Mike Anderson

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote="Red Bloods" post=348759][quote="JackofVirginia" post=348577][quote="bamafan" post=348414]Don't know what his production level will be for us but he is the type of player I would like to have 3 or 4 of on my roster.[/quote]


What about Earlington? I think if given the playing time he could also be a bruiser for us. And just how many more openings do we have?[/quote]
I like Earlington too. He is a big boy and an ex-defensive end so he is tough and strong. If he was 6’8 instead of 6’5 he could wreak havoc in the paint. Plus he made the most of any minutes he was given on the court.[/quote]

He sure did, kid is a winner. Wont be a star but will make a positive impact when his number is called.
 
Don’t think we’ve seen enough of a sample size to determine whether or not Earlington can contribute at this level. That’s not a knock on the kid; he went hard every minute that he was on the court. But there’s a big difference between what you do in a few minutes here and there during garbage time, and what you do during crucial minutes in the game. Not to say that Earlington can’t have a roster spot in the 9-12 slot, but from what I’ve seen of him so far, I’d be (pleasantly) surprised if he could crack the top 8 and contribute significant minutes. Even 2 or 3 years down the road.
 
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=348758]The Mission of Coach Anderson is to win the BE Conference from time to time . Make the NCAA’s 4 of 5 years and be regularly ranked in the top 25 . To do that , we need kids who can compete at a BE Level . Not sure if Anderson ever won the SEC title but , it’s a tough league . Like the BE . Cooley has done well , except this Year at PC , he gets the occasional 4-5 star kid but , basically finishes in the middle of the BE pack . We need to aim higher and look to overtake Xavier , Marquette, Villanova regularly . I don’t think you can win in the BE with a Roster of just 2,3 and the occasional 4 star kid . No matter if you press all game . It won’t happen .[/quote]

Not really sure as to the reasoning behind your post other than to set standards which may BE unattainable so you can go back to saying how Mullin never should have been let go. Only once in our history did we go to the NCAA tournament 8 out of 10 years and that was from 82-92. And even then we were not regularly ranked in the top 25. We were there often but not every year.
I don’t believe CMAs goal is to recruit 2 and 3 star kids to SJU, he certainly Knows better. However, at this point in time he needed 2 kids who can play the point to start and a bulky forward with a little experience. Why is that so difficult to understand? He is grabbing the best available talent to fill gaping holes. Please give the new coach a chance and certain’y a complete pass this spring recruiting season.
 
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=348758]The Mission of Coach Anderson is to win the BE Conference from time to time . Make the NCAA’s 4 of 5 years and be regularly ranked in the top 25 . To do that , we need kids who can compete at a BE Level . Not sure if Anderson ever won the SEC title but , it’s a tough league . Like the BE . Cooley has done well , except this Year at PC , he gets the occasional 4-5 star kid but , basically finishes in the middle of the BE pack . We need to aim higher and look to overtake Xavier , Marquette, Villanova regularly . I don’t think you can win in the BE with a Roster of just 2,3 and the occasional 4 star kid . No matter if you press all game . It won’t happen .[/quote]

What was Mullin's mission?
 
Not for nuttin boys, but an occasional dose of rational skepticism by posters like me and Slyfoxxx is nothing compared to the overdose of cock-eyed optimism that has permeated this board in the past few weeks. So what is it now, anyone that dare question the hiring of CMA, or voice concerns about some of his moves, gets lambasted and/or ridiculed for doing so? What happened to an open exchange of thoughts and opinions?
 
[quote="Monte" post=348793]Not for nuttin boys, but an occasional dose of rational skepticism by posters like me and Slyfoxxx is nothing compared to the overdose of cock-eyed optimism that has permeated this board in the past few weeks. So what is it now, anyone that dare question the hiring of CMA, or voice concerns about some of his moves, gets lambasted and/or ridiculed for doing so? What happened to an open exchange of thoughts and opinions?[/quote]

With all due respect, isn’t criticism of your criticism an open exchange of thoughts and opinions? I can certainly understand criticizing the hire but his moves at this point? I know you act and I would wonder at the validity of someone criticizing your early rehearsals? One can do it, certainly, but in reality it has no credence until you see the final product. As for Anderson, I would think the most intelligent thing is to give him a season or two, for both cockeyed optimists or the sky is falling pessimists. The situation our last 4 coaches coaches (at least) have inherited does not lend itself to either instant gratification or easy early analysis.
 
[quote="Monte" post=348793]Not for nuttin boys, but an occasional dose of rational skepticism by posters like me and Slyfoxxx is nothing compared to the overdose of cock-eyed optimism that has permeated this board in the past few weeks. So what is it now, anyone that dare question the hiring of CMA, or voice concerns about some of his moves, gets lambasted and/or ridiculed for doing so? What happened to an open exchange of thoughts and opinions?[/quote]

What's rational about criticizing a guy who hasn't been here long enough to unpack his suitcase yet, let alone clean up the mess he inherited? And I'm not sure what you consider "cock-eyed optimism", but I don't recall seeing anyone suggest that we are going to be anything other than at best a bubble team IF "Heron stays. If Figueroa stays. If we can find another decent PG option this late in the recruiting cycle...IF...IF...IF..."

Nobody is stopping anyone from the free exchange of opinions and ideas. But that door swings both ways monte. If you post an opinion or idea, its going to illicit a response from people who will post their own opinions and ideas. Not all of them are going to agree with you. And in this case, most aren't. As long as its civil and nobody is spamming the board with the same post over and over, then keep on keeping on.
 
[quote="Logen" post=348797][quote="Monte" post=348793]Not for nuttin boys, but an occasional dose of rational skepticism by posters like me and Slyfoxxx is nothing compared to the overdose of cock-eyed optimism that has permeated this board in the past few weeks. So what is it now, anyone that dare question the hiring of CMA, or voice concerns about some of his moves, gets lambasted and/or ridiculed for doing so? What happened to an open exchange of thoughts and opinions?[/quote]

With all due respect, isn’t criticism of your criticism an open exchange of thoughts and opinions? I can certainly understand criticizing the hire but his moves at this point? I know you act and I would wonder at the validity of someone criticizing your early rehearsals? One can do it, certainly, but in reality it has no credence until you see the final product. As for Anderson, I would think the most intelligent thing is to give him a season or two, for both cockeyed optimists or the sky is falling pessimists. The situation our last 4 coaches coaches (at least) have inherited does not lend itself to either instant gratification or easy early analysis.[/quote]

Just to be clear, after voicing initials concerns about CMA not being the “home run” that so many people think he is, I backed off. I learned my lesson when I voiced my concerns about the Lavin hire. Since then I have I voiced support for CMA’s work ethic, his staff hiring, etc. I’ve also stated on numerous occasions that CMA gets a complete pass on anyone he brings in at this point, because he’s trying to fill out a roster at a late stage in the game. Having said that, I feel it’s ok for some of our more skeptical posters to, for instance, question whether or not our 2 most recent recruits are high D1 level talents, without being told in no uncertain terms to shut up and wait for the season to start. The same way it’s ok for our more optimistic posters to state “well it looks like CMA has filled out need for a PG and PF” without being told to shut up and wait till the season starts. It should work both ways, but it doesn’t. The repetative posts also work both ways, but when the repetitive posts are of the optimistic variety, that’s ok.
As for my rehearsals, I thank my lucky stars that they’re not being donee in a public forum, or rest assured I would be ripped to shreds. Bad enough I have to hear it from the director, who I’ve worked with before and who knows what he’s going to get come opening night. But like CMA, it’s the business I chose. And criticism is a big part of it. I can handle it, so can he.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Monte" post=348806][quote="Logen" post=348797][quote="Monte" post=348793]Not for nuttin boys, but an occasional dose of rational skepticism by posters like me and Slyfoxxx is nothing compared to the overdose of cock-eyed optimism that has permeated this board in the past few weeks. So what is it now, anyone that dare question the hiring of CMA, or voice concerns about some of his moves, gets lambasted and/or ridiculed for doing so? What happened to an open exchange of thoughts and opinions?[/quote]

With all due respect, isn’t criticism of your criticism an open exchange of thoughts and opinions? I can certainly understand criticizing the hire but his moves at this point? I know you act and I would wonder at the validity of someone criticizing your early rehearsals? One can do it, certainly, but in reality it has no credence until you see the final product. As for Anderson, I would think the most intelligent thing is to give him a season or two, for both cockeyed optimists or the sky is falling pessimists. The situation our last 4 coaches coaches (at least) have inherited does not lend itself to either instant gratification or easy early analysis.[/quote]

Just to be clear, after voicing initials concerns about CMA not being the “home run” that so many people think he is, I backed off. I learned my lesson when I voiced my concerns about the Lavin hire. Since then I have I voiced support for CMA’s work ethic, his staff hiring, etc. I’ve also stated on numerous occasions that CMA gets a complete pass on anyone he brings in at this point, because he’s trying to fill out a roster at a late stage in the game. Having said that, I feel it’s ok for some of our more skeptical posters to, for instance, question whether or not our 2 most recent recruits are high D1 level talents, without being told in no uncertain terms to shut up and wait for the season to start. The same way it’s ok for our more optimistic posters to state “well it looks like CMA has filled out need for a PG and PF” without being told to shut up and wait till the season starts. It should work both ways, but it doesn’t. The repetative posts also work both ways, but when the repetitive posts are of the optimistic variety, that’s ok.
As for my rehearsals, I thank my lucky stars that they’re not being donee in a public forum, or rest assured I would be ripped to shreds. Bad enough I have to hear it from the director, who I’ve worked with before and who knows what he’s going to get come opening night. But like CMA, it’s the business I chose. And criticism is a big part of it. I can handle it, so can he.[/quote]

Well said, Monte.
I’ve liked what I’ve seen thus far from CMA and give him a total pass on filling the roster out this late in the recruiting cycle.
It’s natural to come down on different sides of the nascent CMA era at this time.
Maybe both the ‘optimists’ and the cautious ‘skeptics’ should each cool their jets, continue to observe the guy at work and fairly evaluate the assembled roster when completed.
I know both camps will root like crazy for the best for the team.
Let’s go Redmen.
 
[quote="redmannorth" post=348769][quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=348758]The Mission of Coach Anderson is to win the BE Conference from time to time . Make the NCAA’s 4 of 5 years and be regularly ranked in the top 25 . To do that , we need kids who can compete at a BE Level . Not sure if Anderson ever won the SEC title but , it’s a tough league . Like the BE . Cooley has done well , except this Year at PC , he gets the occasional 4-5 star kid but , basically finishes in the middle of the BE pack . We need to aim higher and look to overtake Xavier , Marquette, Villanova regularly . I don’t think you can win in the BE with a Roster of just 2,3 and the occasional 4 star kid . No matter if you press all game . It won’t happen .[/quote]

Not really sure as to the reasoning behind your post other than to set standards which may BE unattainable so you can go back to saying how Mullin never should have been let go. Only once in our history did we go to the NCAA tournament 8 out of 10 years and that was from 82-92. And even then we were not regularly ranked in the top 25. We were there often but not every year.
I don’t believe CMAs goal is to recruit 2 and 3 star kids to SJU, he certainly Knows better. However, at this point in time he needed 2 kids who can play the point to start and a bulky forward with a little experience. Why is that so difficult to understand? He is grabbing the best available talent to fill gaping holes. Please give the new coach a chance and certain’y a complete pass this spring recruiting season.[/quote]
Well said redmannorth. Plus the title of this thread is “Welcome Damien Spears”. Basically just SJU fans welcoming them to the team. Not a thread dedicated to taking shots at these kids and a VERY premature indictment on Coach Anderson’s recruiting philosophy. That was my only issue. Especially all the “experts”(lol) on here trashing a hard working kid like McGriff before they both even get here.
 
[quote="bamafan" post=348810]Don't recall many if any calling it a home run hire. Stand up triple maybe? ;) :)[/quote]

Compared to the way the last staff conducted business, it's a five-run homer. But it remains to be seen how the hire will rate when looked at through a different lens.
 
[quote="bamafan" post=348810]Don't recall many if any calling it a home run hire. Stand up triple maybe? ;) :)[/quote]

Plenty called it a home run hire. Now, many meant “home run” as it related to other viable options. Some meant “home run” as it related to all coaches, not just viable options. To me the only home runs were Pitino and Donovan. Neither was coming here. I didn’t even consider Hurley a Home Run. I would have taken Cluess at a fraction of the cost of Hurley. Anyhow, we are where we are. Like with Lavin, I expressed initial concerns. Like with Lavin, I like what I’ve seen so far from CMA. Like with Lavin, I will root like hell for CMA to succeed. Like with Lavin, I’ll hope that my concerns are removed in the future.
 
[quote="Monte" post=348815][quote="bamafan" post=348810]Don't recall many if any calling it a home run hire. Stand up triple maybe? ;) :)[/quote]

Plenty called it a home run hire. Now, many meant “home run” as it related to other viable options. Some meant “home run” as it related to all coaches, not just viable options. To me the only home runs were Pitino and Donovan. Neither was coming here. I didn’t even consider Hurley a Home Run. I would have taken Cluess at a fraction of the cost of Hurley. Anyhow, we are where we are. Like with Lavin, I expressed initial concerns. Like with Lavin, I like what I’ve seen so far from CMA. Like with Lavin, I will root like hell for CMA to succeed. Like with Lavin, I’ll hope that my concerns are removed in the future.[/quote]

CMA has to be given five to six years. 3 to 4 to even begin evaluating
 
[quote="Monte" post=348815][quote="bamafan" post=348810]Don't recall many if any calling it a home run hire. Stand up triple maybe? ;) :)[/quote]

Plenty called it a home run hire. Now, many meant “home run” as it related to other viable options. Some meant “home run” as it related to all coaches, not just viable options. To me the only home runs were Pitino and Donovan. Neither was coming here. I didn’t even consider Hurley a Home Run. I would have taken Cluess at a fraction of the cost of Hurley. Anyhow, we are where we are. Like with Lavin, I expressed initial concerns. Like with Lavin, I like what I’ve seen so far from CMA. Like with Lavin, I will root like hell for CMA to succeed. Like with Lavin, I’ll hope that my concerns are removed in the future.[/quote]

It was probably less than 5 who thought it was a home run hired for any coach. As far as the real names being thrown out yes it was a home run hire.

He hasn’t had a losing record 17 years!!! I think every one of us would gladly have that be the case for us. As far as concerns, I think the major concerns was how he would fear in the northeast and staff. I think we can agree the staff is looking good with Macon and Cleveland and the other possibilities. Coaching and recruiting we will see what happens.

However to read what people have wrote on message boards and some articles and use them as a concern well that’s not really fair for a guy who hasn’t had a season under .500. That’s why I liked Making Plays comments about what you have read. It’s from someone who is involved in the program. Unless he is coach or Cleveland. Lol

Anyways, this thread is about Sears. Feel free to move these discussions to the coach thread.

Welcome Sears!!
 
[quote="Mike" post=348821][quote="Monte" post=348815][quote="bamafan" post=348810]Don't recall many if any calling it a home run hire. Stand up triple maybe? ;) :)[/quote]

Plenty called it a home run hire. Now, many meant “home run” as it related to other viable options. Some meant “home run” as it related to all coaches, not just viable options. To me the only home runs were Pitino and Donovan. Neither was coming here. I didn’t even consider Hurley a Home Run. I would have taken Cluess at a fraction of the cost of Hurley. Anyhow, we are where we are. Like with Lavin, I expressed initial concerns. Like with Lavin, I like what I’ve seen so far from CMA. Like with Lavin, I will root like hell for CMA to succeed. Like with Lavin, I’ll hope that my concerns are removed in the future.[/quote]

It was probably less than 5 who thought it was a home run hired for any coach. As far as the real names being thrown out yes it was a home run hire.

He hasn’t had a losing record 17 years!!! I think every one of us would gladly have that be the case for us. As far as concerns, I think the major concerns was how he would fear in the northeast and staff. I think we can agree the staff is looking good with Macon and Cleveland and the other possibilities. Coaching and recruiting we will see what happens.

However to read what people have wrote on message boards and some articles and use them as a concern well that’s not really fair for a guy who hasn’t had a season under .500. That’s why I liked Making Plays comments about what you have read. It’s from someone who is involved in the program. Unless he is coach or Cleveland. Lol

Anyways, this thread is about Sears. Feel free to move these discussions to the coach thread.

Welcome Sears!![/quote]

Less than 5? Go back and count in the CMA thread if you care to. Way more than 5. Clearly you can chose to accept to accept/like whoever's comments you want, and draw your own conclusions from them. I'll do the same. With all due respect to making plays, who is a very knowledgeable guy but who clearly has a CMA bias, his comments carry no more weight to me than any other anonymous person's comments do. Again, I'll listen to what he has to say and listen to what others have to say, then draw my own conclusions about CMA's time at Ark. Same as I did with CR Green, who was also a knowledgeable guy but who had a very strong Lavin bias. As soon as Lavin got on the hot seat, Green disappeared. If one were skeptical, they may have thought that CR Green was a Lavin plant. And thanks for the suggestions that I move this discussion to the coach's thread. Hit me up again when you get appointed moderator.
 
[quote="Monte" post=348826]Same as I did with CR Green, who was also a knowledgeable guy but who had a very strong Lavin bias. As soon as Lavin got on the hot seat, Green disappeared. If one were skeptical, they may have thought that CR Green was a Lavin plant.[/quote]

In fairness to CR Green, he disappeared because he was ill and subsequently passed away.
 
[quote="Monte" post=348806][quote="Logen" post=348797][quote="Monte" post=348793]Not for nuttin boys, but an occasional dose of rational skepticism by posters like me and Slyfoxxx is nothing compared to the overdose of cock-eyed optimism that has permeated this board in the past few weeks. So what is it now, anyone that dare question the hiring of CMA, or voice concerns about some of his moves, gets lambasted and/or ridiculed for doing so? What happened to an open exchange of thoughts and opinions?[/quote]

With all due respect, isn’t criticism of your criticism an open exchange of thoughts and opinions? I can certainly understand criticizing the hire but his moves at this point? I know you act and I would wonder at the validity of someone criticizing your early rehearsals? One can do it, certainly, but in reality it has no credence until you see the final product. As for Anderson, I would think the most intelligent thing is to give him a season or two, for both cockeyed optimists or the sky is falling pessimists. The situation our last 4 coaches coaches (at least) have inherited does not lend itself to either instant gratification or easy early analysis.[/quote]

Just to be clear, after voicing initials concerns about CMA not being the “home run” that so many people think he is, I backed off. I learned my lesson when I voiced my concerns about the Lavin hire. Since then I have I voiced support for CMA’s work ethic, his staff hiring, etc. I’ve also stated on numerous occasions that CMA gets a complete pass on anyone he brings in at this point, because he’s trying to fill out a roster at a late stage in the game. Having said that, I feel it’s ok for some of our more skeptical posters to, for instance, question whether or not our 2 most recent recruits are high D1 level talents, without being told in no uncertain terms to shut up and wait for the season to start. The same way it’s ok for our more optimistic posters to state “well it looks like CMA has filled out need for a PG and PF” without being told to shut up and wait till the season starts. It should work both ways, but it doesn’t. The repetative posts also work both ways, but when the repetitive posts are of the optimistic variety, that’s ok.
As for my rehearsals, I thank my lucky stars that they’re not being donee in a public forum, or rest assured I would be ripped to shreds. Bad enough I have to hear it from the director, who I’ve worked with before and who knows what he’s going to get come opening night. But like CMA, it’s the business I chose. And criticism is a big part of it. I can handle it, so can he.[/quote]

It is not a question of can one handle it, I agree with you there. But you make the point, criticize the final product, or at least a product. To continue the acting analogy, don’t criticize me while I am still learning my lines which is what you and others have chosen to do. IMO, give the man a chance; I guarantee we are going to see a TEAM, represented by a group of hard working coaches that respect themselves and their profession. After the debacles of the last slew of coaches that is the start I am looking for.
 
[quote="Monte" post=348826]

Less than 5? Go back and count in the CMA thread if you care to. Way more than 5. Clearly you can chose to accept to accept/like whoever's comments you want, and draw your own conclusions from them. I'll do the same. [/quote]

Challenge accepted!

So far I've gone through the first 35 pages with ZERO references to it being a "home run hire" .
A few people were thrilled, some were shocked.
But the vast majority of posters we extremely happy and/or relieved to have come out of our shit show of of coaching search with a rock solid candidate instead of Jones or Hewitt.

The closest thing I found to "cock-eyed optimism" in those first 35 pages was a post from catman informing everyone he'd just pissed his pants.
Candidly, that could have been from anger or shock as much as unbridled joy. Then again perhaps he's just incontinent.

Then there was this gem amongst all that relief:

Monte wrote: You guys ought to google what Arkansas sport writers and fans were saying about Anderson this season and after his firing. Oh right, like UCLA fans about Lavin, they have no idea what they’re talking about. Only St. John’s fans know what they’re talking about. Know we had limited options because of the school’s ineptitude, but I’m not giddy like the rest of you guys over this hiring.


I'll let you know what the last 60 pages have when I get a chance...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top