I don't look at the entire roster. I look at the top 7 or 8 players in the rotation that get 90% of the time on the court. The fact we have 2 or 3 freshmen either never getting any time or getting just a few minutes a game doesn't play into the equation (just my opinion I admit).

This team returned 4 starters from last year and 3 of those 4 starters (Lewis, Banks, Wilson) have either been starters for the previous 2 seasons (Lewis, Banks) or at minimum was a starter the previous season and played significant minutes his freshman season (Wilson). Parker came off the bench for about the first 10 games his freshman season, but then started around the last 20-ish a year ago.

Jacobs has started and played a lot in his 2 seasons heading into this year. That's 5 of the top 7 in the normal rotation. The young"ness" comes into play with Christmas and Wooden for the remainder of the rotation.

I think calling the team young the last 2 seasons (especially in Rowe's 2nd year 2 years ago) may have some merit regarding the top 7-8 rotation. Not this year. Sounds more like excuse-making.

Agree and I think Rowe see's it the exact same way based on his comments. I do get the JMU broadcast folks attempting to put lipstick on a pig.....it is sorta their job.

(02-07-2020 10:57 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  I do get the JMU broadcast folks attempting to put lipstick on a pig.....it is sorta their job.

Yep. At some point though it is insulting the intelligence of the 3 people who are still listening to the radio broadcasts.

(02-07-2020 11:10 AM)Wear Purple Wrote:  

(02-07-2020 10:57 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  I do get the JMU broadcast folks attempting to put lipstick on a pig.....it is sorta their job.

Yep. At some point though it is insulting the intelligence of the 3 people who are still listening to the radio broadcasts.

I hear and get what you are saying.

Bottom line is this team was picked for 4th place.....

(02-07-2020 12:15 PM)nyduke Wrote:  Bottom line is this team was picked for 4th place.....

Yep. And, unless you are a blue blood like Duke or Kentucky and relying almost exclusively on 1-and-dones + 2-and-dones, "young" teams aren't normally picked in the top half of a conference.