Fire Shaka Smart

[Catdaddyhorn 3444]

The difference between most of Texas' basketball history and let's say since the formation of the Big 12 is that the state of Texas (ie U.I.L) stopped hamstringing its basketball talent by finally allowing participation in AAU. Therefore, in my eyes the last 20+ years, is the only time that is relevant for comparison when discussing what we've been historically as a program. There's a reason why every program in the state outside of maybe UofH or UTEP only started having consistent success from the late 90s on forward.

[Goo Punch 4275]

Let's look at these "identical" teams, shall we. Looking at Rick's final two years and Shaka's last two seasons (including this one, and for Shaka's sake excluding that abortion of a 2016 season), here are the totals for the team stats tracked by Basketball-Reference. Listed below are the number of times that Texas had a statistical category tracked by B-R fall into a certain range nationally. You can see that not only were Rick's teams nowhere near as bad in nearly as many categories as Shaka's teams, but his teams were actually downright good in *way* more categories than Shaka's last two teams. Keeping in mind of course that Rick was working with lowly rated recruits while Shaka has had highly rated classes and lottery picks in the post. 

 

Barnes- 

 

200th or worse: 10

 

150th or worse: 15

 

top 50: 14

 

top 25: 11

 

Shaka-

 

200th or worse: 10

 

150th or worse: 23

 

top 50: 3

 

top 25: 0

 

yeah, looks identical to me. /jlaw.gif

 

these are not the numbers of a program that is *so close*, these are the embarrassingly poor numbers of a team that has recruited better than UVA, Nova, Tennessee, UNC, Michigan, Michigan State, Gonzaga, and every team in the Big XII aside from Kansas. These numbers are pathetic, they are inexcusable, and they are so far below our standard that it is downright insulting for you to come over here and tell us all that we just don't realize how "almost good" we've actually been under Shaka Smart. Get the fuck out of here. 

Edited January 24, 2019 by Goo Punch

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

1 hour ago, Catdaddyhorn said:

The difference between most of Texas' basketball history and let's say since the formation of the Big 12 is that the state of Texas (ie U.I.L) stopped hamstringing its basketball talent by finally allowing participation in AAU. Therefore, in my eyes the last 20+ years, is the only time that is relevant for comparison when discussing what we've been historically as a program. There's a reason why every program in the state outside of maybe UofH or UTEP only started having consistent success from the late 90s on forward.

This raises the question of how far back is relevant, in terms of setting a goal for your program. If Texas routinely played in front of 5,000 fans under Bob Weltlich when I was in elementary school, should that in any way inform what we think of the program today? Is anything that even happened pre-Barnes truly relevant in setting program goals? 

They're interesting questions but don't bother thinking too deeply because the answer(s) are no.

[Goo Punch 4275]

Once Rick Barnes set the bar, and once we affirmed where the bar was set by firing him, the bar stays where it is; it doesn't move backwards. not at Texas. That's really what "We're Texas" means in terms of basketball- we did it once and we can do it again because of all of the inherent advantages of coaching here, many of which are the fruits of the era where the bar was set, e.g. our impressive roster of NBA alumni and our status as heavyweight in recruiting. 

Since this conference formed only KU has been better than Texas overall, although Shaka's tenure here's is putting that distinction on shaky ground. I don't know why we're acting like this is up for debate either. Rick Barnes is a really good coach who got really good results for an entire decade at Texas. There's no reason to believe that a great coach can't get great results at UT, and sooner rather than later. 

Edited January 24, 2019 by Goo Punch

[hobbes2702 12799]

The idea that Texas basketball can’t be competitive at the top levels because of history is fucking stupid. We have too much money, high quality facilities, and a state rich with basketball talent. Fucking Florida won back to back titles because they had the right coach. Memphis, Nova, Gonzaga, Michigan State, Wisconsin. All are programs that didn’t have much history before their guy got there. Whether this is a basketball school or not doesn’t matter. We can still recruit at the highest levels and should hire a coach who can take us to the highest level.

 

[Underdog 28445]

Sleeping Giant. 

[HookEm 2442]

Obviously we have the potential to be a top 10 program. We recruit like one already.

Barnes set the bar high as far as results go. No doubt. But he was fired for a reason. The last 3-4 years were no fun at all and there is no reason to believe he would have ever gotten back to the peak that he established.

[ztejas 43262]

1 hour ago, Underdog said:

Sleeping Giant. 

Don't go and aggy this shit up. 

[Underdog 28445]

You’re unfamiliar with that term regarding the Horns? 

[XYZ 2154]

Tell us how you really fell, Goo Punch.

[Horn80 6075]

Shaka keeps this up the FEC will be empty of fans.  Somebody should do a Monte Python skit walking around FEC during game ring a bell and shouting “bring out your dead”.

[Machinator 32097]

1 hour ago, Horn80 said:

Shaka keeps this up the FEC will be empty of fans.  Somebody should do a Monte Python skit walking around FEC during game ring a bell and shouting “bring out your dead”.

"will be"?

[MotownHorn 1728]

9 hours ago, Goo Punch said:

that @Bitterwhiteguy post, like everything he posts, is a bunch of shaka apologist bullshit. being a "writer" for a couple of websites doesn't make you an authority in anything, and this idea you keep perpetuating that you know and comprehend things that the rest of our pleb fans can't grasp or understand is elitist bullshit. i mean most of your major points are straight up lies. you don't have the spreadsheets handy? don't worry, i do:

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/texas/

go see for yourselves you ignorant plebs, the numbers are nowhere close. go look at Rick's last two years vs Shaka's last year and this one. It's not even close. Shaka's teams live in the 200's and 300's in the vast majority of team stats tracked by b-r, while Barnes's teams avoided those areas of the rankings almost entirely, not to mention the fact that Barnes's teams actually ranked in the top 5-10% of the country in several categories both years, something Shaka cannot come close to saying. Oh and Rick did this with a bunch of 2*, 3*, and low 4* talent, while Shaka's teams, which have been markedly worse in essentially every measurable statistic (FACT) have been full of HS All americans and top ranked classes. you're so full of shit it's not even funny.

for those wondering why i've suddenly decided to go old school on this assclown, this motherfucker @Bitterwhiteguy had the nerve to come to this board at the beginnng of this season and announce publicly that he is above conversing with me. all year long he has popped in to take part in discussions i'm involved in,  it he has stayed true to his belief that he is literally too good to even speak to me. well fuck that. he is a friendlier wescott eberts, and nothing more. writing about this team and feigning politeness don't make you some sort of expert who is above the rest of us plebs, and no matter how much bullshit you spout about Shaka's teams "really being no different from Barnes's teams", that won't make it even remotely true. you and your holier than this shtick can go fuck back off to BC now where the whole "the jury is still out in shaka" bullshit holds more weight.

 

Dude. See a therapist ASAP. You’re getting pretty worked up over internet message board grudges.

[ztejas 43262]

5 hours ago, Underdog said:

You’re unfamiliar with that term regarding the Horns? 

I'm familiar as it relates to Texas football. UT hoops has never been a giant. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by ztejas
but maybe your comment was tongue in cheek

[hobbes2702 12799]

1 hour ago, ztejas said:

I'm familiar as it relates to Texas football. UT hoops has never been a giant. 

That’s kinda what the phrase means.

[Underdog 28445]

5 hours ago, ztejas said:

I'm familiar as it relates to Texas football. UT hoops has never been a giant. 

 

4 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

That’s kinda what the phrase means.

 

[Goo Punch 4275]

When Texas fired Rick Barnes we could have gone after Jay Wright, but we (as fans) thought were too good for him, and apparently the AD agreed. Are those of y'all who contest what Texas could be/should aspire to be going to tell me that if we'd hired Jay Wright instead of Shaka Smart that we wouldn't be just as good as we ever were under Rick, if not better? If when we fired Rick the next guy had picked up where he had left off around 2010-2011, and Texas was always in the tourney, regularly in the S16, full of All Americans and NBA lottery picks, etc, then right now today Texas would be considered a basketball power and there wouldn't be much question about it depending on just how far we'd gone in the tourney since then. Certainly a top 15 overall program. 

Wescott Eberts calls us "fans", bwg says we should be happy with secretly almost being good and that we probably can't do better than Shaka anyway- fuck that. Almost nobody here is buying any of that. The time where this fan base had so much animus towards Rick Barnes that everyone here acted like we forgot that 1999-2011 existed has come and gone. Texas was fucking awesome at basketball for more than a decade. Five Sweet 16's in six years (should have been 6/6), three Elite 8's in five years, two NPOY winners, three conference POY winners, 11 first round draft picks, 8 All Americans, three consensus first team All Americans, two Cousy Award winners, three conference titles, a conference record of 151-51 (does 100 games above .500 do anything for you?!), and that was all between 1999-2011, and we damn sure had more bad luck in the tourney than good luck along the way. Don't tell me that we weren't already pretty fucking great not that long ago, and don't tell me that we can't be that way again, especially if you have the nerve to suggest that we are doing just about as well as we could be with Shaka Smart ineptly running this team. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Goo Punch

[PilotsError 2281]

The Rationals are the fucking worst.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

16 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

The idea that Texas basketball can’t be competitive at the top levels because of history is fucking stupid. We have too much money, high quality facilities, and a state rich with basketball talent. Fucking Florida won back to back titles because they had the right coach. Memphis, Nova, Gonzaga, Michigan State, Wisconsin. All are programs that didn’t have much history before their guy got there. Whether this is a basketball school or not doesn’t matter. We can still recruit at the highest levels and should hire a coach who can take us to the highest level.

 

History says you're mistaken. Florida as back to back champs was an outlier.  Being a football first school affects basketball.  It has for decades pretty consistently.

[TXSooner518 2432]

8 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

History says you're mistaken. Florida as back to back champs was an outlier.  Being a football first school affects basketball.  It has for decades pretty consistently.

I don't think it has anything to do with being a "football first school."  I think that, for one, there are 250+ schools that compete in DI hoops but not FBS football, so naturally you will see basketball natties from schools that aren't football powers.  Also, regionality has a lot to do with it, hoops is popular in midwest and northeast, which doesn't traditionally have heavy college football presence.  

Plenty of college football powers have had decent to substantial success in hoops, including Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, USC, Oregon, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio State.

[hobbes2702 12799]

9 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

History says you're mistaken. Florida as back to back champs was an outlier.  Being a football first school affects basketball.  It has for decades pretty consistently.

History says in basketball that the best coaches win anywhere. Being a football school has zero bearing. I’m not sure why you think it does. If we didn’t have the money for basketball then maybe you would have a point. Being a basketball school didn’t seem to matter when we spent a decade in the top 10 under RB. Being a football school hasn’t mattered for two decades at Ohio State. It hasn’t mattered to Michigan for the past decade. Good coaches maintain success in college basketball.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

History says in basketball that the best coaches win anywhere. Being a football school has zero bearing. I’m not sure why you think it does. If we didn’t have the money for basketball then maybe you would have a point. Being a basketball school didn’t seem to matter when we spent a decade in the top 10 under RB. Being a football school hasn’t mattered for two decades at Ohio State. It hasn’t mattered to Michigan for the past decade. Good coaches maintain success in college basketball.

Show me the track record then. For sure there are competitive top 20 programs, but seldom do they reach the National championship level.  Florida was the outlier. That's what I'm talking about. Because if all you cared about was being top 20 and sometimes cracking  the top 10, and making final four runs every once in a while then Barnes might still be your coach (SEE: #1 ranked Tennessee).

[Goo Punch 4275]

22 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

History says you're mistaken. Florida as back to back champs was an outlier.  Being a football first school affects basketball.  It has for decades pretty consistently.

history has nothing to do with anything. the game is so different now from what it was back when only a handful of teams were ever on national tv with any regularity, and kids got good at basketball simply by loving it and playing it every day. now every school is on espn 100x a year and players have personal trainers and top flight coaching and training from elemtary shchool age forward. There's talent everywhere, and the fact that a program was or wasn't great several decades ago has exactly zero to do with what will happen going forward. Georgetown, Indiana, and UCLA being great decades ago has nothing to do with what they've done since then, and Texas not being great decades ago has nothing to do with what we can do going forward.

 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Goo Punch

[Goo Punch 4275]

History says that Creighton and Xavier shouldn't be in the Big East, and yet here we are. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

history has nothing to do with anything. the game is so different now from what it was back when only a handful of teams were ever on national tv with any regularity, and kids got good at basketball simply by loving it and playing it every day. now every school is on espn 100x a year and players have personal trainers and top flight coaching and training from elemtary shchool age forward. There's talent everywhere, and the fact that a program was or wasn't great several decades ago has exactly zero to do with what will happen going forward. Georgetown, Indiana, and UCLA being great decades ago has nothing to do with what they've done since then, and Texas not being great decades ago has nothing to do with what we can do going forward.

 

History has everything to do with everything. If you don't know that Simple fact of life you're in for a lot of disappointment .  

[hobbes2702 12799]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Show me the track record then. For sure there are competitive top 20 programs, but seldom do they reach the National championship level.  Florida was the outlier. That's what I'm talking about. Because if all you cared about was being top 20 and sometimes cracking  the top 10, and making final four runs every once in a while then Barnes might still be your coach (SEE: #1 ranked Tennessee).

How many programs do you think have ever one more than 1 title? Barnes at his height is the kind of success we should expect. At the least. We should be a perennial sweet 16 because outside of 4-5 coaches no one else can consistently make the final four. We should be aiming to hire the next K or Izzo. 

 

[Goo Punch 4275]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

History has everything to do with everything. If you don't know that Simple fact of life you're in for a lot of disappointment .  

So the only teams that have any chance to win any future ncaa tournaments are those that have already won titles? Interesting. 

[hobbes2702 12799]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

History has everything to do with everything. If you don't know that Simple fact of life you're in for a lot of disappointment .  

Do you really think we shouldn’t expect to be on the same level as Nova? Or Louisville? 

Edited January 25, 2019 by hobbes2702

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Goo Punch said:

So the only teams that have any chance to win any future ncaa tournaments are those that have already won titles? Interesting. 

Nope not at all, but for you to say history doesn't matter is just ignorant of what reality is.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Do you really think we should expect to be on the same level as Nova? Or Louisville? 

No I think you should be a top 20 program every year and with Barnes there you were that program pretty consistently. You want a national championship and he didn't deliver.  I get that, but making comments about just being competitive, top 20 or top 10 every couple years  is being less than honest.

Edited January 25, 2019 by Onboard 2.0

[hobbes2702 12799]

1 minute ago, Goo Punch said:

So the only teams that have any chance to win any future ncaa tournaments are those that have already won titles? Interesting. 

I wonder if Izzo got that memo at MSU? They had Magic before that and literally nothing else. We had KD, more money, better facilities, better recruiting pool. But I guess we can’t expect success cuz history says we can’t.

[Goo Punch 4275]

9 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Show me the track record then. For sure there are competitive top 20 programs, but seldom do they reach the National championship level.  Florida was the outlier. That's what I'm talking about. Because if all you cared about was being top 20 and sometimes cracking  the top 10, and making final four runs every once in a while then Barnes might still be your coach (SEE: #1 ranked Tennessee).

wrong. Barnes wasn't putting up the same results as he had and he was rightfully fired for failing to live up the standard he had set in the aughts. besides which you're the only one in here talking about "ncaa title or bust". nobody here is making that argument. a school with tour recent history and athletic budget should expect to be a perennial top 25-ish team that can realistically get to the second weekend 3-4 times each decade while sending players to the NBA. Been there, done that, can absolutely do it again. 

[Machinator 32097]

Obviously I want to aim high, but I would be very happy if we were perennially the team we were in glory days of Rick.

[hobbes2702 12799]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No I think you should be a top 20 program every year and with Barnes there you were that program pretty consistently. You want a national championship and he didn't deliver.  I get that, but making comments about just being competitive, top 20 or top 10 every couple years  is being less than honest.

Barnes stopped winning. For a decade we were at an elite level in basketball and were one of the top 10 or so programs in the country. We should expect that short of continued success the same way we do in football. I don’t really know what you’re struggling with. We can be elite, as we’ve proven, if we have the right coach. Barnes was the guy for a while and then he wasn’t.

[hobbes2702 12799]

3 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

wrong. Barnes wasn't putting up the same results as he had and he was rightfully fired for failing to live up the standard he had set in the aughts. besides which you're the only one in here talking about "ncaa title or bust". nobody here is making that argument. a school with tour recent history and athletic budget should expect to be a perennial top 25-ish team that can realistically get to the second weekend 3-4 times each decade while sending players to the NBA. Been there, done that, can absolutely do it again. 

What he seems to not understand is that is a pretty elite class of college basketball programs to be in. He seems to think that nattys are all that matters for measuring success. News flash, only 15 teams ever have more than one title. Only 8 have more than two. That includes schools like San Francisco, Indiana, NC State, and UCLA. None of those school have won a title since 1995. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

Barnes stopped winning. For a decade we were at an elite level in basketball and were one of the top 10 or so programs in the country. We should expect that short of continued success the same way we do in football. I don’t really know what you’re struggling with. We can be elite, as we’ve proven, if we have the right coach. Barnes was the guy for a while and then he wasn’t.

And now he's got the number one team in the nation.  You Texas fans are pretty hard on your coaches, and their success rate to your perceived satisfaction. Maybe that's why you couldn't attract a head football coach so easily after mack.

 I'd love to go on with this gay, witty banter, but gotta hit the slopes, and the 8" of fresh powder.

[Goo Punch 4275]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Nope not at all, but for you to say history doesn't matter is just ignorant of what reality is.  

oh my goodness the irony. let me tell you what reality is: reality is that NCAA basketball today is so far removed from what it was for the majority of the 20th century that pointing to school success from that era as a forecaster for what can happen going forward is laughable. Everything about the sport, everything- from its scale, it's popularity of the sport, the tv coverage, the impact of the internet, how players eat, how players train, how early players start specializing in the sport, the conferences, the tournament, everything, is vastly different today than it was in the 20th century. What happened then has *nothing* to do with what's going to happen going forward, save for a few blue bloods who can trace their sustained success back that far. And that's a fact. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

What he seems to not understand is that is a pretty elite class of college basketball programs to be in. He seems to think that nattys are all that matters for measuring success. News flash, only 15 teams ever have more than one title. Only 8 have more than two. That includes schools like San Francisco, Indiana, NC State, and UCLA. None of those school have won a title since 1995. 

Dude, barnes got you to the dance pretty consistently.  He's now coaching the top rated team in the country, he didn't stop winning, he's doing it right now.

[hobbes2702 12799]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And now he's got the number one team in the nation.  You Texas fans are pretty hard on your coaches, and their success rate to your perceived satisfaction. Maybe that's why you couldn't attract a head football coach so easily after mack.

 I'd love to go on with this gay, witty banter, but gotta hit the slopes, and the 8" of fresh powder.

It’s almost like the richest athletic program in NCAA history expects to successful in more than one sport. If you don’t watch much college hoops then that’s ok just stop pretending to have any insight.

[Goo Punch 4275]

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Barnes stopped winning. For a decade we were at an elite level in basketball and were one of the top 10 or so programs in the country. We should expect that short of continued success the same way we do in football. I don’t really know what you’re struggling with. We can be elite, as we’ve proven, if we have the right coach. Barnes was the guy for a while and then he wasn’t.

onboard keeps making up arguments that nobody else is making just to argue with Texas fans. and he doesn't even know what he's talking about to begin with. rick stopped winning amid other issues, and nobody here is demanding a title,  not to mention that he refuses to accept the reality of how much the game the landscape of the ncaa has changed over the years. these arguments are tiring. 

[Js1 85095]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And now he's got the number one team in the nation.  You Texas fans are pretty hard on your coaches, and their success rate to your perceived satisfaction. Maybe that's why you couldn't attract a head football coach so easily after mack.

Dude, Barnes' time at Texas was up.  Good for him for reviving himself at another school - no hard feelings.  Change of scenery is sometimes a blessing in disguise for coaches.  Just like after Mack, we made the wrong hire of the "hot" coach.  Doesn't always work out.  NBD, we move on and try again.  Not the first or last time a school in the NCAA will make the wrong hire. 

[hobbes2702 12799]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Dude, barnes got you to the dance pretty consistently.  He's now coaching the top rated team in the country, he didn't stop winning, he's doing it right now.

Are you fucking dense? Barnes won 1 conference championship at Texas and lost to a team seeded lower than him 9 times. We were elite under him until we weren’t. He couldn’t meet he expectations that he set. 

I mean for fucks sake we got bounced in the first weekend 6 of his last 7 years. The one year missing, we missed the tourney and got bounced in round 1 of the fucking CBI.

Edited January 25, 2019 by hobbes2702

[Goo Punch 4275]

5 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And now he's got the number one team in the nation.  You Texas fans are pretty hard on your coaches, and their success rate to your perceived satisfaction. Maybe that's why you couldn't attract a head football coach so easily after mack.

 I'd love to go on with this gay, witty banter, but gotta hit the slopes, and the 8" of fresh powder.

you don't have a clue what you're talking about, and are arguing just to argue. i'd imagine that your knowledge of the Texas program from 1999-2015 including all of the events that led to his firing is about zero, but please continue to lecture us on our crazy expectations for a program you know nothing about. 

cameltoe being banned may have been bad for your stock around here. 

[Machinator 32097]

8 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Maybe that's why you couldn't attract a head football coach so easily after mack.

Or, you know, because we had a dysfunctional athletic department and a chode at director.

[Goo Punch 4275]

Onboard, who came over here when/because we hired Shaka Smart away from his school, is in lecturing a bunch of Texas fans about shit he knows nothing about. He knows that he doesn't know what he's talking about, yet he takes on the entire board anyway. yep, you've replaced cameltoe as the board contrarian. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Goo Punch

[TXSooner518 2432]

38 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Dude, barnes got you to the dance pretty consistently.  He's now coaching the top rated team in the country, he didn't stop winning, he's doing it right now.

Rick Barnes in his last 7 seasons had 3 tourney wins and 0 Sweet 16s.

4 of those 7 seasons Texas was 4th or worse in a 10 team league (and once was 4th in a 12 team league) 

In those 7 seasons, Texas lost 87 games, more than 12 losses per season. 

Included in those seasons were:
Going from 5th to unranked in 2009 (start 15-4, finish 7-7)
Going from 1st to unranked and damn near missing the tourney in 2010 (start 17-0, finish 7-9)
Starting 23-3 and #3 in 2011, then going 4-4 down the stretch and getting a 5 seed, resulting in missing the second weekend again
Starting 12-4 in 2012, then going 8-9 down the stretch and damn near missing the tourney
Sub-.500 CBI season in 2013
Starting 20-5 and #19 in 2014, then yet again falling apart down the stretch going 4-5 and falling to the 7 seed in the tourney
Starting 14-4 and as high as #6 in 2015, then YET AGAIN, going 6-9 down the stretch, damn near missing the tourney. 

The continuous late-season swoons added to the lack of any NCAAT success for the better part of a decade are what signed Barnes' warrant, and appropriately so.

Edited January 25, 2019 by TXSooner518

[Horn80 6075]

13 hours ago, Machinator said:

"will be"?

Consider that a very slow pitch directly over the plate.

Edited January 25, 2019 by Horn80

[ztejas 43262]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And now he's got the number one team in the nation.  You Texas fans are pretty hard on your coaches, and their success rate to your perceived satisfaction. Maybe that's why you couldn't attract a head football coach so easily after mack.

 I'd love to go on with this gay, witty banter, but gotta hit the slopes, and the 8" of fresh powder.

Fresh pow bro? You gonna go shred some fresh pow? Yeah brah? Nice bro. That's radical. 

Shut the fuck up.

[Bitterwhiteguy 153]

18 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

The idea that Texas basketball can’t be competitive at the top levels because of history is fucking stupid. We have too much money, high quality facilities, and a state rich with basketball talent. Fucking Florida won back to back titles because they had the right coach. Memphis, Nova, Gonzaga, Michigan State, Wisconsin. All are programs that didn’t have much history before their guy got there. Whether this is a basketball school or not doesn’t matter. We can still recruit at the highest levels and should hire a coach who can take us to the highest level.

 

I'll tag onto this to clarify what I meant by invoking history because the intent wasn't to say Texas "can't" be competitive at the top levels, rather that before you decide what you want to be you need to have an honest view of who you are so you understand the barriers to overcome. This is true of any realistic goal-setting, in my experience, if you want to bench 225 you have to know what you bench now. History says that Texas is not at a level of Louisville, much less the Dukes and Kansases of the world. Before the current Jay Wright run, Villanova was closer to a peer, but they're clearly ahead of Texas now. I did a fairly deep dive on this about 5 years ago when the Barnes era was starting to come to an end, mainly so I could try to quantify what should be a reasonable goal for a program like Texas. You can read the article if you like, it gives an idea of what I think is the ceiling for a program like Texas. The short version is that I think the apex for Texas is among the Louisvilles and Michigan States of the world, but not the Dukes & Kansases...at least not any time soon. The gap between the Duke/KU/UK/UNC group and the rest of college basketball over the past 34 years (since the NCAA tourney went to 64 teams) is pretty staggering, and it takes more than a decade of matching/exceeding their success to even start to breathe near them. Some people think Texas is more easily able to make the leap into the next tier of programs than I do, and if those people have the right coach pegged then they're probably onto something. Others who have stated getting the right coach helps a ton are absolutely correct, but striking gold like that in any sport is fairly difficult - ask Indiana, Arkansas, or Georgetown fans how they feel about the past 10-15 years - and if we're doing our due diligence on the pros & cons of a coaching change we have to look at the potential downside as clearly as the potential upside. Everyone lands on a different spot in the spectrum of risk tolerance, many on this board and others are more willing to make a change and risk the downside than I am and that's perfectly fine.

[Goo Punch 4275]

The fact that we as fans may not know who all out there is a slam dunk hire is not a reason to advocate retaining Shaka Smart. Yeah, we might not hit a home run, we might fail again...so? That's a reason to keep a coach who objectively has underperformed everywhere he's been including here? I don't see how that makes any sense.

This is where the Shaka apologists are at now- 1,000 words these last two posts and none of it says anything about Shaka being a good coach who is deserving of his role. He had more talent than everyone else in the AAC and the A 10 and he underachieved and underperformed there, and he's had more talent than anyone in this league save KU and he's done the same. It's time to move on. 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Goo Punch