Reality

None of us negative people WANT Ben gone.. however we can see the "REALITY" of the situation. I'm not going to puff rainbows and unicorns up everyone ass... I'm going to plainly call it how I see it .. if the "reality" of this situation is too much for you to bear that's on you....
 


None of us negative people WANT Ben gone.. however we can see the "REALITY" of the situation. I'm not going to puff rainbows and unicorns up everyone ass... I'm going to plainly call it how I see it .. if the "reality" of this situation is too much for you to bear that's on you....
Ben will be our head coach for life. As he approaches John Wooden status he will stay. Ok, the turn around has to start this year. If that is with Mitchell, Carrington, and Christie as guard. So be it.
 

None of us negative people WANT Ben gone.. however we can see the "REALITY" of the situation. I'm not going to puff rainbows and unicorns up everyone ass... I'm going to plainly call it how I see it .. if the "reality" of this situation is too much for you to bear that's on you....
The reality of the situation is that we have had 2 really rough years and we are heading into 22-23 with a lot of unknowns.....included in that list of unknows is how it is all going to play out.

Nobody is puffing rainbows and unicorns up everyones ass (whatever the he!! that means). Some of us would just prefer to wait and see what happens before giving up. The horror....
 

The reality of the situation is that we have had 2 really rough years and we are heading into 22-23 with a lot of unknowns.....included in that list of unknows is how it is all going to play out.

Nobody is puffing rainbows and unicorns up everyones ass (whatever the he!! that means). Some of us would just prefer to wait and see what happens before giving up. The horror....
Wait and see, apparently, includes whining at anyone who doesn't fall in line with your thinking and "hope" and "if".
 


Wait and see, apparently, includes whining at anyone who doesn't fall in line with your thinking and "hope" and "if".
That's bullshite. He has not whined about anything. Simply responded to mindless whiners repeating the same thing endlessly. Reality is we have a coach for next year and full roster is still unknown.
 

That's bullshite. He has not whined about anything. Simply responded to mindless whiners repeating the same thing endlessly. Reality is we have a coach for next year and full roster is still unknown.
No, daka$$, whining at others that do not agree with his hope and if is exactly what mnvcguy is all about.

Mindless is exactly what hope and if is - and you and your buddy are truly exceptional at it.
 





If logical equates to hope and if, sure. Logical doesn't equate to hope and if, however.
We only need more guards to ensure depth. Yes, we need to add depth. That doesn’t mean our starting guards are on the current roster if we add the right ones.
 

No, daka$$, whining at others that do not agree with his hope and if is exactly what mnvcguy is all about.

Mindless is exactly what hope and if is - and you and your buddy are truly exceptional at it.
Mindless. Expected.
 


Try this on for living in the now....Richard Pitino has recruited enough transfers to position New Mexico as the preseason Mountain West favorites.
He still has to coach them in order for them to win.. I think it was you who was watching them this year and commented when they were 13-0 or 14-1, whatever it was... how did they finish again?

Seemed awfully familiar when all was said and done, wasn't it?
 



He still has to coach them in order for them to win.. I think it was you who was watching them this year and commented when they were 13-0 or 14-1, whatever it was... how did they finish again?

Seemed awfully familiar when all was said and done, wasn't it?
Can't disagree, (and yes it is me) but like I have said Richard is good for a half season of excitement every year.
That is tough to do consistently....right? Anybody else come to mind that has that ability or lack there of or trait? I believe one of these years he'll have a full season.
Ben gave us some excitement the first month of season one and then not so much. He was dead in the water the entire 2nd year. There certainly is no optimism in year 3. Some guys like Izzo make the tournament almost every year. Some guys are bad almost all the time.

Richard is unique with his seasonal coaching timelines. Richard has his Lobo fans optimistic again this year....you can hate all you want but there is something there that will manifest some day somewhere. Just impossible to be good for half a season that often, that consistently and not have at least one more memorable finish beyond the NIT Championship.
Roster construction has been a problem, injuries or ineligibility issues always bite him. If House doesn't get hurt they are in the NCAA's. (Again, he needed to be fired at Minnesota.). Just believe he has enough value as a coach that he'll put his team in position to get lucky at some point to be a talker for an entire season.
 


We only need depth now...... Lol my goodness how the bobos change their tune.... No we dont just need depth.....
 

you need to stop reading those Supreme Court obscenity cases.
WOW!! Not what I expected to learn today. Full disclosure: I've had my 50th birthday party. Side note: I don't remember it. And maybe as a result you might conclude I don't know stuff.
But so be it...I have Never heard this word in my life:
Screenshot 2023-04-27 at 4.37.55 PM.png
Have heard all the similar ones listed for context.
 

That's bullshite. He has not whined about anything. Simply responded to mindless whiners repeating the same thing endlessly. Reality is we have a coach for next year and full roster is still unknown.
lol....had to hit the show ignored content button to see what good ole Barney was saying about me, I see that he hasn't changed and is still complaining about my posts.

It is sad that the crew that takes the same shots at the program over and over and over again in every thread can't grasp why others fans might get annoyed by it.

The really pathetic part is how mad they get when anyone has the audacity to suggest that we should see how things go in year 3 before giving up on year 3. They are so convinced everything is going to go poorly that they can't even allow for the possibility that all the new faces will lead to some improvement.
 

The only thing I am accepting is that Johnson is going to be the coach in 23-24 so hoping for the best. If he can't get the players he needs from the portal then there is a good chance he will get canned after the upcoming season and I am sure there will be much rejoicing from the fans desperate for that day to come.
There he is.
 

1. The team objectively sucked last year, and when I say 'objectively", I'm going beyond just the W-L record. The offensive and defensive efficiency numbers explain why they didn't win many games. And by the way, year one - which everybody now remembers somewhat fondly - had putrid analytics, too, though admittedly slightly less putrid.

1A. A personal viewpoint not shared by many - I am not interested in or impressed with any player's individual production when the overall team efficiency is that bad. Can you make the team better, yes or no.

2. 54% of the minutes left the team, the lion's share from two starters who each played over 30+ mpg. There's two sides to that coin, and both are true - 1) change is needed because the group you had objectively sucked (see #1), and 2) that's a lot to replace and unless those replacement minutes are an upgrade (however that's defined), it probably won't get better.

3. That second side of the coin is what's being debated in this thread. I think both the optimists and pessimists have valid arguments, and none of us have a crystal ball.

The optimists fervently believe in that first side of the coin and see change as the hope. Maybe they think the replacements are more talented, but I'm more swayed by the thought that the replacements will be able to play better as a team. I don't think there's any real evidence of either the talent or the ability to play as a team, but neither is there evidence of the converse. It could happen.

Pessimists see that the talent has not obviously upgraded, and may have even downgraded. There's a bunch of players that are being counted on that have either not been seen, been injured, or are being counted on to be a better version of what they were in the past. It inspires skepticism, not confidence.

When I weigh the arguments, I come down on the pessimist side, but I do understand and appreciate the possibility that the optimists could be right. No one knows they're right. But people on both sides act like they do.
 

1. The team objectively sucked last year, and when I say 'objectively", I'm going beyond just the W-L record. The offensive and defensive efficiency numbers explain why they didn't win many games. And by the way, year one - which everybody now remembers somewhat fondly - had putrid analytics, too, though admittedly slightly less putrid.

1A. A personal viewpoint not shared by many - I am not interested in or impressed with any player's individual production when the overall team efficiency is that bad. Can you make the team better, yes or no.

2. 54% of the minutes left the team, the lion's share from two starters who each played over 30+ mpg. There's two sides to that coin, and both are true - 1) change is needed because the group you had objectively sucked (see #1), and 2) that's a lot to replace and unless those replacement minutes are an upgrade (however that's defined), it probably won't get better.

3. That second side of the coin is what's being debated in this thread. I think both the optimists and pessimists have valid arguments, and none of us have a crystal ball.

The optimists fervently believe in that first side of the coin and see change as the hope. Maybe they think the replacements are more talented, but I'm more swayed by the thought that the replacements will be able to play better as a team. I don't think there's any real evidence of either the talent or the ability to play as a team, but neither is there evidence of the converse. It could happen.

Pessimists see that the talent has not obviously upgraded, and may have even downgraded. There's a bunch of players that are being counted on that have either not been seen, been injured, or are being counted on to be a better version of what they were in the past. It inspires skepticism, not confidence.

When I weigh the arguments, I come down on the pessimist side, but I do understand and appreciate the possibility that the optimists could be right. No one knows they're right. But people on both sides act like they do.
Perfectly stated, with one exception - I am on the pessimistic side of the argument and am not acting as though I know what will happen this coming season. I have said surprises do happen, injuries to opponents and none to MN, etc etc etc could make the season better than expected.

That likelihood, however, isn't great given what we know today.
 


1. The team objectively sucked last year, and when I say 'objectively", I'm going beyond just the W-L record. The offensive and defensive efficiency numbers explain why they didn't win many games. And by the way, year one - which everybody now remembers somewhat fondly - had putrid analytics, too, though admittedly slightly less putrid.

1A. A personal viewpoint not shared by many - I am not interested in or impressed with any player's individual production when the overall team efficiency is that bad. Can you make the team better, yes or no.

2. 54% of the minutes left the team, the lion's share from two starters who each played over 30+ mpg. There's two sides to that coin, and both are true - 1) change is needed because the group you had objectively sucked (see #1), and 2) that's a lot to replace and unless those replacement minutes are an upgrade (however that's defined), it probably won't get better.

3. That second side of the coin is what's being debated in this thread. I think both the optimists and pessimists have valid arguments, and none of us have a crystal ball.

The optimists fervently believe in that first side of the coin and see change as the hope. Maybe they think the replacements are more talented, but I'm more swayed by the thought that the replacements will be able to play better as a team. I don't think there's any real evidence of either the talent or the ability to play as a team, but neither is there evidence of the converse. It could happen.

Pessimists see that the talent has not obviously upgraded, and may have even downgraded. There's a bunch of players that are being counted on that have either not been seen, been injured, or are being counted on to be a better version of what they were in the past. It inspires skepticism, not confidence.

When I weigh the arguments, I come down on the pessimist side, but I do understand and appreciate the possibility that the optimists could be right. No one knows they're right. But people on both sides act like they do.
Well said. Only thing I would contend would be that there is a third group between the optimists and the pessimists and my guess would be it is where a majority of the fans fall.

Disappointed in the first two years but not willing to write off year three before the roster is even set and the season has started.

I don't get the sense that we have many overly optimistic people in here, but we definitely have a group of hardcore pessimists. The majority though are taking a wait and see approach, hoping for the best but not necessarily believing it is likely to happen.
 

Well said. Only thing I would contend would be that there is a third group between the optimists and the pessimists and my guess would be it is where a majority of the fans fall.

Disappointed in the first two years but not willing to write off year three before the roster is even set and the season has started.

I don't get the sense that we have many overly optimistic people in here, but we definitely have a group of hardcore pessimists. The majority though are taking a wait and see approach, hoping for the best but not necessarily believing it is likely to happen.
Still waiting for all the Ben superfans to pop out (they don't exist)!
 


Well said. Only thing I would contend would be that there is a third group between the optimists and the pessimists and my guess would be it is where a majority of the fans fall.

Disappointed in the first two years but not willing to write off year three before the roster is even set and the season has started.

I don't get the sense that we have many overly optimistic people in here, but we definitely have a group of hardcore pessimists. The majority though are taking a wait and see approach, hoping for the best but not necessarily believing it is likely to happen.
I don't see the bolded as a third group. I think that's the current baseline perspective, everyone's starting point. From there, there's a continuum of optimism to pessimism. Maybe the hardcore pessimists wanted Johnson gone already, but now that that's not happening, I don't think they're truly writing off the season - they might have low expectations, though.
 

lol....had to hit the show ignored content button to see what good ole Barney was saying about me, I see that he hasn't changed and is still complaining about my posts.

It is sad that the crew that takes the same shots at the program over and over and over again in every thread can't grasp why others fans might get annoyed by it.

The really pathetic part is how mad they get when anyone has the audacity to suggest that we should see how things go in year 3 before giving up on year 3. They are so convinced everything is going to go poorly that they can't even allow for the possibility that all the new faces will lead to some improvement.
lol.....had to hit the ignore. A lot......:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
 

1. The team objectively sucked last year, and when I say 'objectively", I'm going beyond just the W-L record. The offensive and defensive efficiency numbers explain why they didn't win many games. And by the way, year one - which everybody now remembers somewhat fondly - had putrid analytics, too, though admittedly slightly less putrid.

1A. A personal viewpoint not shared by many - I am not interested in or impressed with any player's individual production when the overall team efficiency is that bad. Can you make the team better, yes or no.

2. 54% of the minutes left the team, the lion's share from two starters who each played over 30+ mpg. There's two sides to that coin, and both are true - 1) change is needed because the group you had objectively sucked (see #1), and 2) that's a lot to replace and unless those replacement minutes are an upgrade (however that's defined), it probably won't get better.

3. That second side of the coin is what's being debated in this thread. I think both the optimists and pessimists have valid arguments, and none of us have a crystal ball.

The optimists fervently believe in that first side of the coin and see change as the hope. Maybe they think the replacements are more talented, but I'm more swayed by the thought that the replacements will be able to play better as a team. I don't think there's any real evidence of either the talent or the ability to play as a team, but neither is there evidence of the converse. It could happen.

Pessimists see that the talent has not obviously upgraded, and may have even downgraded. There's a bunch of players that are being counted on that have either not been seen, been injured, or are being counted on to be a better version of what they were in the past. It inspires skepticism, not confidence.

When I weigh the arguments, I come down on the pessimist side, but I do understand and appreciate the possibility that the optimists could be right. No one knows they're right. But people on both sides act like they do.
Good post. I see the words optimist, pessimist, negative being thrown around a lot. I think it's only natural for there to be a big deviation when it comes to next season's outcome, just because there'll be a lot of new, unproven pieces, so there's a huge potential spread depending on whether Fox can actually play at this level, Ihnen can be as good as he flashed a few years ago, and Christie can come in and start in this league. And obviously we don't even know what our roster is going to look like yet.

I will say this, though: there's both reasonable and unreasonable optimism, and both are represented here. Like I've mentioned, I was very optimistic going into last season, and I learned my lesson. The picture is now clearer as to how good this coaching staff is and, like you say, how talent will translate into efficiency and wins. As high as I am on some of these players, I'll have to have it proven to me that they can be fashioned into a team that's any better than last year's.

Even if both Pride and Brown sign, what is the most reasonably optimistic (one standard deviation? two?) outcome for next year? Look at the other teams in this league. Besides the cratered remains of Penn State, who would our roster be better than? And beyond the roster, who would Johnson outcoach to finish ahead of?
 
Last edited:






Top Bottom