This thread is funnier than anything in chit chat.

1/28/2009 9:06:16 PM

1/28/2009 9:21:24 PM

Quote :

"overwhelming evidence?"

let's see .. 11-27 in the ACC. None of it is Lowe's fault though, it's always the players. If we win a game (of the 11 wins we have in the ACC over 3 years) then it is ALL because of coach Lowe. You'll see next year, when we likely won't make the tourny for the 4th year in a row. All of those evil Herb's recruits will be gone and then we'll SURELY turn it around.

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 9:27 PM. Reason : .]

1/28/2009 9:25:13 PM

Quote :

"This thread is getting really really stupid. You guys can gush over Lowe all you want, but the evidence is overwhelming that he is in over his head in the ACC."

Why do you continue to make up shit? Who is "gushing" over Lowe? Really?

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 9:46 PM. Reason : people are just trying to defend OUR coach from a bunch of unnecesasry negativity]

1/28/2009 9:34:57 PM

everything is speculation at this point with either side of the argument. there is no OVERWHELMING evidence. the transition from a princeton style, nonathletic, slow paced offense to a fast paced, pro style, flex offense is going to take time no matter who is running the show.

loop on!

1/28/2009 9:50:23 PM

while (thread == stupid) {

RAWR RAWR RAWR

}

1/28/2009 10:09:32 PM

I don't even think people are saying the players are bad...we're saying that we don't have all of the right pieces. I think McCauley and Costner could be great with a good PG, but thats just it, they're our best players and they're 4/5 men. You don't win games with good bigs and no guards.

But we're playing better now that our guards are playing better. Coincidence that McCauley and Costner go off when Degand and Fells play their Knutesac off? I think not.


fucking christ though....lock this thread.

[Edited on January 28, 2009 at 10:37 PM. Reason : ]

1/28/2009 10:37:12 PM

Quote :

"the transition from a princeton style, nonathletic, slow paced offense to a fast paced, pro style, flex offense is going to take time no matter who is running the show."

See: Pearl, Bruce

1/28/2009 11:53:53 PM

see: player personnel

1/28/2009 11:59:54 PM

We have a team with some good athletes....don't tell me we couldn't run.

Our current offense is slower and more pathetic than Herb's was.

Believe it or not we averaged about 75 a game with Herb.

1/29/2009 12:04:26 AM

how many players do we have that can run

once you add up the 4 we have, tell me how they are supposed to run the entire game and who will sub for them once they are exhausted from running.

1/29/2009 12:09:15 AM

We play a 10-man rotation, why the hell couldn't we run?

FWIW I don't want us to run. What teams that are really successful run all the time besides UNC?

Look at the best teams of the last few years, UCLA and Florida, they score low and play great defense.

1/29/2009 12:11:14 AM

You know what really helps an up-tempo offense?

Wait for it...






















Wait for it...





















A point guard

Lock this shit

1/29/2009 12:12:10 AM

why the hell would you not want to be able to run and score easy buckets on a fast break?????????

1/29/2009 12:14:33 AM

A fastbreak is different from a RUNNING team.

Tennessee is a running team and they lose often because it doesn't work for them.

1/29/2009 12:19:47 AM

my mind

is blown

1/29/2009 12:23:46 AM

What is so hard to understand about this?

VMI is the highest scoring team in the country at just under 100....

You don't want to run all the time.

1/29/2009 12:26:50 AM

dude, you're contradicting yourself all over the place.

Quote :

"Quote : "the transition from a princeton style, nonathletic, slow paced offense to a fast paced, pro style, flex offense is going to take time no matter who is running the show." See: Pearl, Bruce"

Quote :

"Tennessee is a running team and they lose often because it doesn't work for them."

which is it, does bruce pearl make it work, or not?


i'll also add that i said nothing about a running team, you brough that shit up. my quote is included in here.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:28 AM. Reason : .]

1/29/2009 12:27:04 AM

no see, they run, they just aren't fast

or maybe its the other way around

it is a pretty fucking confusing concept.

1/29/2009 12:28:01 AM

Quote :

"dude, you're contradicting yourself all over the place."

Umm no I am not.

You said it takes several years to implement a high-paced offense and my answer was Bruce Pearl.

From DAY ONE, he ran HIS OFFENSE.

1/29/2009 12:29:49 AM

and you said they lose often because it doesn't work for them

1/29/2009 12:33:30 AM

that wasnt his point

1/29/2009 12:34:45 AM

are we still making "points" in this thread?

1/29/2009 12:35:14 AM

Quote :

"and you said they lose often because it doesn't work for them"

And?

They do lose because of it....if they are forced to play a halfcourt game, they lose, see the Gonzaga game.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 12:37 AM. Reason : Some of you have no reading comprehension skills at all]

1/29/2009 12:36:47 AM

maybe you should read then

i know what you're saying, but you've missed the point sir

1/29/2009 12:40:13 AM

Then what is the point?

Next year will be pretty much his players, so will finally see Lowe's offense because I am curious?

1/29/2009 12:42:49 AM

WE RUN NO OFFENSE AT ALL

IT IS A SHAPELESS SHIFTING AMOEBA BEREFT OF ANYTHING RESEMBLING BASKETBALL

i can't believe this thread isn't locked yet.

1/29/2009 12:49:04 AM

OH LAWD

1/29/2009 12:53:45 AM

your thinking that you can mark it on the calendar when a certain offense is implemented and on that date the offense is in place.

maybe you don't understand that certain players fit certain systems. this is why it can take time for the said change to be effective. sid was able to use the princeton principles in his first year because we had a point guard that knew the system well. as you know, herb's offense had a learning curve to it, and many freshman never saw the court during his tenure because of this. we still have players that fit that style better however, that's why they came here in the first place, but we don't have a point guard that can run it. we want to run a pro style offense eventually and it will take time to get the guys that are most effective in that style. we have to play to our strengths and right now, that's running everything through the post.

1/29/2009 12:59:31 AM

in reply to j_sun...
coaches can change players...do you think that every player that ever played under Coach K or Roy Williams have always somehow miraculously fit the systems?? The answer is no, yet they coach the players to the point that they do fit into the system. Plain and simple Sidney Lowe is a bad coach and has no leadership ability. THE END...

1/29/2009 12:48:33 PM

Quote :

"do you think that every player that ever played under Coach K or Roy Williams have always somehow miraculously fit the systems?? "

no, they don't "miraculously fit the system". They fit the system because the coaches recruit players who fit their system. duh.

1/29/2009 12:52:02 PM

Quote :

"i can't believe this thread isn't locked yet."

Why should it be locked? It's not like TWW has ever been a bastion of solid arguments. This is probably the most active thread in Sports Talk history. I'm glad it's not locked, nor should it be.

1/29/2009 1:39:17 PM

What are you calling active?

The Sports Betting thread has been around longer and has thousands more replies, but gets less per day.


The Carolina Hurricanes thread has been around for less time and has half as many replies, but gets more on a per day basis.

1/29/2009 2:27:28 PM

Forget Sid, I wanna argue about how active this thread it. It's pretty active!

1/29/2009 2:29:58 PM

It's at least moderately active.

1/29/2009 2:35:19 PM

Well, since Novemer 16, this thread has gotten 37 new pages. The 'Canes thread was started on 9/18 and has 42 pages. The Betting Thread has just been around forever.

This is a pretty fast growing thread...

^^ lol, I'll argue anything... just that way.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM. Reason : x]

1/29/2009 2:37:48 PM

Sidney Sunshine Squad???

1/29/2009 2:46:42 PM

I would guess there is one great reason why this thread isn't locked...

If it were, then every time we lost (which is a lot amiright?) then you would see even more shitty threads popping up. This thread prevents some of that so every that is pissed off can either vent in the game thread or this one afterwords.

1/29/2009 2:50:09 PM

And it took 8 months for it to get the three pages previous to those 37.

Not to mention that 37 pages ago, this thread was full of

Quote :

"i hate this thread"

posts. The same thing it's full of now.






So I guess it's the most active thread on TWW consisting mostly of posts asking that it be locked up as long as you don't count the times that nobody posted in it at all fo rmonths at a time. That's a grand reason to keep it open.

[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 2:51 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2009 2:50:38 PM

Quote :

"And it took 8 months for it to get the three pages previous to those 37."

Was a majority of those 8 months the offseason?? Because that probably explains it.

Then there's the fact that last year was only Lowe's 2nd year...and that the fact that we're seeing the same stuff for the 3rd year is making everyone a little more riled up??

Just trying to give a good explanation.

1/29/2009 2:54:48 PM

Yeah, that's kinda why I picked the 8 month span.

I mean, if you really want ot compare the Hurricanes thread and this one, from the same date that one has 42 pages and this one has 38. So it's not the most active thread in TWW history, or even the most active thread right now on the front page. If you really really want to compare threads, you take them from the beginning instead of skipping over all the shit that doesn't support whatever cockamamie idea you just put forth.



ETA: And as far as I know, the Hurricanes thread isn't full of a bunch of random BS arguments on anything under the sun, and a bunch of replies asking for it to be locked. There's a "quality of thread" component that NYM410 is glossing over..





[Edited on January 29, 2009 at 3:10 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2009 3:02:13 PM

We could lock this and create a "perpetual bitching about NC State's basketball program thread"

That way it doesn't look like 83 pages of posters bitching about Lowe. This thread really isn't, its more people acting like retards and idiots like myself trying to convince them to shut up and wait a year before we try to fire the coach.

1/29/2009 4:59:07 PM

Quote :

"n reply to j_sun... coaches can change players...do you think that every player that ever played under Coach K or Roy Williams have always somehow miraculously fit the systems?? The answer is no, yet they coach the players to the point that they do fit into the system. Plain and simple Sidney Lowe is a bad coach and has no leadership ability. THE END..."

in reply to BlakeN08
actually, coaches recruit players that FIT THEIR SYSTEM.

why would a coach recruit someone who didnt fit? (other than K recruiting Shav so he didnt go to NCSU)

your arguement is mind blowing

1/29/2009 5:15:33 PM

I've got an idea, why don't you guys make a "Sidney Lowe is the best coach EVAR" thread?

1/29/2009 5:31:21 PM

no one thinks that, good sir.

1/29/2009 5:37:06 PM

^^I thought i pointed that (^) out to you yesterday. Why do you contniue to make up stuff? No one is "gushing" over Sid. You're becoming less credible with every post you make.

1/29/2009 7:45:00 PM

He is trying to make his oppositions position seem as illogical as his. All we are saying is Lowe has not had a chance to prove what type of coach he will be. Logically and historically (as presented over and over again in this thread) he could still end up being one of the best coaches ever or he could be one of the worst. There is not enough information yet to determine what he will end up being. So far this season has been far from a disappointment for all but the most irrational fans (those that seem to think we were a upper echelon ACC team simply because we are NC STATE). We have been put in the position to win games which we had no business winning (Marquette) and lost in some close games to very talented teams. He also is providing State with a steady influx of talent and has state competing to land some of the best recruits in the nation. He has missed on some PG recruits but he seems to be rectifying this with a solid 4 year guard in Mays and some more exciting guards coming in during the next few years.
On to Ohboyee, maybe he is just a really good troll? If so GG sir GG. If not please show me where your vast experience comes from. Tell us all what makes you such a sage evaluator of coaching potential.

1/29/2009 9:40:14 PM

BlakeN08 welcome to tww. way to waste your first post.

1/29/2009 9:46:56 PM

Quote :

"coaches can change players...do you think that every player that ever played under Coach K or Roy Williams have always somehow miraculously fit the systems?? The answer is no, yet they coach the players to the point that they do fit into the system. Plain and simple Sidney Lowe is a bad coach and has no leadership ability. THE END..."

Might want to check Kryzoooooski's records his first few years at Duke

1/30/2009 8:48:05 AM

I agree that Lowe deserves criticism for the team's performance last and this year. But I disagree that the blame for it rests with Lowe's coaching ability. To me anyone blaming State's problems to "bad coaching" is merely bitching about State's poor W/L record.

To be fair, NC State did underachieve last year. Badly. But the reason for that underachievement are at best up for debate. Either the lack of a PG or bad coaching was the underlying problem. This year, however, NC State's roster from a talent perspective SUCKS. I haven't seen anyone present a decent refutation of this point.

Therefore, State is actually performing about as well as could be expected. If that pisses you off, then the criticism should be directed at Sid's RECRUITING, not his coaching. Find me one reputable sports analyst who picked Stae to finish anywhere besides the BOTTOM of the ACC. Then maybe hating on Sid's coaching would make sense.

But it doesn't. This is a mediocre team which, so far has had mediocre results. On paper, who has State lost to that they should have beaten? None. And if that's the case then State's only lost to teams that were BETTER then us.

So, before you bitch about Sid's "bad coaching", either:

1) Refute my "this team sucks" argument.
2) STFU.

Additionally, for all those who are hating on Lowe for all the lineup changes, there are two very good reasons why he did it:

1) It sent amessage to some of our starters, who at times were turning in 1/2 assed performances (Costner, Fells), that those who practice/play hard and contribute will start. The best way to cure State's issues with hustle was to reward those who DO hustle.
2) Now Lowe has given several young players playing time in big games. That experience is going to pay dividends later in the season and next season. This is critical considering that Fells, McCaauley, and likely Costner are going to be gone.

So yeah, you guys may want to reconsider your bitching about the lineup. I say play the guys that earn it.

1/30/2009 11:29:23 AM