LSU makes the dance if Pierre is the coach all year. I'll buy. He's a much better coach than Brady was. He has that team firing on all cylinders.
No one except for Coach34. When it is Stans that faces obstacles, he is accused of not being a good coach because injuries are a part of the game that you just have to deal with. However, when Brady's players get injured, then injuries are a legitimate excuse for failure to perform.Nobody on this board would be saying anything about a terrible coaching job in Starkville had Ricky lost Gordon 3 games into the season and then Rhodes for a 6 game stretch.
Was that when they were 1-6 in the SEC?They had started playing better when Johnson came back under Brady
In your world, Stans is never allowed to have a down season due to having a young team or injuries to key players. However, you are defending Brady by saying he had to deal with injuries. The point is, every coach has to deal with youth or injuries or some combination of the two at some point. If you are going to excuse Brady's performance due to these things, then you should afford Stans the same criteria. You won't, but you should if you have any interest in being fair.As far as Ricky goes, everyone was giving him a pass 2 years ago because we were "young". He got a pass last year because we were still "young"...and had he lost Gordon in the 3rd game of this season, he would be getting a pass as well.
MSUCostanza said:many times you do it, it never gets old watching you scramble to the defense of John Brady. Hilarious stuff. I think I'll start calling you Misty Champagne since you like to call me Meo.
He really recruited University High on the campus of LSU hard as well as the far corners of Louisiana to bring in that talent.Brady wasn't a good coach. He won when he had super talent all through his lineup
Coach34 said:MSUCostanza said:many times you do it, it never gets old watching you scramble to the defense of John Brady. Hilarious stuff. I think I'll start calling you Misty Champagne since you like to call me Meo.
facts are facts. You and Stormwhiner would be defending Ricky to the death had we lost Gordon in game 3 and been looking at a 11-19 record this year</p>
patdog said:You can debate all you want, but the facts don't support you.</p>
Brutius said:John Brady isn't the second coming of Dean Smith like Coach34 thinks and John Brady isn't the second coming of Ed Murphy like Constanza thinks.
Brady was hurt by injuries early in the year, I don't care who the coach was it's hard to win with 7 scholarship players. On the other hand, he was extremely lucky in the final four run to have 2 NBA players. Again, hard to screw that up.
Much like coach34 always says about Stansbury, John Brady was always a very average floor coach. He won with NBA talent and lost horribly when anything went wrong with injuries or not having sufficient talent.</p>
Sorry for trying to be the voice of reason in a sea of ineptitude, but I had to try.</p>
Your friend,</p>
Brutius</p>
Coach34 said:we have been more consistent in conference. But as afr as achieving nationally, not so much. Last season is a good example. 8-8 and NIT is not a successful season. Not being one of the top 65 teams is not successful. Winning games against other lesser teams left out of the Tourney is not successful . But yet, it was SEC West successful .
Ricky has definitely been consistent though. No doubt about that. But had we lost Gordon in game 3, this season would have been a disaster and you know it.