Mike Anderson

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote="L J S A" post=348828][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]

Correct. He passed away during Lavin's third or fourth season.
 
[quote="SJUFAN2" post=348860][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...[/quote]

Please do let us know. I just didn't feel like going back to re-read the posts, but I have a pretty good memory for the most part, and just didn't recall a bunch of posts where folks were falling over themselves in excitement when Anderson was hired nor when he landed McGriff and Sears.

Of course, you're always gonna have a small group of posters who'll act in that manner anywhere, and it's no different on here. I just don't recall it being a ton of posters.

I really believe a lot of this stems from Cluess not being hired, as I know Monte strongly advocated for the hiring of him. I could be wrong, but I truly believe this to be the case.
 
[quote="MJDinkins" post=348866][quote="SJUFAN2" post=348860][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...[/quote]

Please do let us know. I just didn't feel like going back to re-read the posts, but I have a pretty good memory for the most part, and just didn't recall a bunch of posts where folks were falling over themselves in excitement when Anderson was hired nor when he landed McGriff and Sears.

Of course, you're always gonna have a small group of posters who'll act in that manner anywhere, and it's no different on here. I just don't recall it being a ton of posters.

I really believe a lot of this stems from Cluess not being hired, as I know Monte strongly advocated for the hiring of him. I could be wrong, but I truly believe this to be the case.[/quote]

65 pages in and frankly, its not looking good for your hyperbolic claim Monte.

So far, only one post that MIGHT be considered someone being in love with the hire or calling it a homerun.
Chicago Days said this after CMA's introductory press conference: "I'm sky high on Mike A..."

of course he followed that up with this post a couple of pages later, so his euphoria was not unbridled...

Chicago Days (2): "Monte's 'whoa' guidance has toned down my enthusiasm.
I was at the Penthouse level, with great vistas of the City Lights and the Hudson; now I'm on the 5th Floor with decent Street Views. Lol.
But I like this hire. I think CMA will work hard.
He's probably not a recruiter the level of Fraschilla or'early' Lavin, but he's stable, genuine, and should be in it for the long haul
His comment about again 'having something to prove' resonated with me. He meant it.
His staff is key.
We shall see.
I'm 2 levels above 'cautiously optimistic' but off the Kool-Aid.
Gotta laugh."

I'm going to leave the last 30 pages to you monte. Perhaps you can use them to illustrate your point. The first 65 clearly don't support your premise of unbridled euphoria or claims of a home run hire. They do clearly portray a fan base that was happy to get such a qualified coach out of left field when it seemed the program was slipping into oblivion, as well as their measured optimism about his ability to succeed here. Of course there were a few like you, dee and one or two others who went in the other direction for whatever reason.


Can't wait to see what you considered so over the top that it was worthy of criticizing the whole board or thread for excessive giddiness, unbridled euphoria, and the hyperbole of calling it a home run hire.
 
[quote="MJDinkins" post=348866]
Please do let us know. I just didn't feel like going back to re-read the posts, but I have a pretty good memory for the most part, and just didn't recall a bunch of posts where folks were falling over themselves in excitement when Anderson was hired nor when he landed McGriff and Sears.

Of course, you're always gonna have a small group of posters who'll act in that manner anywhere, and it's no different on here. I just don't recall it being a ton of posters.

I really believe a lot of this stems from Cluess not being hired, as I know Monte strongly advocated for the hiring of him. I could be wrong, but I truly believe this to be the case.[/quote]

I wanted Cluess as well MJ. I wanted to hire him when we hired Lavin, and had him 3rd on my list behind the Hurley's when we hired Mullin.

I hope you are wrong and monte's issues with CMA are not simply that he has the job and Cluess doesn't. That's a petty and indefensible position to take on the subject.
 
If you are willing to accept Lavin or CMA career results which are quite impressive to fans of a perennial loser like St. John’s then all should be ok. Problems occur when fans get a taste of victory and start to expect more than the coaches career record has provided.That is where fans of UCLA and Arkansas have their gripes, they expected more because of their winning heritage, and never reached the accolades of the past.
 
[quote="Monte" post=348826][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]

I meant for the moderators to feel free to move these discussions to the other thread. Also, yes CR was a big fan of Lavin and defended him, good for him. As others have stated he disappeared because of an unfortunate situation.

Would you have the same concerns if Cluess was hired?
 
[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. 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]

With all due respect to you, I find that offensive for you to say I have a bias, when I've done nothing more than provide facts. I'm a fan of CMA yes, but that doesn't mean that I have a bias towards him. It's possible to be a fan of a coach and/or school and still give a fair and honest opinion.

I've challenged you several times to find any inaccuracies in my posts that you've questioned in this thread, you've declined to do so each time, but you pass along hearsay you read on message boards as facts and then get in your feelings and try to say other people are bias when they point out your inaccuracies.

As I said I'm a facts guy, if you don't want to have a conversation in facts, I'm probably not the guy to talk, you seem more set on listening to message board gossip that agrees with your point rather than actually knowing the truth about stuff.
 
[quote="Moose" post=348879]Someone is having an exciting Monday morning.[/quote]
LMAO Guess we all are. LOL
 
[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] those are fine standards. Why didnt you hold Mullin to them ?
 
Last edited:
[quote="mjmaherjr" post=349002][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] those are fine standards. Why didnt you hold Mullin to them ?[/quote]. Yes, their are good Objectives for our Program or any Program . Lavin didn’t accomplish them either and both , he and Mullin shared the same fate . Lavin got to the NCAA twice , once with Norm’s players in 5 years He did a great job with Norm’s kids , Burrell, Kennedy , in year 1 . And , again in his last year with DLO, Greene , etc . If you accept these Goals , which are tough to achieve , you will have a good team . Next Year , without Figgy and Heron , will be tough . And , as with Mullin , Coach Anderson gets a free pass for year 1 results . Even , with them both, it will be tough to be .500 barring miraculous Late minute additions , like G’ town got last year with Akingo and McGuinn. Who will haunt us for 3 more years . I had opinions that favored Mullin for sure . You have opinions too . If you believe it’s a duty for you to criticize others opinions , on a basketball site , go ahead . As for Mullin , there were many , many posters and fans that supported Chris , in addition to those who resorted to weak personal attacks . I am not accusing you but , there were many in the Anti Mullin posse. If Anderson can achieve winning a BE Title in 5 years And the other Goals , he will be a success . If not , he will suffer the same fate . Although at age 60 , he can simply retire , if he doesn’t get those results .
 
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=349040][quote="mjmaherjr" post=349002][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] those are fine standards. Why didnt you hold Mullin to them ?[/quote]. Yes, their are good Objectives for our Program or any Program . Lavin didn’t accomplish them either and both , he and Mullin shared the same fate . Lavin got to the NCAA twice , once with Norm’s players in 5 years He did a great job with Norm’s kids , Burrell, Kennedy , in year 1 . And , again in his last year with DLO, Greene , etc . If you accept these Goals , which are tough to achieve , you will have a good team . Next Year , without Figgy and Heron , will be tough . And , as with Mullin , Coach Anderson gets a free pass for year 1 results . Even , with them both, it will be tough to be .500 barring miraculous Late minute additions , like G’ town got last year with Akingo and McGuinn. Who will haunt us for 3 more years . I had opinions that favored Mullin for sure . You have opinions too . If you believe it’s a duty for you to criticize others opinions , on a basketball site , go ahead . As for Mullin , there were many , many posters and fans that supported Chris , in addition to those who resorted to weak personal attacks . I am not accusing you but , there were many in the Anti Mullin posse. If Anderson can achieve winning a BE Title in 5 years And the other Goals , he will be a success . If not , he will suffer the same fate . Although at age 60 , he can simply retire , if he doesn’t get those results .[/quote]

I could be wrong (the one big paragraph is more than not a distraction) but I don't see in there an answer why you didn't hold Mullin to those standards.
 
[quote="SLYFOXX1968" post=349040] Yes, their are good Objectives for our Program or any Program . Lavin didn’t accomplish them either and both , he and Mullin shared the same fate . Lavin got to the NCAA twice , once with Norm’s players in 5 years He did a great job with Norm’s kids , Burrell, Kennedy , in year 1 . And , again in his last year with DLO, Greene , etc . If you accept these Goals , which are tough to achieve , you will have a good team . Next Year , without Figgy and Heron , will be tough . And , as with Mullin , Coach Anderson gets a free pass for year 1 results . Even , with them both, it will be tough to be .500 barring miraculous Late minute additions , like G’ town got last year with Akingo and McGuinn. Who will haunt us for 3 more years . I had opinions that favored Mullin for sure . You have opinions too . If you believe it’s a duty for you to criticize others opinions , on a basketball site , go ahead . As for Mullin , there were many , many posters and fans that supported Chris , in addition to those who resorted to weak personal attacks . I am not accusing you but , there were many in the Anti Mullin posse. If Anderson can achieve winning a BE Title in 5 years And the other Goals , he will be a success . If not , he will suffer the same fate . Although at age 60 , he can simply retire , if he doesn’t get those results .[/quote]

There isn't an "anti-Mullin posse". Every fan of this program LOVES that guy, which is why so many were dismayed at his inaction and failure to even put in the EFFORT to achieve your goals. Maybe if Mullin had accepted them as you asked, he'd still be here.

Coaching at the college level is a very tough job. It's a year round, 60-80 hour a week gig. It requires the ability to manage staff and develop young men, while promoting the program and constantly recruiting. It is not for everyone, and its not a job where you can coast or phone it in, and hope to be consistently successful. Our new coach clearly gets all of that. So much so in fact, that I'd be willing to bet you my cherished Chris Mullin bobblehead, that CMA comes far closer to meeting your goals than our previous HC.
 
Well stated Dolphin. Coaching is not a job, heck it is more even than a profession. It is a way of life. Just ask the families of real coaches.
 
Don’t know if this was posted. But skimmed JJ and thought I saw something about a Shamel Grant a preferred walk on ,pg attending St Johns.
 
[quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=349082]Don’t know if this was posted. But skimmed JJ and thought I saw something about a Shamel Grant a preferred walk on ,pg attending St Johns.[/quote]
True, from Summit Academy in Brooklyn

[attachment=927]1511A37B-25C6-43A6-A057-0C84007F9682.jpeg[/attachment]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote="richard A Steinfeld" post=349082]Don’t know if this was posted. But skimmed JJ and thought I saw something about a Shamel Grant a preferred walk on ,pg attending St Johns.[/quote]
You can admit you READ JJ. ;) :)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top