Pearl Lovers 1 Pearl Haters 1

#1

tvols75

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
9,219
Likes
14
#1
Both sides this whole time have had flawed arguments, and it got summed up today. This is not a knock on Martin, because I like the hire, even though I would rather have had Marshall.

The two sides:

Pearl lovers: We should keep Bruce because we can't hire a good coach, and he is UT basketball... or "dimond in the rough."

Flawed because: UT basketball would've been hammered by the NCAA, he wouldn't have coached for 2 years.

Pearl Haters: Fire him because, UT basketball has the facilities and money to get a coach that is better than Bruce.

Flawed: No "big coach" or "up and coming" coach is going to chance coming into a situation that we are in. Sure we can assure them that the program won't be hurt, and it will be Bruce. However, the media has painted UT as having one of, if not the, most dysfunctional athletic departments in the NCAA, and UT can only blame itself.


Summary: Martin is a good coach that hopefully can get in here and keep Tobias and Scotty along with the recruits. At worse, he provides us some stability for the next coach so we don't have to go into IU rebuilding mode. At best, he continues the success of UT basketball.
 
#2
#2
Both sides this whole time have had flawed arguments, and it got summed up today. This is not a knock on Martin, because I like the hire, even though I would rather have had Marshall.

The two sides:

Pearl lovers: We should keep Bruce because we can't hire a good coach, and he is UT basketball... or "dimond in the rough."

Flawed because: UT basketball would've been hammered by the NCAA, he wouldn't have coached for 2 years.

Pearl Haters: Fire him because, UT basketball has the facilities and money to get a coach that is better than Bruce.

Flawed: No "big coach" or "up and coming" coach is going to chance coming into a situation that we are in. Sure we can assure them that the program won't be hurt, and it will be Bruce. However, the media has painted UT as having one of, if not the, most dysfunctional athletic departments in the NCAA, and UT can only blame itself.


Summary: Martin is a good coach that hopefully can get in here and keep Tobias and Scotty along with the recruits. At worse, he provides us some stability for the next coach so we don't have to go into IU rebuilding mode. At best, he continues the success of UT basketball.
Agree.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#3
#3
Both sides this whole time have had flawed arguments, and it got summed up today. This is not a knock on Martin, because I like the hire, even though I would rather have had Marshall.

The two sides:

Pearl lovers: We should keep Bruce because we can't hire a good coach, and he is UT basketball... or "dimond in the rough."

Flawed because: UT basketball would've been hammered by the NCAA, he wouldn't have coached for 2 years.

Pearl Haters: Fire him because, UT basketball has the facilities and money to get a coach that is better than Bruce.

Flawed: No "big coach" or "up and coming" coach is going to chance coming into a situation that we are in. Sure we can assure them that the program won't be hurt, and it will be Bruce. However, the media has painted UT as having one of, if not the, most dysfunctional athletic departments in the NCAA, and UT can only blame itself.


Summary: Martin is a good coach that hopefully can get in here and keep Tobias and Scotty along with the recruits. At worse, he provides us some stability for the next coach so we don't have to go into IU rebuilding mode. At best, he continues the success of UT basketball.

and at worst?
 
#5
#5
I'm not looking forward to going to Lexington to play their NBA farm club lineup.
 

VN Store



Back
Top