Have you ever seen anything like this?

#76
#76
webleedorange said:
Exactly what I want to do... Get into a verbal internet fight about my English comprehension or my IQ.. I will just let this one lie...

Back on point. Our basketball program is a complete joke. If you can provide any evidence to the contrary I would love to see it.
Click to expand...

I'll spell it out for you: I was comparing the irrational statements of posters that they "deserve a better coach" because they donate money to the hypothetical irrational situation of saying one "deserves a cure" because he donates money to cancer research. Both are situations where you really don't deserve anything just because you donated money. Caught up now?
 
#77
#77
whobethis16 said:
I'll spell it out for you: I was comparing the irrational statements of posters that they "deserve a better coach" because they donate money to the hypothetical irrational situation of saying one "deserves a cure" because he donates money to cancer research. Both are situations where you really don't deserve anything just because you donated money. Caught up now?
Click to expand...

Does it make you feel better? Maybe make you feel like a better person or a bigger person to try and cut others down or demean them on a college sports message board? I could very easily do the same to you, I just fail to see the benefit I would get out of playing your game.

Everyone on here is entitled to their opinion. If you disagree it really doesn't give you the right to try and cut others down to state your own agenda. 10 years ago I would have been ready to go toe to toe with you... Today, it just isn't worth it to me... Especially over a program so screwed up as our basketball program..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#78
#78
whobethis16 said:
That's really what you took from that? I only saw a replay, but it was scrambled but initially he wanted them to play. He probably was wanting a good look 3 from a guy not shooting 0 for 5, and the look Barton got wasn't horrible but wasn't great. So, once that happened, Martin took the second option of going for the tie, and should've been the win if Stokes had made the free throw.
Click to expand...

What I take out of that is:
A: if you work on situations and that's the best you got, you are in over your head.
B: If he wanted to let them play then let them play... You ARE NOT going to get a good look at the basket with less than 3 seconds on the clock if you are Michael F***ing Jordan.

ARE YOU UP TO SPEED NOW?
 
#79
#79
webleedorange said:
What I take out of that is:
A: if you work on situations and that's the best you got, you are in over your head.
B: If he wanted to let them play then let them play... You ARE NOT going to get a good look at the basket with less than 3 seconds on the clock if you are Michael F***ing Jordan.

ARE YOU UP TO SPEED NOW?
Click to expand...

Im confused, didn't we get about as good a luck as possible? Point blank layup?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#81
#81
bleedingTNorange said:
Im confused, didn't we get about as good a luck as possible? Point blank layup?
Click to expand...

BTO, I don't know. I didn't watch the game. I heard we got a good look at the end of regulation... If we did get a good look at the end of OT, then I retract, well. actually amend my statement... Either way, the odds are certainly not in your favor in trying to draw up a play with that little time remaining...

I am mainly just tired of all the Billy Bob Badasses on here that feel the need to put others down for their opinions. I could care less about this program under the current leadership..
 
#82
#82
whobethis16 said:
Of course not. He expects an 0 for 5 guy to take the last shot of the game while Martin played the percentages of that situation and won.
Click to expand...

No dude. Point is the percentages are not in your favor with a couple ticks left on the clock. Either let them play or take the TO early and set up the play you want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#83
#83
webleedorange said:
BTO, I don't know. I didn't watch the game. I heard we got a good look at the end of regulation... If we did get a good look at the end of OT, then I retract, well. actually amend my statement... Either way, the odds are certainly not in your favor in trying to draw up a play with that little time remaining...

I am mainly just tired of all the Billy Bob Badasses on here that feel the need to put others down for their opinions. I could care less about this program under the current leadership..
Click to expand...

Yes the look at the end of OT was bad, but not much of a better option in bounding 90 feet away with 2 seconds left.

What you were talking about with calling a timeout with 3 seconds left, to draw up a play, was the end of regulation. We got a layup for Stokes that he made, was fouled on, and could've won had he hit his ft.
 
#84
#84
rdl2k7 said:
The right call is to let your team run around from 12 seconds to 4 seconds and as soon as one shoots a shot, you call timeout? Ok...
Click to expand...

Lol. Yeah, I mean the reason Barton is in there with 10 secs left is because he can make a play (despite his stats). You gotta let your player just make his play...for better or worse. Hindsight is 20/20, I get that, but I'd rather go down letting my players play basketball than to play the timeout game with 2 seconds left.
 
#85
#85
webleedorange said:
No dude. Point is the percentages are not in your favor with a couple ticks left on the clock. Either let them play or take the TO early and set up the play you want.
Click to expand...

That's the point. 2.6 secs was all it took for Stokes to hit that tying layup and get to the foul line for the win. He hits that free throw, A&M has less than a second to get a prayer off and no one complains about the time out.
 
#86
#86
bleedingTNorange said:
Yes the look at the end of OT was bad, but not much of a better option in bounding 90 feet away with 2 seconds left.

What you were talking about with calling a timeout with 3 seconds left, to draw up a play, was the end of regulation. We got a layup for Stokes that he made, was fouled on, and could've won had he hit his ft.
Click to expand...

:salute:

Got ya man thanks...

Like I said I was basically arguing with the guy to be arguing.. I see him cutting people down for stating their opinions..
 
#87
#87
whobethis16 said:
Think about this: if Barton was 1 of 5 (last shot doesn't count as an attempt), and Thompson (the STARTING point guard) goes 1 of 3, it's a W. Martin can't hit those shots or layups for those guys.
Click to expand...

Think about this: If frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their @$$. It is what it is and at the end of the day, Martin is not the answer.
 
#89
#89
Anyone who thinks a coach calling a timeout with less than 3 seconds left to set up a play after having a chance to do it before then is as stupid as Martin is at coaching.
 
#90
#90
OrangeBalls said:
Anyone who thinks a coach calling a timeout with less than 3 seconds left to set up a play after having a chance to do it before then is as stupid as Martin is at coaching.
Click to expand...

Not calling one at 12ish seconds was foolish, but to allow a bad shot which was clearly coming would be even worse.

I have a hard time believing we would've gotten any better of a look than we did, do you disagree?
 
#91
#91
OrangeBalls said:
Anyone who thinks a coach calling a timeout with less than 3 seconds left to set up a play after having a chance to do it before then is as stupid as Martin is at coaching.
Click to expand...

the idea was to see if one of our players could make a play, and if they couldn't, call a timeout with enough time to dig it in the Stokes to tie it up. In my opinion the correct call was to just let your player finish his play for better or worse...the odds of him hitting his shot are about the same as getting it into Stokes with 2 seconds left for a layup. one wins the game out right the other simply ties it with an outside chance of getting the and one. I'd rather just put my money on the game winner.

the irony is that both options came to fruition and we still couldn't win
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#92
#92
Shaun1985 said:
Congrats for being clueless...A timeout is the right thing to do in that scenario. Maybe Martin should give Barton the silent treatment for going mia for several games.
Click to expand...

It was a poorly timed TO. You call that with about 10 sec left when Richardson was dribbling aimlessly with nowhere to go. The fact that he watched that for 10 sec and didn't think once of calling a TO that hows his ineptitude.
 
Last edited:
#93
#93
bleedingTNorange said:
Not calling one at 12ish seconds was foolish, but to allow a bad shot which was clearly coming would be even worse.

I have a hard time believing we would've gotten any better of a look than we did, do you disagree?
Click to expand...

Does it matter? Martin is over on the sideline trying to draw up the X's and O's. That is strike 1 against us every time. Stokes bails his ass out and still can't hit the FT. His own incompetence continues to bite him in the ass every time. When your team continues to find ways to lose in close games then that usually tells you something.
 
#94
#94
Insunseri said:
the idea was to see if one of our players could make a play, and if they couldn't, call a timeout with enough time to dig it in the Stokes to tie it up. In my opinion the correct call was to just let your player finish his play for better or worse...the odds of him hitting his shot are about the same as getting it into Stokes with 2 seconds left for a layup. one wins the game out right the other simply ties it with an outside chance of getting the and one. I'd rather just put my money on the game winner.

the irony is that both options came to fruition and we still couldn't win
Click to expand...

And that's Cuonzo ball in a nutshell. It would be funny if it weren't so damn pathetic.
 
#95
#95
OrangeBalls said:
Does it matter? Martin is over on the sideline trying to draw up the X's and O's. That is strike 1 against us every time. Stokes bails his ass out and still can't hit the FT. His own incompetence continues to bite him in the ass every time. When your team continues to find ways to lose in close games then that usually tells you something.
Click to expand...

It does matter. Martin called an excellent play, it was executed to perfection, got the wonderful foul, and Stokes didn't finish it off. He makes that, you wouldn't be on here complaining.
 
#96
#96
whobethis16 said:
It does matter. Martin called an excellent play, it was executed to perfection, got the wonderful foul, and Stokes didn't finish it off. He makes that, you wouldn't be on here complaining.
Click to expand...

It's pointless to argue.

If Martin wouldn't have called a TO and Barton airballs that shot, it would be the complete opposite argument from the same group.

I'm not defending Martin, and my feelings on him are known, but the final 10 seconds of regulation aren't what lost us that game.
 
#97
#97
whobethis16 said:
It does matter. Martin called an excellent play, it was executed to perfection, got the wonderful foul, and Stokes didn't finish it off. He makes that, you wouldn't be on here complaining.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't matter. Martin is in over his head. Only simpletons like you can't see it because you have your head up his ass.
 
#98
#98
bleedingTNorange said:
It's pointless to argue.

If Martin wouldn't have called a TO and Barton airballs that shot, it would be the complete opposite argument from the same group.

I'm not defending Martin, and my feelings on him are known, but the final 10 seconds of regulation aren't what lost us that game.
Click to expand...

LMAO. The irony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top