If PSU had danced in 2009, what would be different around here?


#1

Would Ed still be getting a pass from the haters at this point?

Would there just be less haters?

Would we have lot 4 players this off-season?

I’m interested in knowing what you believe the difference in making the NIT versus the NCAA means for Ed’s legacy here and the PSU program in general during his tenure. Nothing would have changed during the 2009 regular season in this scenario, we just would have gotten selected into the tournament instead of the NIT.


#2

Tough to say. How far would the Lions go, first round exit? If so, it goes back to the whole NIT Championship vs. 0-1 or 1-1 in the NCAA tournament debate.

I mean one NCAA appearance in ED’s tenure is still nothing to brag about. Sure it would have been nice as a fan, but a program changer? Highly doubt it…


#3

Records, NCAAs and NITs mean nothing. The APOLOGISTS would defend Ed with all of their illogical twists, ridiculous math and general foolishness. This APOLOGIST movement is totally unique to my experience of life long sports watching. AND, I am an oldtimer. Some sport fans are LOYALISTS to their team. They defend the team, players and coaches at ALL costs. BUT, I don’t see the APOLOGISTS in this vain. The APOLOGISTS bash the school, the town, the players, and the history of the before mentioned.
No, I see the APOLOGISTS as just as being similar to the Indian tribe “The Contraries” in the movie Little Big Man. In the movie the CONTRARIES did everything in REVERSE, an APOLOGIST does EVERYTHING (see the above non logic, ridiculous math, etc) just to CONTER a posted opinion.

SO…to answer your question…no matter what Ed’s coaching record was: NCAA or NIT or ZERO TOTAL WINS…if any poster made a negative comment about Ed’s coaching he would be CONTERED by the APOLOGISTS.

One more thing...............your classifying posters as "haters" is in very poor taste!!   A poster who cites the coach's record and then gives his opinion that the said coach has not been effective and should be removed is NOT HATEING. This is what sport fans do..............all teams..........all sports..............forever. This sport FAN wants a coach who would WIN games with his favorite team. Check EVERY sport message board  ( well maybe not the "CONTARY" board .)

#4

[quote=“tundra, post:3, topic:1199”]Records, NCAAs and NITs mean nothing. The APOLOGISTS would defend Ed with all of their illogical twists, ridiculous math and general foolishness. This APOLOGIST movement is totally unique to my experience of life long sports watching. AND, I am an oldtimer. Some sport fans are LOYALISTS to their team. They defend the team, players and coaches at ALL costs. BUT, I don’t see the APOLOGISTS in this vain. The APOLOGISTS bash the school, the town, the players, and the history of the before mentioned.
No, I see the APOLOGISTS as just as being similar to the Indian tribe “The Contraries” in the movie Little Big Man. In the movie the CONTRARIES did everything in REVERSE, an APOLOGIST does EVERYTHING (see the above non logic, ridiculous math, etc) just to CONTER a posted opinion.

SO…to answer your question…no matter what Ed’s coaching record was: NCAA or NIT or ZERO TOTAL WINS…if any poster made a negative comment about Ed’s coaching he would be CONTERED by the APOLOGISTS.

One more thing...............your classifying posters as "haters" is in very poor taste!!   A poster who cites the coach's record and then gives his opinion that the said coach has not been effective and should be removed is NOT HATEING. This is what sport fans do..............all teams..........all sports..............forever. This sport FAN wants a coach who would WIN games with his favorite team. Check EVERY sport message board  ( well maybe not the "CONTARY" board .)[/quote]

LMAO.

I see, it’s only name calling and in bad taste when the other guy does it. When you do it, it’s OK.


#5

[quote=“tundra, post:3, topic:1199”]Records, NCAAs and NITs mean nothing. The APOLOGISTS would defend Ed with all of their illogical twists, ridiculous math and general foolishness. This APOLOGIST movement is totally unique to my experience of life long sports watching. AND, I am an oldtimer. Some sport fans are LOYALISTS to their team. They defend the team, players and coaches at ALL costs. BUT, I don’t see the APOLOGISTS in this vain. The APOLOGISTS bash the school, the town, the players, and the history of the before mentioned.
No, I see the APOLOGISTS as just as being similar to the Indian tribe “The Contraries” in the movie Little Big Man. In the movie the CONTRARIES did everything in REVERSE, an APOLOGIST does EVERYTHING (see the above non logic, ridiculous math, etc) just to CONTER a posted opinion.

SO…to answer your question…no matter what Ed’s coaching record was: NCAA or NIT or ZERO TOTAL WINS…if any poster made a negative comment about Ed’s coaching he would be CONTERED by the APOLOGISTS.

One more thing...............your classifying posters as "haters" is in very poor taste!!   A poster who cites the coach's record and then gives his opinion that the said coach has not been effective and should be removed is NOT HATEING. This is what sport fans do..............all teams..........all sports..............forever. This sport FAN wants a coach who would WIN games with his favorite team. Check EVERY sport message board  ( well maybe not the "CONTARY" board .)[/quote]

That’s funny. I just watched Little Big Man about 2 days ago.


#6

Making the NCAAs in 2009 would probably make the fall last year look even worse.


#7

So we’d have an NCAA bid to add to our grand basketball tradition, and Ed might actually be on the hot seat. Sounds like a win/win to me.


#8

[quote=“tundra, post:3, topic:1199”]Records, NCAAs and NITs mean nothing. The APOLOGISTS would defend Ed with all of their illogical twists, ridiculous math and general foolishness. This APOLOGIST movement is totally unique to my experience of life long sports watching. AND, I am an oldtimer. Some sport fans are LOYALISTS to their team. They defend the team, players and coaches at ALL costs. BUT, I don’t see the APOLOGISTS in this vain. The APOLOGISTS bash the school, the town, the players, and the history of the before mentioned.
No, I see the APOLOGISTS as just as being similar to the Indian tribe “The Contraries” in the movie Little Big Man. In the movie the CONTRARIES did everything in REVERSE, an APOLOGIST does EVERYTHING (see the above non logic, ridiculous math, etc) just to CONTER a posted opinion.

SO…to answer your question…no matter what Ed’s coaching record was: NCAA or NIT or ZERO TOTAL WINS…if any poster made a negative comment about Ed’s coaching he would be CONTERED by the APOLOGISTS.

One more thing...............your classifying posters as "haters" is in very poor taste!!   A poster who cites the coach's record and then gives his opinion that the said coach has not been effective and should be removed is NOT HATEING. This is what sport fans do..............all teams..........all sports..............forever. This sport FAN wants a coach who would WIN games with his favorite team. Check EVERY sport message board  ( well maybe not the "CONTARY" board .)[/quote]

I’m sorry I’m confused… are you trying to say counter? Or is conter a term that I’d understand if I saw this movie?

For the record - this post isn’t about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you’ve clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself “haters”. You take every single post and make it into something it’s not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?


#9
[quote="tundra, post:3, topic:1199"]Records, NCAAs and NITs mean nothing. The APOLOGISTS would defend Ed with all of their illogical twists, ridiculous math and general foolishness. This APOLOGIST movement is totally unique to my experience of life long sports watching. AND, I am an oldtimer. Some sport fans are LOYALISTS to their team. They defend the team, players and coaches at ALL costs. BUT, I don't see the APOLOGISTS in this vain. The APOLOGISTS bash the school, the town, the players, and the history of the before mentioned. No, I see the APOLOGISTS as just as being similar to the Indian tribe "The Contraries" in the movie Little Big Man. In the movie the CONTRARIES did everything in REVERSE, an APOLOGIST does EVERYTHING (see the above non logic, ridiculous math, etc) just to CONTER a posted opinion.

SO…to answer your question…no matter what Ed’s coaching record was: NCAA or NIT or ZERO TOTAL WINS…if any poster made a negative comment about Ed’s coaching he would be CONTERED by the APOLOGISTS.

One more thing...............your classifying posters as "haters" is in very poor taste!!   A poster who cites the coach's record and then gives his opinion that the said coach has not been effective and should be removed is NOT HATEING. This is what sport fans do..............all teams..........all sports..............forever. This sport FAN wants a coach who would WIN games with his favorite team. Check EVERY sport message board  ( well maybe not the "CONTARY" board .)[/quote]

I’m sorry I’m confused… are you trying to say counter? Or is conter a term that I’d understand if I saw this movie?

For the record - this post isn’t about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you’ve clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself “haters”. You take every single post and make it into something it’s not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?

OH, GET REAL… Of course, I modified the threat’s intent. For a reason. The threat’s intent appears to be a thinly (very) veined attempt to be mean spirited toward anyone who DARE make a comment that our coach (Ed) may not be successful.
P.S. The “H” word is mean-spirited!
Another P.S. There is not a PSU fan alive who does not have serious doubts about Ed’s ability to be a success HC at PSU…to ignore this situation is to be totally__________ (fill in the word)…I am “too polite”


#10

[quote=“Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199”]For the record - this post isn’t about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you’ve clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself “haters”. You take every single post and make it into something it’s not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.


#11
[quote="tundra, post:3, topic:1199"]Records, NCAAs and NITs mean nothing. The APOLOGISTS would defend Ed with all of their illogical twists, ridiculous math and general foolishness. This APOLOGIST movement is totally unique to my experience of life long sports watching. AND, I am an oldtimer. Some sport fans are LOYALISTS to their team. They defend the team, players and coaches at ALL costs. BUT, I don't see the APOLOGISTS in this vain. The APOLOGISTS bash the school, the town, the players, and the history of the before mentioned. No, I see the APOLOGISTS as just as being similar to the Indian tribe "The Contraries" in the movie Little Big Man. In the movie the CONTRARIES did everything in REVERSE, an APOLOGIST does EVERYTHING (see the above non logic, ridiculous math, etc) just to CONTER a posted opinion.

SO…to answer your question…no matter what Ed’s coaching record was: NCAA or NIT or ZERO TOTAL WINS…if any poster made a negative comment about Ed’s coaching he would be CONTERED by the APOLOGISTS.

One more thing...............your classifying posters as "haters" is in very poor taste!!   A poster who cites the coach's record and then gives his opinion that the said coach has not been effective and should be removed is NOT HATEING. This is what sport fans do..............all teams..........all sports..............forever. This sport FAN wants a coach who would WIN games with his favorite team. Check EVERY sport message board  ( well maybe not the "CONTARY" board .)[/quote]

I’m sorry I’m confused… are you trying to say counter? Or is conter a term that I’d understand if I saw this movie?

For the record - this post isn’t about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you’ve clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself “haters”. You take every single post and make it into something it’s not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?

OH, GET REAL… Of course, I modified the threat’s intent. For a reason. The threat’s intent appears to be a thinly (very) veined attempt to be mean spirited toward anyone who DARE make a comment that our coach (Ed) may not be successful.
P.S. The “H” word is mean-spirited!
Another P.S. There is not a PSU fan alive who does not have serious doubts about Ed’s ability to be a success HC at PSU…to ignore this situation is to be totally__________ (fill in the word)…I am “too polite”

You mean thread and veiled? You are either drunk, or I’ve never realized how awful you are at getting thoughts across on here. Either way, I’m not going to bother arguing with you when you can barely form sentences.

This thread was as straight-forward as it gets. You, and you alone, are the one responsible for making this into something else.


#12

[quote=“Craftsy21, post:11, topic:1199”]You mean thread and veiled? You are either drunk, or I’ve never realized how awful you are at getting thoughts across on here. Either way, I’m not going to bother arguing with you when you can barely form sentences.

This thread was as straight-forward as it gets. You, and you alone, are the one responsible for making this into something else.[/quote]

…talk about barely forming sentences or being drunk. :wink: Getting a bit personal, don’t you think Craftsy?


#13
[quote="Craftsy21, post:11, topic:1199"][b]You mean thread and veiled?[/b] You are either drunk, or I've never realized how awful you are at getting thoughts across on here. Either way, I'm not going to bother arguing with you when you can barely form sentences.

This thread was as straight-forward as it gets. You, and you alone, are the one responsible for making this into something else.[/quote]

…talk about barely forming sentences or being drunk. :wink: Getting a bit personal, don’t you think Craftsy?

I can’t even understand what this person is trying to say, yet he’s completely hijacked the thread with his outrage towards the topic at hand.

He’s like rokk but even more confusing - if such a thing is possible… CAPITALIZING random words and stringing together (almost) phrases that wouldn’t fit even if he spelled them correctly.

The rule of thumb is - if you’re going to be a loud mouth, you better not have a slip of the tongue and expect to get away with it… let alone a dozen of them. Might as well delete this thread now, it will never get back on track.


#14

[quote=“Craftsy21, post:1, topic:1199”]Would Ed still be getting a pass from the haters at this point?

Would there just be less haters?

Would we have lot 4 players this off-season?

I’m interested in knowing what you believe the difference in making the NIT versus the NCAA means for Ed’s legacy here and the PSU program in general during his tenure. Nothing would have changed during the 2009 regular season in this scenario, we just would have gotten selected into the tournament instead of the NIT.[/quote]

I think it would have made a huge difference. Even assuming they went 0-1, or 1-1, I think the staff would have had a huge credibility boost on the recruiting trail, and would have started inching up towards higher caliber recruits. The collapse this past year still wouldn’t have done us PSU any good, though. It was pretty important to do something in 2009-2010 to hold at least the momentum from '08-'09, this past season was about as close to the worst possible outcome as we could have gotten. losing Babb and Edwards was a big big problem, and the news about Burke was a killer. Something seems very broken

Unless they make the dance next season, I think another chance at an NCAA tournament is more than 4 years away. I truthfully don’t think this staff will ever make an NCAA tournament due to their out of conference scheduling. They schedule weak opponents at home, which is the absolute worst approach to building your RPI. In the RPI, Home losses hurt you more and road wins help you more. The first order of business should be improving the out of conference SOS. Interest in this program is so low, I doubt giving up 3 OOC home games would make much of a significant financial difference. It’s probably barely worth it to open the building for some of the lousy opponents they tend to schedule on November weeknights. The 2008-2009 team would have been a lock with a strong SOS and a worse overall record. That is solely on this staff. Their only attempt to remedy the situation last season was to add Virginia Tech, which was far, far too little


#15
[quote="Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199"]For the record - this post isn't about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you've clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself "haters". You take every single post and make it into something it's not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.

Jerry could have been around for as long as he liked, but his final 2 season REALLY doomed him.

Over his final 2 season…

12 win in 54 games
4 wins in 32 conference games
15 losses by 20+ points
very low level recruits coming in

…it was BAD when Jerry left. The program was in a freefall. Ed is not in that area presently.


#16
[quote="Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199"]For the record - this post isn't about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you've clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself "haters". You take every single post and make it into something it's not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.

Jerry could have been around for as long as he liked, but his final 2 season REALLY doomed him.

Over his final 2 season…

12 win in 54 games
4 wins in 32 conference games
15 losses by 20+ points
very low level recruits coming in

…it was BAD when Jerry left. The program was in a freefall. Ed is not in that area presently.

He very well might be come the end of next season. In the past few months we’ve had 3 players leave the team. 1 Recruit back out on us and Ed doesn’t have the most promising team coming back next year either. It could be as bad if not worse than the end of the Jerry era.

#17
[quote="Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199"]For the record - this post isn't about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you've clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself "haters". You take every single post and make it into something it's not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.

Jerry could have been around for as long as he liked, but his final 2 season REALLY doomed him.

Over his final 2 season…

12 win in 54 games
4 wins in 32 conference games
15 losses by 20+ points
very low level recruits coming in

…it was BAD when Jerry left. The program was in a freefall. Ed is not in that area presently.

That’s nuts. The consensus opinion was that Jerry was about to get fired in 2001 and only the Sweet Sixteen run saved his job. Although you will never get anyone to officially admit it, I’ve heard that Jay Wright was all lined up to come here.


#18
[quote="Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199"]For the record - this post isn't about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you've clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself "haters". You take every single post and make it into something it's not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.

Jerry could have been around for as long as he liked, but his final 2 season REALLY doomed him.

Over his final 2 season…

12 win in 54 games
4 wins in 32 conference games
15 losses by 20+ points
very low level recruits coming in

…it was BAD when Jerry left. The program was in a freefall. Ed is not in that area presently.

That’s nuts. The consensus opinion was that Jerry was about to get fired in 2001 and only the Sweet Sixteen run saved his job. Although you will never get anyone to officially admit it, I’ve heard that Jay Wright was all lined up to come here.

That sure rings a “bell” with me from 2001 too Lar.


#19
[quote="Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199"]For the record - this post isn't about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you've clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself "haters". You take every single post and make it into something it's not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.

Jerry could have been around for as long as he liked, but his final 2 season REALLY doomed him.

Over his final 2 season…

12 win in 54 games
4 wins in 32 conference games
15 losses by 20+ points
very low level recruits coming in

…it was BAD when Jerry left. The program was in a freefall. Ed is not in that area presently.

That’s nuts. The consensus opinion was that Jerry was about to get fired in 2001 and only the Sweet Sixteen run saved his job. Although you will never get anyone to officially admit it, I’ve heard that Jay Wright was all lined up to come here.

That sure rings a “bell” with me from 2001 too Lar.

So it’s quite possible that the Sweet 16 run is the worst thing that ever happened to the program. How ironic.


#20
[quote="Craftsy21, post:8, topic:1199"]For the record - this post isn't about being an apologist, and for turning it into that kind of debate you've clearly indicated why I label people such as yourself "haters". You take every single post and make it into something it's not to fit your own agenda on this board, which is nothing more than a pedestal to bash on Ed.

This question is very simple - it’s very straight-forward. I mean nothing more than to find out just how different a simple selection committee decision could have changed the perception of this program. I think NCAA bids are the true measuring stick in most program’s case, so would Ed having one versus his NIT championship change anything in the perception of how he’s done here?[/quote]

The question seems a little naive to me. Its not like we don’t have recent history to look at. If Ed had made the Sweet 16 2 years ago I’d like to think he’d be out of here if he had a repeat of last season. On the other hand I’m not that sure it would happen. For some reason Ed seems to get more slack than Jerry did. Jerry had better results but apprently Crispin ran that team and his recruiting pales in comparison to Ed. ::slight_smile: If that’s the case bring Joe Crispin in to coach. ::slight_smile: Once again I must ask why Ed does not get the type and amount of heat Jerry did. What could possibly be the diferecne between these 2 men? Very interesting.

Jerry could have been around for as long as he liked, but his final 2 season REALLY doomed him.

Over his final 2 season…

12 win in 54 games
4 wins in 32 conference games
15 losses by 20+ points
very low level recruits coming in

…it was BAD when Jerry left. The program was in a freefall. Ed is not in that area presently.

That’s nuts. The consensus opinion was that Jerry was about to get fired in 2001 and only the Sweet Sixteen run saved his job. Although you will never get anyone to officially admit it, I’ve heard that Jay Wright was all lined up to come here.

That sure rings a “bell” with me from 2001 too Lar.

So it’s quite possible that the Sweet 16 run is the worst thing that ever happened to the program. How ironic.

Last year has to rank up there as well. And if we are going to look at it that way, I contend that the NIT title was a lot worse. The Sweet 16 is a actual feather in your cap. The NIT title is something you’re proud of when you’re program is garbage. That shot by Battle doesn’t go in againt George Mason and my guess is that Ed is gone right now and we are at least a year ahead of rebuilding this thing once again.