beast of the east
Active member
First of all some of the commentary here is spectacularly over the top negative.
Most of you very same guys were just a few games ago giddy when specuiating that our seed may be as high as a 5 or 6. Then Heron misses 2 games, where we pull one out vs. a good Seton Hall team, comes back at less than himself, and we lose while nonetheless not playing our best.
Think about our culture. People toss in the towel on salvageable marriages by not doing the hard work of building, restoring, and committing. Many won't even enter into those kind of relationships any more because in part, they can't take the bad that comes along with the good, or that it's just too hard to sacrifice, commit, and be patient.
When you guys turn this into an all out assault on the effort and character of coaches, you degrade yourself.
Chris Mullin HAS earned a lot of money over his career. He was also one of the very best basketball players to ever play this game, good enough to be in both the HS and college HOF. Some of you speak of the monetary success that comes with this as almost something he should apologize for, or that it is disdainful. It's irrelevant to the discussion.
Before you guys go bashing everyone, for the Big East, our starting 5, at full strength and healthy, is as good as anyone in conference. Probably good enough to win a couple of NCAA games. However, the deficiencies are obvious, lack of height and lack of depth. The misfortune of losing Ponds even for a game, and Heron for 3, definitely impacted wins. If we went 7 deep with two guys who could step in next year and start, or at least where the dropoff wasn't radical, we'd be in a different spot.
Amazing but I suspect that many of you who are the harshest critics on Mullin, are not even among the 4,000 or so season ticket holds of various packages, or have attended as many as 5 games this season. You may recall that guy on here (who I won't name) who would always beg for free unused tickets for games who advocated a boycott on buying tickets until we added to our coaching staff. This was from a guy who had never bought his own tickets. When the irony of that post was pointed out, he disappeared, thankfully.
This issue should not be about being disdainful towards Mullin or any staff member. I think it is a reasonable discussion to consider whether we've improved enough over four seasons to be hopeful for the future. Some of you have seen enough and I think that's fair. I'm a little more patient, and this season to date has been as exciting as any in recent memory, at least to me. I guess, to fans also if you go by attendance.
I will say this, and it's completely legitimate from what I see. I don't remember a time in our recent history, maybe ever, where the school and the AD has built such a strong culture between alumni, other fans, and the program. It's a positive vibe, and a strong community is being formed. It didn't exist when Lavin was here, but even that was a ton better than when Norm ran the show. Before that, I can't comment because I wasn't so involved.
We are in an extremely competitive league, and to be among the best you have to assemble better talent and lots of it. Every program has a competitive team, and it is awfully difficult to rise above that. It isn't like a weaker mid major league where you can assemble better talent quickly and compete at the top of league. Here, and thankfully, just about every program gives you a tough go night in and night out.
For those of you who think that eating $2 million of Mullin's last year, or that we should go after sure fire coaching talent of $3-4 million or more, I'd ask one thing - How much have you donated towards that cause over the past 3 years? Programs aren't built on the shoulder of one or two big donors, they are built on a strong base of contributors that make significant donations as their means allow. We want to expand CA - that will cost money? Better coaches - more $$, etc. But money alone won't build a great program. Boston college has an endowment of $5 billion, yet cannot product a top tier team in the ACC. Harvard I think has $50 billion, enough to steamroll nearly all colleges, yet their athletic success is moderate.
Again, I'm okay with discussing the future of the program and even coaching changes, but do we have to attack the coaches personally to do so?
Most of you very same guys were just a few games ago giddy when specuiating that our seed may be as high as a 5 or 6. Then Heron misses 2 games, where we pull one out vs. a good Seton Hall team, comes back at less than himself, and we lose while nonetheless not playing our best.
Think about our culture. People toss in the towel on salvageable marriages by not doing the hard work of building, restoring, and committing. Many won't even enter into those kind of relationships any more because in part, they can't take the bad that comes along with the good, or that it's just too hard to sacrifice, commit, and be patient.
When you guys turn this into an all out assault on the effort and character of coaches, you degrade yourself.
Chris Mullin HAS earned a lot of money over his career. He was also one of the very best basketball players to ever play this game, good enough to be in both the HS and college HOF. Some of you speak of the monetary success that comes with this as almost something he should apologize for, or that it is disdainful. It's irrelevant to the discussion.
Before you guys go bashing everyone, for the Big East, our starting 5, at full strength and healthy, is as good as anyone in conference. Probably good enough to win a couple of NCAA games. However, the deficiencies are obvious, lack of height and lack of depth. The misfortune of losing Ponds even for a game, and Heron for 3, definitely impacted wins. If we went 7 deep with two guys who could step in next year and start, or at least where the dropoff wasn't radical, we'd be in a different spot.
Amazing but I suspect that many of you who are the harshest critics on Mullin, are not even among the 4,000 or so season ticket holds of various packages, or have attended as many as 5 games this season. You may recall that guy on here (who I won't name) who would always beg for free unused tickets for games who advocated a boycott on buying tickets until we added to our coaching staff. This was from a guy who had never bought his own tickets. When the irony of that post was pointed out, he disappeared, thankfully.
This issue should not be about being disdainful towards Mullin or any staff member. I think it is a reasonable discussion to consider whether we've improved enough over four seasons to be hopeful for the future. Some of you have seen enough and I think that's fair. I'm a little more patient, and this season to date has been as exciting as any in recent memory, at least to me. I guess, to fans also if you go by attendance.
I will say this, and it's completely legitimate from what I see. I don't remember a time in our recent history, maybe ever, where the school and the AD has built such a strong culture between alumni, other fans, and the program. It's a positive vibe, and a strong community is being formed. It didn't exist when Lavin was here, but even that was a ton better than when Norm ran the show. Before that, I can't comment because I wasn't so involved.
We are in an extremely competitive league, and to be among the best you have to assemble better talent and lots of it. Every program has a competitive team, and it is awfully difficult to rise above that. It isn't like a weaker mid major league where you can assemble better talent quickly and compete at the top of league. Here, and thankfully, just about every program gives you a tough go night in and night out.
For those of you who think that eating $2 million of Mullin's last year, or that we should go after sure fire coaching talent of $3-4 million or more, I'd ask one thing - How much have you donated towards that cause over the past 3 years? Programs aren't built on the shoulder of one or two big donors, they are built on a strong base of contributors that make significant donations as their means allow. We want to expand CA - that will cost money? Better coaches - more $$, etc. But money alone won't build a great program. Boston college has an endowment of $5 billion, yet cannot product a top tier team in the ACC. Harvard I think has $50 billion, enough to steamroll nearly all colleges, yet their athletic success is moderate.
Again, I'm okay with discussing the future of the program and even coaching changes, but do we have to attack the coaches personally to do so?