Calling Out Pearl Haters (merged)

Haha you still won't answer the question concerning the topic you felt inclined to post on.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The 105 minute comment was all I posted about. As to the great play: we beat an awful LBSU team and a massively overseeded, guard centric UVA team, then gagged away a win. We played well by our tourney standards, but nit by the quality of that team's standards.
 
Btw that is called a fact. (Minus the 2.5 joke) An excuse would be if I were to say, " The only reason we got beat is because they have nba guys and we don't" or "we shouldn't have beat them anyway bc they are better"
Did I say anything like this? Nope
I actually stated above that we BLEW IT, we SHOULD HAVE WON the game.
Your rusty in the 'morn, eh?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
The 105 minute comment was all I posted about. As to the great play: we beat an awful LBSU team and a massively overseeded, guard centric UVA team, then gagged away a win. We played well by our tourney standards, but nit by the quality of that team's standards.

Genious theory Paps, That teams standards were somehow supposed to be "above" the tourney standards? Wow !! Considering the above stated lack of NBA depth, those are high standards, even for you Daddavol
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Btw that is called a fact. (Minus the 2.5 joke) An excuse would be if I were to say, " The only reason we got beat is because they have nba guys and we don't" or "we shouldn't have beat them anyway bc they are better"
Did I say anything like this? Nope
I actually stated above that we BLEW IT, we SHOULD HAVE WON the game.
Your rusty in the 'morn, eh?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Then why the question in such an idiotic way? Explain to me why the question exists and please avoid the horrendous composition lessons. If I need those, I'll ask my kindergartener.
 
Genious theory Paps, That teams standards were somehow supposed to be "above" the tourney standards? Wow !! Considering the above stated lack of NBA depth, those are high standards, even for you Daddavol
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Offer something worthwhile and I'll respond. The OSU collapse and near loss to UVA were about poor play / prep.

Lack of NBA depth didn't hurt Alford and Co.
 
Bere =) for the headache, then a gatorade to rehydrate, works every time. =)
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Bere? You're legit sad.

Your silliness about my drinking says what your posts confirm: you are happy talking about that of which you know nothing.
 
Hurry men, Plan B!!! Plan B!!!! Haha
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Did you really think that was funny or do you just have nothing better to say?

Nevermind, those were rhetorical. Don't you find it sad that you have to be told that a question is rhetorical?
 
What's your grade for the planning and preparation Char, KU? Since you bring up planning and preparation? LOL that you still take the spelling bate. I knew you wouldn't respond to the BP is the best comment, but you surprised me taking the little whurm! =)
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Btw, in case you are unaware, for every coach or team you name that "did something pearl and co didn't" there can be a case made as to why. Its a new thing, called objectivety.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
What's your grade for the planning and preparation Char, KU? Since you bring up planning and preparation? LOL that you still take the spelling bate. I knew you wouldn't respond to the BP is the best comment, but you surprised me taking the little whurm! =)
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Take the spelling bait? That's funny. At least be creative in your lying. That one's old and unbelievably lame.

The prep and effort for that game was solid. We were definitely fortunate, but effort makes breaks. Unfortunately, that's an indictment of the garbage we were treated to at USC, in terms of effort.

Your last sentence makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, but I'll grant you that it's better than the spelling excuse.
 
Btw, in case you are unaware, for every coach or team you name that "did something pearl and co didn't" there can be a case made as to why. Its a new thing, called objectivety.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Absolutely and it's usually about coaching, but it's apparent to me that you don't get that concept.
 
Take the spelling bait? That's funny. At least be creative in your lying. That one's old and unbelievably lame.

The prep and effort for that game was solid. We were definitely fortunate, but effort makes breaks. Unfortunately, that's an indictment of the garbage we were treated to at USC, in terms of effort.

Your last sentence makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, but I'll grant you that it's better than the spelling excuse.

Lol
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Absolutely and it's usually about coaching, but it's apparent to me that you don't get that concept.
I can't wait to see the explanation of all the advantages that Stan Heath had at Kent that Pearl is denied at UT. If only we had that MAC level commitment.
 
Not the point. I just want to see the explanation as to why it was easier for Kent to reach the Elite Eight than it is for Bruce Pearl.

Take a scroll back 40 pages, there is no point. Would you? Appears to be his one trick pony?
 
You should already know this, Law of Averages.
I bet there are some schools who lack faith in The Law Of Averages where college hoops are concerned. Missouri probably tops the list. They've been "due" to win an Elite Eight game for some time now.
 
I bet there are some schools who lack faith in The Law Of Averages where college hoops are concerned. Missouri probably tops the list. They've been "due" to win an Elite Eight game for some time now.

The BP Fan Club keeps the faith in the Law of Averages, just like Jim Jones' followers. We know how that turned out.
 
The BP Fan Club keeps the faith in the Law of Averages, just like Jim Jones' followers. We know how that turned out.

Yep, being a fan of a basketball team really does resemble being a member of a doomsday cult on another continent. That is the stupidest thing I've ever read anywhere...
 
V, Would a oden block away from elite 8 be considered a "good" showing? Yes we blew a big lead but that doesn't void the other 105 minutes of hard play? I agree we should have won that game but they were there, right? Not settling, but you can't say it wasn't a reasonably good tourney, can you?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

It's hard to say it was a good showing in the tournament when we blew a massive lead like that because we couldn't stop the bleeding, because we didn't have any other options in the halfcourt besides shooting threes. They were falling in the first half and we went up big; they didn't in the second and we were helpless. That game was a great example of why any serious basketball team has to be able to play the halfcourt game occasionally.

As far as whether you can overall call that year a "reasonably good tourney," It depends on how you look at it. If you go out to the bars and have a great night, and the bartenders buy all your drinks and you find a $100 bill on the floor, and you meet an incredibly attractive woman and she comes home with you, and you get in bed with her......and then she pulls out a penis, did you still have a "reasonably good" night? I dunno.
 

VN Store



Back
Top