Doug Harris article

[Lamont Sanford]

What an assclown!

http://www.oxfordpress.com/oxford-sports/you-cant-blame-xavier-coach-for-wanting-a-better-deal-74557.html

[DAllen15]

Where is Harris off-base?

Is the Pac-10, a Big Six conference, a higher profile conference than the A10? Yes.

Has Arizona won a national championship while we've never gotten to a Final Four? Yes.

Did Arizona pay Miller quite a bit more money? Yes.

Have our last five head coaches all left and taken jobs with Big Six conferences? Yes.

Really, no historical evidence whatsoever points to a Xavier coach being successful AND staying here long-term, so I don't know why we expect it to happen, honestly. Maybe Mack, or someone else will be the exception. But, until that happens, we ARE a stepping-stone to a Big Six job. There's simply no denying this based on the career decisions made by Staak, Gillen, Prosser, Matta and Miller.

[Lamont Sanford]

Gary -

Why don't you go move to Dayton with Doug Harris!?

Or at least go back to your board with all your D Listers.

I'm not sure what the impetus was for this article as Miller has been gone for a while now and Mack is in charge.

[MuskieCinci]

It is definitely from April 8 so I think it is a little late to get too excited about the article.

[DAllen15]

Lamont, I understand your misguided anger, but I ask again, on which factual point was Harris incorrect? Or my follow-up post, for that matter?

I hate to break it to you, but there's a difference between wanting something to be true and it's actually being true.

[sweet16]

Gary -

Why don't you go move to Dayton with Doug Harris!?

Or at least go back to your board with all your D Listers.

I'm not sure what the impetus was for this article as Miller has been gone for a while now and Mack is in charge.

Man, you miss a day, you miss alot! When was it determined that DAllen15 is Mr. Neutral? Is that common knowledge to most on this board?

[Lamont Sanford]

Man, you miss a day, you miss alot! When was it determined that DAllen15 is Mr. Neutral? Is that common knowledge to most on this board?

sweet -

It's common knowledge. Gary was getting bored arguing with himself on MM, so he decided to join in the fun over here.

[DAllen15]

All this discussion about who's who, and yet not a word disputing the factual arguments in Harris' article or my post. Gosh, I wonder why??????

[XU-XHI]

All this discussion about who's who, and yet not a word disputing the factual arguments in Harris' article or my post. Gosh, I wonder why??????


Here is your factual argument based on this mis-statement in his article,

Arizona is a lot closer to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball than Xavier ever will be.

Xavier is presently, although just took a hit, and has in most recent history been closer to Arizona to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball. (E8, S16, & E8 in the last few years) This doesn't mean that X will stay at this level and it doesn't mean X won't stay at this level or improve (as hsitory shows it likely will improve). X has already been closer and many of us believe/hope that the program continues its ability to achieve at the highest level on the court and in the classroom. While keeping a coach would seem to be an asset in reaching the pinnacle, X's track record shows it is not a necessity. Who knows, X may be creating a new paradigm for success. Keep bringing in young hungry exciting coaches and let the old ones run off to stagnate. No arguing the facts.

[Lamont Sanford]

Gary -

My sole issue was that this UD beat writer (Harris) is an assclown.

Don't you need to go argue with Rico or Shadow on MM about now?

[DAllen15]

You've got a lot of speculation and gueswork in your argument, XU-HI.

My points were:

Is the Pac-10 a better conference than the A10? Of course.
Has Arizona won a national title while X hasn't gotten past the Elite Eight? Yes.
Did UA offer Miller substantially more $$$? Obviously.
Has each of our last five coaches left for a Big Six job? Yep.

So, until something changes, I don't see how anyone can argue that we're not a stepping-stone job. That was the point and conclusion of Harris' article, and, based on our history, it's indisputable.

[DAllen15]

My sole issue was that this UD beat writer (Harris) is an assclown.

I'll let you decide the assclown issue. My point is that the possible assclown is making a historically valid point--our coaches do well, and then move on to a Big Six job. That's a fact.

[DC Muskie]

Kansas is a stepping stone job.

[XU-XHI]

No speculation, all fact. Has X been hurt by being a stepping stone? No, in fact, based on track record, being a stepping stone has benefitted X. Will it continue? I don't know and neither does anyone else but if it does - please keep on stepping up and out to make room for the coach and team that wins it all. As for harris's arguement about X never being closer to the pinnacle, all those things he lists do not get you closer to the pinnacle. They may make it easier but it is ok to do things the hard way sometimes. Winning games does. X has done a better job of winning games that get you closer to the pinnacle better than Arizona on a regular basis in recent history. No speulation, just fact.


You've got a lot of speculation and gueswork in your argument, XU-HI.

My points were:

Is the Pac-10 a better conference than the A10? Of course.
Has Arizona won a national title while X hasn't gotten past the Elite Eight? Yes.
Did UA offer Miller substantially more $$$? Obviously.
Has each of our last five coaches left for a Big Six job? Yep.

So, until something changes, I don't see how anyone can argue that we're not a stepping-stone job. That was the point and conclusion of Harris' article, and, based on our history, it's indisputable.

[XU-XHI]

I'll let you decide the assclown issue. My point is that the possible assclown is making a historically valid point--our coaches do well, and then move on to a Big Six job. That's a fact.

Yes it is and it has been good for X and helped X to be closer to the pinnacle than Arizona. That's a fact.

[sweet16]

All this discussion about who's who, and yet not a word disputing the factual arguments in Harris' article or my post. Gosh, I wonder why??????

I found the article to be intellectually shallow.......lacking new, original, revolutionary thought. The comment about BCS schools muscling out non-BCS schools is stale and, quite frankly, misguided. OK, 4 at-large bids.....but 29 of the 64 teams were from non-BCS conferences......that's 45% of the field......that sounds about right to me. Ask yourself this question......if you take all 70 BCS schools (or whatever the number is) along with X and you rank them based on the last 5-10 years where would X fall?

[DAllen15]

Here's Harris' comments verbatim--

Musketeer fans need to face facts. The six power conferences rule TV, which fuels recruiting, and Arizona is a lot closer to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball than Xavier ever will be. Obviously true as to the first part of the sentence, and we disagree as to the correctness of the last half of the sentence.

And let’s not forget the rather sizeable bump in pay Miller received, more than doubling his $1 million-per-year. Also obviously true.

The NCAA tournament is muscling out the non-BCS schools at an alarming rate, awarding them a meager four at-large bids this year, and it may not get any better. Correct.

I don’t fault any coach for going where the odds of making regular NCAA tourney trips aren’t so stacked against him.Arguably true, but I can see where you'd take issue with it.

Is it too much these days to ask a coach to make one school a long-term project?

If that school doesn’t reside in one of the six power conferences, the answer, sadly, is probably yes. Clearly correct, as our last five coaches have done exactly that.

[XU 87]

The NCAA tournament is muscling out the non-BCS schools at an alarming rate, awarding them a meager four at-large bids this year, and it may not get any better. Correct.

I don’t fault any coach for going where the odds of making regular NCAA tourney trips aren’t so stacked against him.Arguably true, but I can see where you'd take issue with it.

[/COLOR]

Those paragraphs are not true.

The first paragraph- two years ago Jay Bilas was complaining that too many non-BCS schools got at large bids. In short, your sample size of one year (last year) is ridiculous.

Paragraph two- the odds are NOT stacked up against Xavier to make regular NCAA tourney trips. How can you claim that paragraph 2 is "arguably true" as it relates to Xavier? In case you've been living on another planet, Xavier has been to 8 of the last 9 NCAA's.

[DAllen15]

Kansas is a stepping stone job.

If X becomes a Kansas-like stepping stone, we'd be ecstatic.

Larry Brown did use it as a stepping stone back to the NBA--after winning an NCAA title in
'88, and having gone to a Final Four two years earlier.

Roy Williams used the Kansas job as a stepping stone to North Carolina, after being at KU for 15 seasons, with his last 2 years being Final Four and 2nd place-finish seasons.

In 2003, Bill Self became the 8th, repeat, 8th, head basketball coach in KU history.

We're on our 6th in 30 years.

[DAllen15]

How can you claim that paragraph 2 is "arguably true" as it relates to Xavier? In case you've been living on another planet, Xavier has been to 8 of the last 9 NCAA's.

Arizona has been to 25 consecutive NCAA tournaments, the best active streak in college basketball and second all time to a 27-year North Carolina run.

8 of 9, or 25 in a row-----which one is more enticing to a coach? Hmmm, let me think.

[XU 87]

The statement talked about going to a program "where the odds of making the NCAA aren't so stacked against you", implying that the odds are stacked against Xavier making the NCAA tourney. You agree with this statement.

So tell me, how are the odds stacked against Xavier?

And telling me that Arizona has been to 25 NCAA's in a row doesn't then equate that "the odds are stacked against Xavier" making the tourney. It means that Arizona has had a better program over the last 25 years. It may also mean that Arizona, year in and year out, has a better chance of making the NCAA. But it doesn't mean that Xavier has the "odds stacked against it".

The more I write the more I realize what a foolish article this is at times.

[PMI]

All this discussion about who's who, and yet not a word disputing the factual arguments in Harris' article or my post. Gosh, I wonder why??????

Allow me to tell you why. Xavier fans (which is what this board is made up of) will read an article like that from a Xavier fan's perspective. There are certain things in it that ALL true Xavier fans who believe in our program would disagree with. You weakened your original position (what a surprise) when you first asked where Harris is off base and then you went through it again with phrases like "arguably true." I, and many others, believe that there were in fact parts of the article where Harris was off-base. Also, most people here don't like you and find it both mildly amusing and truly pathetic that you still hide behind the name "DAllen15." Personally, I've always had more of a problem with your ancient buddy Shadow, although I'm not your biggest fan either. Apparently the board the two of you have run into the ground isn't enough for you. I feel for muskieman. Thankfully we have good moderators here.


Kansas is a stepping stone job.

I found this amusing, as almost all good programs have been ditched by a coach for another job. The difference between Xavier and most of the rest of them is that we always win here, thus there are always lots of people knocking at our door, hence our high turnover rate over the last 30 years. It's because our coaches are good, but it's also because they get to coach at a very good school/program. If you believe in trends, there's no reason to believe we can't reach the pinnacle of ALL OF COLLEGE BASKETBALL.


Here's Harris' comments verbatim--

Musketeer fans need to face facts. The six power conferences rule TV, which fuels recruiting, and Arizona is a lot closer to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball than Xavier ever will be. Obviously true as to the first part of the sentence, and we disagree as to the correctness of the last half of the sentence.

And let’s not forget the rather sizeable bump in pay Miller received, more than doubling his $1 million-per-year. Also obviously true.

The NCAA tournament is muscling out the non-BCS schools at an alarming rate, awarding them a meager four at-large bids this year, and it may not get any better. Correct.

I don’t fault any coach for going where the odds of making regular NCAA tourney trips aren’t so stacked against him.Arguably true, but I can see where you'd take issue with it.

Is it too much these days to ask a coach to make one school a long-term project?

If that school doesn’t reside in one of the six power conferences, the answer, sadly, is probably yes. Clearly correct, as our last five coaches have done exactly that.

This is where your tone changed from "The article has nothing wrong with it" to "you could argue there are some debatable things", but your tone didn't change quite enough. For example, the last sentence is not "clearly correct" at all. There are coaches outside the Big 6 programs who have made one school their long-term project. Martelli is one. Hell, Morgan Wooten spent his entire Hall of Fame career at DeMatha Catholic High School when he had NBA and college offers on several occasions. It takes a rare individual, but it's certainly not unheard of. We just happened to have hired some of the ones who aren't that way, but it worked out nonetheless (although it may have caused some early heart problems in some of our friends here.) Who knows, maybe we just hired one who is here for the long haul.

[DAllen15]

Mea culpa. I always forget how much each and every poster has to fall into line on these boards. Any divergent thought or disagreement is seen as coming straight from Satan's mouth. I'll try to remember that as I look back fondly on our many national titles and lack of change in our head coaching job.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Mea culpa. I always forget how much each and every poster has to fall into line on these boards. Any divergent thought or disagreement is seen as coming straight from Satan's mouth. I'll try to remember that as I look back fondly on our many national titles and lack of change in our head coaching job.

Its not that at all. People disagree on here all the time but when you have a reputation of doing so just to get your rocks off then people question you.

PMI did a great job of pointing out flaws to you in what you were saying and agreeing with in the article and then you do what you have already called someone else on and not addressed the issue. You went on a rant about how people have to fall in line. You honestly think the odds are stacked against Xavier to make the tournament? Give me a break. It isnt "clearly correct" that coaches dont make long term careers outside the big 6. PMI named some, and you can throw in Few and Altman. Has it been true at Xavier so far? Yes. That wasnt what the comment said though. Also who cares if the non-BCS schools are only getting 4 at large bids when Xavier is consistently in the top 3 for non bcs schools. Also the other 2 are Gonzaga and Memphis who win their conference tourney every year so that eliminates them from the at large category.

[DART87]

Where is Harris off-base?

Is the Pac-10, a Big Six conference, a higher profile conference than the A10? Yes.

Has Arizona won a national championship while we've never gotten to a Final Four? Yes.

Did Arizona pay Miller quite a bit more money? Yes.

Have our last five head coaches all left and taken jobs with Big Six conferences? Yes.

Really, no historical evidence whatsoever points to a Xavier coach being successful AND staying here long-term, so I don't know why we expect it to happen, honestly. Maybe Mack, or someone else will be the exception. But, until that happens, we ARE a stepping-stone to a Big Six job. There's simply no denying this based on the career decisions made by Staak, Gillen, Prosser, Matta and Miller.

I don't dispute the actual facts in the article. My problem is with this:

"Musketeer fans need to face facts. The six power conferences rule TV, which fuels recruiting, and Arizona is a lot closer to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball than Xavier ever will be."

Here are the "facts" as this Musketeer fan sees them.
XU has a damn good TV package, better than most if not all non BCS programs and better coverage than a lot of BCS teams.
XU has built a solid foundation over the past 25 years and that success on the court, in the classroom, and in the NBA gives XU a serious chance to compete for even better recruits.
XU is able and willing to pay a baskeball coach over $1,000,000.

Can XU win a bidding war against a BCS program - no, nor should they. Does this make XU a "stepping stone" for coaches - YES, as long as they win and run a clean program.

Is "Arizona closer to the pinnacle in college basketball" than XU is today?...maybe (but this is debatable not fact).

Is "Arizona closer to the pinnacle in college basketball than XU ever will be"?...this statement is utter bullshit and why I agree that the author is an assclown.

[PMI]

Also who cares if the non-BCS schools are only getting 4 at large bids when Xavier is consistently in the top 3 for non bcs schools. Also the other 2 are Gonzaga and Memphis who win their conference tourney every year so that eliminates them from the at large category.

Very true. Since when have we had to worry about holding our own as a top 4 or 5 non-BCS school? Making the tournament is not our concern right now, and it would take a lot more than the loss of Miller, D Brown, the assistants and the strength coach to change that. We are in prime position to go back to the tournament next year and even challenge for a third straight Sweet 16. Jason Love has gotten used to nothing less.



Can XU win a bidding war against a BCS program - no, nor should they. Does this make XU a "stepping stone" for coaches - YES, as long as they win and run a clean program.

Is "Arizona closer to the pinnacle in college basketball" than XU is today?...maybe (but this is debatable not fact).

Is "Arizona closer to the pinnacle in college basketball than XU ever will be"?...this statement is utter bullshit and why I agree that the author is an assclown.

I took a lot of issue with the "pinnacle" comment too. First of all, if you look at our roster vs. Arizona's roster, I'd argue that we're closer to the pinnacle right now. I mean the pinnacle is winning a national title right? I like our chances better than theirs next year, as I did last year and the two years before that. So to say they are closer NOW than we will EVER be is, as you say, utter bullshit. Even if you're talking about programs in general and taking all other kinds of things into consideration, I don't doubt our potential is better than what Arizona is right now, which is, I guess, a Top 15-20 program or so.

I will also note that the term "stepping stone" is not that bad when you're talking about X. You wouldn't use a stepping stone if you knew you'd fall right through it. Our program is a consistently excellent job for any coach. It's easier to win here than at most other places and it obviously looks very good on any coach's resume. We are Xavier fans, not necessarily fans of certain coaches, so we should be fine with that term. If you are a sturdy stepping stone for a long enough time, you will eventually become a permanent block on which to stand. I really believe that. You'd only be allowed on the block if you were good enough for it. Hopefully Mack will chill on our block for a long time to come.

[XU 87]

Mea culpa. I always forget how much each and every poster has to fall into line on these boards. Any divergent thought or disagreement is seen as coming straight from Satan's mouth. I'll try to remember that as I look back fondly on our many national titles and lack of change in our head coaching job.

Don't you just hate it when the facts show that you're wrong?

[PMI]

Mea culpa. I always forget how much each and every poster has to fall into line on these boards. Any divergent thought or disagreement is seen as coming straight from Satan's mouth. I'll try to remember that as I look back fondly on our many national titles and lack of change in our head coaching job.

Typical Gary reaction to being wrong. Just pawn it off on us all being Xavier homers and you being some holier than thou neutral observer, who sees things solely for what they are but also happens to root for X. You know damn well that many of us are quick to point out when an author writing something negative has a point, or when the truly delusional (albeit well-meaning) homers among us are taking it a bit too far. There were simply parts of this article that any Xavier fan has the right to and should disagree with. Spare us all.

[theprofessor]

If we can thank Sean for something beyond the team's last two seasons, it would be his intolerance for allowing the press to paint X along with other non BCS (big 6) teams with a broad brush. What if Sean had left for Memphis instead of Az, would anything have been different? They aren't a BCS school, but to me, it would have been similar to him leaving for AZ. Coaching X is a more prestigious job than coaching about half of the BCS schools. The same argument the author made about X, could be made for Vanderbilt, Northwestern, etc,


It also bears mentioning that the author writes for an Oxford paper. Recall that Miami's coaches used to leave for better positions. They had a good way to solve that problem... mediocrity. Coles isn't bad enough to get fired (at Miami anyway) and not good enough for others to lure him away.

[principal]

Gary - shouldn't you be on the MM board criticizing someone's grammar?

[Lamont Sanford]

Gary -

Why don't you make like Michael Jackson and beat it!?

Again, the last thing I want to read is a UD beat writer assclown telling me as a Xavier fan to get over it. He can suck it as far as I'm concerned.

UD sucks too.

[DAllen15]

Focus on the messenger, not the message; that's the ticket!

[PMI]

Focus on the messenger, not the message; that's the ticket!

In this case we got to do both. The messenger and the message are both jokes.

[muskiefan82]

is that Xavier continues to have coaches move on to other programs because Xavier continues to win and win big. I fail to see how this is a bad thing. If Xavier ends up with the same coach for 30 years, does that mean that Xavier didn't do well enough for the coach to make more somewhere else? I would rather have a coach 4-5 years with E8's and S16's than a career coach with no NCAA or one and dones (see Dayton).

If Mack stays, great, but if he leaves for "greener pastures" I bet I'm happy because he will have earned it by continuing the success we are all used to.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Focus on the messenger, not the message; that's the ticket!

Yet again another post calling us the bad guys and not even trying to address the many posts that have called you out on supporting claims that arent even true.

[DAllen15]

And I assume you'll be agree with the indisputably true comments that Harris did make in his article?

Arizona's in one of the power, i.e., Big Six, conferences, while X is not.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Arizona gave Miller a substantial bump in compensation.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Schools like X, and specifically X, tend to lose their successful coaches to Big Six schools.--Can't possibly argue with this as it's happened FIVE successive times to X.

The only thing we disagree with, really, is which school is more likely to have more success in the future. I don't disagree at all that X is better positioned than ever, but my opinion (which is all yours is as well) is that Arizona will always have advantages over X in terms of recruiting, exposure, money, etc., and therefore is in a better position to reach the top of the heap. They've already shown they can, while we have not.

I don't see the big deal about guys having different opinions. You can argue all you want about how X will reach the promised land (Final Four, championship game, championship), but until we actually do it, it's just wishin' and hopin'.

I'd love it if X did reach that level, and we're closer than ever, but until it happens, it hasn't happened, and all the wouldda's and shouldda's in the world don't make it so.

[D-West & PO-Z]

QUOTE=DAllen15;129105]And I assume you'll be agree with the indisputably true comments that Harris did make in his article?

Arizona's in one of the power, i.e., Big Six, conferences, while X is not.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Arizona gave Miller a substantial bump in compensation.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Schools like X, and specifically X, tend to lose their successful coaches to Big Six schools.--Can't possibly argue with this as it's happened FIVE successive times to X.

The only thing we disagree with, really, is which school is more likely to have more success in the future. I don't disagree at all that X is better positioned than ever, but my opinion (which is all yours is as well) is that Arizona will always have advantages over X in terms of recruiting, exposure, money, etc., and therefore is in a better position to reach the top of the heap. They've already shown they can, while we have not.

I don't see the big deal about guys having different opinions. You can argue all you want about how X will reach the promised land (Final Four, championship game, championship), but until we actually do it, it's just wishin' and hopin'.

I'd love it if X did reach that level, and we're closer than ever, but until it happens, it hasn't happened, and all the wouldda's and shouldda's in the world don't make it so.[/QUOTE]

No one is arguing with the first two bolded points.

The third point is arguable. It has happened to X but to say there isnt a chance to ever find a good coach to make a long term commitment outside the Big 6 is not correct. Its not common but it happens. Dana Altman, Mark Few, even Calipari (Yes, I know he left, but he was there for a long time and knew of the violations coming.)

With the 4th bolded point are you saying that Arizona is closer right now to reaching the pinnacle that Xavier ever will be? Thats what people took issue with in the guys article. No one was mad because the guy said in the future Arizona will have a better chance at winning a championship that Xavier. No one knows whether that is true or not. The guy stated "Arizona is a lot closer to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball than Xavier ever will be." That is not a true statement. I dont think it can even be reasonably argued.

[DAllen15]

And from my point of view, I don't see how it can reasonably be argued the other way. We disagree, obviously, we've both had our say, so that's about as far as we can go with this, don't you think? At the end of the day, you're not going to change your opinion, and it's not any more likely that I will mine.

That's why message boards (and conversations) exist.

[X Factor]

I'm glad Bobo, Mack, Kelsey, and the rest of our coaches and admin don't think like Gary.

[DAllen15]

Guys, I'm not saying that the administration, coaching staff, etc., shouldn't aim as high as possible. But we're just observers; we don't do the scheduling, recruiting, or coaching.
All we do is see what we see, try to digest it, analyze it, and guess what the future will bring.

Sometimes posters have been unanimous (virtually) that we were going to win a game, and that didn't happen. Sometimes it seemed like we couldn't possibly win a game, and we did. So, our opinions on this or any board have zip to do with how the team actually performs on the court.

I don't see why we can't simultaneously be fans (who want our team to do well and root for them to win) and observers who disinterestedly call 'em as we see 'em.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I don't see why we can't simultaneously be fans (who want our team to do well and root for them to win) and observers who disinterestedly call 'em as we see 'em.

How can anyone who claims to be as big of fans as we all do talk disinterestedly talk about Xavier in any way? That is not to say we cant see flaw with the program, team, or admit when another program is better but the fact that you can ever talk about Xavier in a disinterested way is weird to most of us. A lot of times you come off as someone who a.) just likes to ruffle feathers just for the sake of doing so. and b.) who wishes xavier fails at whatever the argument is about just so you can be right.

You act so surprised every time you get blasted for things like this. When stuff like this arises where a point could be argued way way or another 99% of the fans are going to give Xavier the benefit of the doubt. Why you dont who knows?

[ChrisFarley]

http://www.oxfordpress.com/oxford-sports/you-cant-blame-xavier-coach-for-wanting-a-better-deal-74557.html

[XU-XHI]

The only thing we disagree with, really, is which school is more likely to have more success in the future. I don't disagree at all that X is better positioned than ever, but my opinion (which is all yours is as well) is that Arizona will always have advantages over X in terms of recruiting, exposure, money, etc., and therefore is in a better position to reach the top of the heap. They've already shown they can, while we have not.

I don't see the big deal about guys having different opinions. You can argue all you want about how X will reach the promised land (Final Four, championship game, championship), but until we actually do it, it's just wishin' and hopin'.

I'd love it if X did reach that level, and we're closer than ever, but until it happens, it hasn't happened, and all the wouldda's and shouldda's in the world don't make it so.

Here's the logical arguement the other way. If all those advantages meant that teams/schools that have those advantages are closer to the pinnacle than the programs without them, then the bottom of the heap of those BCS conferences would be ahead of teams like X and we all know that isn't true.

Yes we all agree the points made about exposure, $$, recruiting are relevant but it is what the teams do with the "tools" they have is what makes the difference in being closer to the pinnacle. Remember there are a number of things X does that Arizona didn't or couldn't do in terms of perks for the coach, travel for the team for example.

The arguement certainly can be made that X does much more with less than what most bcs schools do.

Remember Pete Edward Rose...did much more with far less talent than most of his peers and reached the pinnacle in baseball and hits.

X xmells like a Rose to me...(minus the gambling, personality etc.)

[xunorm]

thanks for wasting my time on an article from April 8.

Stupidity running wild.

[DAllen15]

Peter Drucker once said that anything decided unanimously was either insignificant or incorrect. There's ALWAYS another side to an issue, even if it's not 50-50. That's really all I'm saying.

[XU05and07]

http://www.oxfordpress.com/oxford-sports/you-cant-blame-xavier-coach-for-wanting-a-better-deal-74557.html

Really? You are kidding, right? You start a new thread about an article that is already on the board...AND IT'S FROM APRIL 8th!!! And what are you trying to prove? What's your motive, what's your fascination, what's your problem? I think your brain has a thick candy shell.

Did you eat paint chips as a kid?

[sweet16]

Good lord Rico, this article was already posted here, has over 600 views and 40 replies. I honestly believe that your involvement on this board and MM is nothing more than a self-serving, ego gratifying ploy......get your name at the top of every post. Do you EVER read any of the other posts or do you simply start new threads? And by the way (and I don't mean to sound condescending) but the contracted form of "has not" is spelled hasn't not has'nt.

[XU-XHI]

Peter Drucker once said that anything decided unanimously was either insignificant or incorrect. There's ALWAYS another side to an issue, even if it's not 50-50. That's really all I'm saying.

Sam Drucker once said "Mr. Douglas, I think you're gonna need a shovel to move all that manure." What a boring world it would be if we all agreed. Although more people would be right if they agreed with me. :-)

[PMI]

Rico/Chris Farley is a troll. I got a PM from him today titled "naked woman." Holding my breath that it wasn't a virus, I opened the message:

"how do they let you get away with having that photo by your user name(nude woman with watermelon)...my daughter uses this site and sees that. You can see her nipples...Bad Taste!

You're not the only one who has naked female pictures..."

Mt response:

"Well, chances are your daughter has nipples so it's not something she hasn't seen before. I'll tell you what, if you stop annoying everyone here and leave, I'll change my avatar. Otherwise, take it up with someone in charge because I like my naked woman avatar. This is not a Walt Disney site and I will not change a thing I do here for you. How you police your daughter's internet activity is your business. Good day."

It's probably a matter of time before he's permanently banned. I know I don't get a vote, but I hope it's sooner rather than later. Literally EVERY ONE of his posts have been annoying and worthless. I don't like a few posters (Gary, LH) but at least they're usually here for the right reasons. I don't believe that's the case with this guy. He is a gnat.

[Raoul Duke]

Rico/Chris Farley is a troll. I got a PM from him today titled "naked woman." Holding my breath that it wasn't a virus, I opened the message:

"how do they let you get away with having that photo by your user name(nude woman with watermelon)...my daughter uses this site and sees that. You can see her nipples...Bad Taste!

You're not the only one who has naked female pictures..."

Mt response:

"Well, chances are your daughter has nipples so it's not something she hasn't seen before. I'll tell you what, if you stop annoying everyone here and leave, I'll change my avatar. Otherwise, take it up with someone in charge because I like my naked woman avatar. This is not a Walt Disney site and I will not change a thing I do here for you. How you police your daughter's internet activity is your business. Good day."

It's probably a matter of time before he's permanently banned. I know I don't get a vote, but I hope it's sooner rather than later. Literally EVERY ONE of his posts have been annoying and worthless. I don't like a few posters (Gary, LH) but at least they're usually here for the right reasons. I don't believe that's the case with this guy. He is a gnat.

There is an option to disable avatars and images, so he could do that. Unfortunately, there is not an option (that I'm aware of) to disable 'smiley' faces. No grown man should be using colored smiley faces to express his 'emotions.'

[Raoul Duke]

And I assume you'll be agree with the indisputably true comments that Harris did make in his article?

Arizona's in one of the power, i.e., Big Six, conferences, while X is not.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Arizona gave Miller a substantial bump in compensation.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Schools like X, and specifically X, tend to lose their successful coaches to Big Six schools.--Can't possibly argue with this as it's happened FIVE successive times to X.

The only thing we disagree with, really, is which school is more likely to have more success in the future. I don't disagree at all that X is better positioned than ever, but my opinion (which is all yours is as well) is that Arizona will always have advantages over X in terms of recruiting, exposure, money, etc., and therefore is in a better position to reach the top of the heap. They've already shown they can, while we have not.

I don't see the big deal about guys having different opinions. You can argue all you want about how X will reach the promised land (Final Four, championship game, championship), but until we actually do it, it's just wishin' and hopin'.

I'd love it if X did reach that level, and we're closer than ever, but until it happens, it hasn't happened, and all the wouldda's and shouldda's in the world don't make it so.

Now you're cherry picking. You're leaving out the assertions (which you earlier agreed with) that the NCAA favors BCS teams, and that the odds are stacked against X every year. Those are (1) non-factual and (2) absurd, as XU87 has already pointed out.

No one is picking on you because you disagree; they're picking on you because your arguments are stupid.

[DAllen15]

MY arguments are stupid? Would all the guys who thought Miller would stay at X because it was such an attractive job, and who thought he would be any different from Staak/Gillen/Prosser/Matta, please step forward and now admit your total wrongheadedness?

If Doug Harris' points are so off base, why have our last 5 coaches gone to Big Six jobs? You can keep believing what you want, but our coaches keep pulling the rug out from under you by leaving. I seem to be the only one not surprised when it happens. I'd think more posters would have caught on by now, but apparently not. How many coaches leaving in a row will it take before it sinks in that X is not a destination job for the overwhelming majority of coaches? Maybe Mack will be different, but anybody who's suprised by his leaving in 3-5-7 years qualifies for a lobotomy.

[Raoul Duke]

MY arguments are stupid? Would all the guys who thought Miller would stay at X because it was such an attractive job, and who thought he would be any different from Staak/Gillen/Prosser/Matta, please step forward and now admit your total wrongheadedness?

If Doug Harris' points are so off base, why have our last 5 coaches gone to Big Six jobs? You can keep believing what you want, but our coaches keep pulling the rug out from under you by leaving. I seem to be the only one not surprised when it happens. I'd think more posters would have caught on by now, but apparently not. How many coaches leaving in a row will it take before it sinks in that X is not a destination job for the overwhelming majority of coaches? Maybe Mack will be different, but anybody who's suprised by his leaving in 3-5-7 years qualifies for a lobotomy.

You're cherry picking again. I only disagreed with the points that I...well...said I disagreed with.

[DAllen15]

I get a kick out of the fact that you, and others, are saying I'm cherry picking, while I don't think ONE poster has acknowledged agreeing with ANY of Harris' statements, including--

Is the Pac-10, a Big Six conference, a higher profile conference than the A10?

Has Arizona won a national championship while we've never gotten to a Final Four?

Did Arizona pay Miller quite a bit more money?

Have our last five head coaches all left and taken jobs with Big Six conferences?

As none of those can be factually disputed, the ONLY thing we're disagreeing about is whether X or UA is better situated for future success. As that's speculation no matter which side you take, how much more agreement would you expect?

I think and hope X will continue to be successful. I expect UA to continue to be successful as well. I think their ceiling is higher than ours. You disagree. Exactly how much further do you want to go with this?

[D-West & PO-Z]

QUOTE=DAllen15;129105]And I assume you'll be agree with the indisputably true comments that Harris did make in his article?

Arizona's in one of the power, i.e., Big Six, conferences, while X is not.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Arizona gave Miller a substantial bump in compensation.--Can't possibly be an argument there.

Schools like X, and specifically X, tend to lose their successful coaches to Big Six schools.--Can't possibly argue with this as it's happened FIVE successive times to X.

The only thing we disagree with, really, is which school is more likely to have more success in the future. I don't disagree at all that X is better positioned than ever, but my opinion (which is all yours is as well) is that Arizona will always have advantages over X in terms of recruiting, exposure, money, etc., and therefore is in a better position to reach the top of the heap. They've already shown they can, while we have not.

I don't see the big deal about guys having different opinions. You can argue all you want about how X will reach the promised land (Final Four, championship game, championship), but until we actually do it, it's just wishin' and hopin'.

I'd love it if X did reach that level, and we're closer than ever, but until it happens, it hasn't happened, and all the wouldda's and shouldda's in the world don't make it so.

No one is arguing with the first two bolded points.

The third point is arguable. It has happened to X but to say there isnt a chance to ever find a good coach to make a long term commitment outside the Big 6 is not correct. Its not common but it happens. Dana Altman, Mark Few, even Calipari (Yes, I know he left, but he was there for a long time and knew of the violations coming.)

With the 4th bolded point are you saying that Arizona is closer right now to reaching the pinnacle that Xavier ever will be? Thats what people took issue with in the guys article. No one was mad because the guy said in the future Arizona will have a better chance at winning a championship that Xavier. No one knows whether that is true or not. The guy stated "Arizona is a lot closer to reaching the pinnacle in college basketball than Xavier ever will be." That is not a true statement. I dont think it can even be reasonably argued.[/QUOTE]




I get a kick out of the fact that you, and others, are saying I'm cherry picking, while I don't think ONE poster has acknowledged agreeing with ANY of Harris' statements, including--

Is the Pac-10, a Big Six conference, a higher profile conference than the A10?

Has Arizona won a national championship while we've never gotten to a Final Four?

Did Arizona pay Miller quite a bit more money?

Have our last five head coaches all left and taken jobs with Big Six conferences?

As none of those can be factually disputed, the ONLY thing we're disagreeing about is whether X or UA is better situated for future success. As that's speculation no matter which side you take, how much more agreement would you expect?

I think and hope X will continue to be successful. I expect UA to continue to be successful as well. I think their ceiling is higher than ours. You disagree. Exactly how much further do you want to go with this?

I clearly showed that I didnt and I didnt think anyone else did disagree with the fact that the pac 10 is better and miller got paid more and our last 5 coaches have left for big 6 conferences.

You keep tweaking the statements though. Before it was that no coach would make a school outside of the big 6 their long term home. We have showed thats not true and that there is hop of Xavier getting one of these types of guys.

Then you take the statement that Arizona is closer to the pinnacle of college hoops now that Xavier ever will be and change it to has Arizona won a national championship and has xavier ever gotten to the final 4? Is Arizona going to be minutes and a few points from a final 4 this year? probably not, so that means we have already been closer to the pinnacle than they are right now.

No one jumped on the Harris guy(and you in turn for agreeing) because he said Arizona has a brighter future. You keep acting like thats what everyone was upset with. He said Arizona is closer to the pinnacle now than Xavier ever will be. That just isnt true.

[XU 87]

I

I think and hope X will continue to be successful. I expect UA to continue to be successful as well. I think their ceiling is higher than ours. You disagree. Exactly how much further do you want to go with this?

On behalf of just about everyone on this board, "No further."

But does it ever cause you to step back and reflect when you are arguing some point and everyone disagrees with you and no one agrees with you?