Well, I see his point in that we melted down, but we did get the 20 point lead to begin with.

UK never had a chance.

****. They could have shot from half court for the first 10 minutes and achieved similar results.

Vandy had their scrubs in for most of the second half.

Similar to the A&M OU football game five years ago, that score could have been a whole lot worse.

bendover, do you think UK will keep BCG for 5 years?

Do you think BCG can't get them turned around in five years?

I don't know if he would, but I'd take even odds on him having them in a better position in five years as anybody else they could hire between now and then.

I thought they'd be better this year, so I honestly don't know.

He's recruiting some studs nationally and that's hard to screw up.

I guess since everyone is comparing him to Fran I wondered if they'd put up with as much as we had to.

bcg has forgotten more about bball than fran ever knew about football.

it'll be interesting. even after player mutinies he still has them on the upswing. it'll be interesting to see who goes/stays at the conclusion of the season.

Houstontexan, you are just wrong on this point. I watched the game last night, and sure, Vandy played extremely well, but there is no excuse for 11 points in a half. That's just unacceptable. Plus, TKC also put in an injured player (Meeks) mid-way in to the SECOND HALF. Ever since TKC left, he's made some very bizarre coaching decisions. Last night, he was simply out-coached, and he can only ride the "lack of talent" excuse for so long.

ugh!

I like ht, and he ususally has a lot of good things to say. He just developed such an affinity for Billy Clyde in his time here that he has become too quick to question Billy Clyde's replacement and too slow to question Billy Clyde. That, and he is too proud to admit that he was too quick to blast MT.

[This message has been edited by letters at random (edited 2/13/2008 9:35a).]

Look guys, if UK loses, it is because the opponent was hot, UK was cold, lack of talent, not deep, the refs sucked, and despite the brilliant tactical adjustments of BCG, there was no way that UK could win. You neophites just don't understand the genius it took to get 11 points out of that cast of scrubs against the consensus final four pick Vanderbilt. I doubt UK would have scored 5 points under MT's confused game management.

MT has clearly been in over his head and his carefuly thought out comments at the press conference are lucid evidence that the basketball house he has been building his entire career was a house of cards. We are just lucky that he obviously read the brilliant assesments of the texags elite, who from their living room saw what MT was incapable of seeing, and adjusted his coaching per their brilliant ramblings.

I believe there were some folks here blaming our team's "sinking spell" on talent that hadn't bought into MT's system. It is a two way street.

Anybody who think BCG can't coach based on the 2nd Vandy game (remember UK did win the 1st one) should automatically be disregarded. If we get waxed at Austin, does that mean that MT had a brain dump from the first, overwhelming win?

They love to bash our coach and support Gillispie. I don't understand it but I've learned to accept it.

And there are some who appreciate BCG's contribution and support MT's efforts to build on that.

There are some that don't appreciate sarcasm.

or feeble attempts at it

whatever inflates your ego

The only thing I don't understand is why it is difficult to accept that a good coach can have a bad game. Of course BCG is a good coach, very possibly a great one. And yet his team got beat by 41 points, and to say that is all a function of talent, player effort, imagined internal dissension, or whatever, and has nothing to do with him, is probably letting him off a little too easy. To say BCG had a bad game is not to say that he, in absolute terms, is a horrible coach, and anyone who suggests otherwise is being intellectually dishonest.

Case in point - after the Tech game, there was alot of screaming that MT didn't use any timeouts to slow down Tech's surge in the last part of the first half. Well, BCG didn't use any timeouts (excluding media timeouts) until his team was down 19. Was one decision proper and the other one wrong?

Same goes for Turgeon and the Tech and Arizona games - doesn't mean he's clueless, but certainly he is responsible for the product on the floor.

BCG is a good coach who, like MT, has had a few bad nights this season. It happens to the best of them.

hello hank

LawHall, most posters on the board agree that good coaches have bad games. What annoys us is that certain posters apply different standards to BCG than the new coach. Since they insist that only their opinion counts, some of us enjoy poking a finger in their eye.

It is great fun. You should try it.

8T2 ... just post this:

"I think it's funny to be ignorant and obsessed with hating a coach who left A&M in the same manner in which he arrived. I just hate it when somebody does something to A&M when I thought it was perfectly okay to do to get them to A&M."

That oughta 'bout cover it.

[This message has been edited by XL2Win (edited 2/13/2008 10:58a).]

Pretty asinine to argue that a 15 point loss is worse than a 41 point loss, by the way.

so UK was hitting shots and finishing? players weren't committing horrible fouls?

and vandy wasn't playing well?

good to know. one of those days where if patterson doesn't show up and no one steps up, it gets ugly in a hurry.

quote:

---

Pretty asinine to argue that a 15 point loss is worse than a 41 point loss, by the way.

---

that 15 point loss was much much worse than 15 pionts. we had a team we outclassed at every position, yes, including voskul at the point which was coming off a 20 point drubbing.

this was immediately following a lackluster win over CU were the problems on D had again exposed themselves. odd thing is that tech played pretty horribly against us and we still let them have it.

i'm not arguing that a 41 point loss isn't horrible, but i sure as hell don't put that fully on bcg. patterson presses, no one steps up and that's what you have.

vandy's a very solid team with olgivy and when they're hitting from everywhere on the floor, they're very tough to stop.

he better have them ready for tennessee.

quote:

---

good coaches have bad games

---

kentucky's scheme last night was fine. guys were lost in transition and just playing horribly all around (i'm not going to get started on some of the entries). if you play D under bcg like he teaches, you'll be in EVERY game. if you **** around outside getting lost and can't figure out the transition the other way, there isn't much he can do other than sit guys who refuse to follow his lead, which he will do to anyone.

xl2lose, I did not condone the hiring of Fran that you are alluding to. I realize that you love to ascribe positions to people who find your postings to be buffoonery, but just because you say it doesn't mean I believe it. To be clear, I thought both the Fran hiring AND the Gillispie leaving to be lacking in integrity.

Not that it matters. I just enjoy watching Gillispie and UK lose, and the torment that their losing causes to you and houstontexan makes it even more enjoyable. You are really in a tough spot here. The more you scream, the funnier I find it. Perhaps I should not find so much humor in your delusional rants, but I just can't help it. I'm sorry that I have so much fun at your expense...and HT's...and KFC's.

quote:

---

kentucky's scheme last night was fine.

---

Exhibit #1!!!!!

BCG did an OK job coaching last night. It is really hard to coach a roster full of 4 and 5 star talent, though.

Fran's but one example. We hired ALL of our coaches from somewhere. You can argue about Sherman since he was in pro ball, but basketball (men's and women's), baseball, etc all were coaching somewhere else. They left there to come here, as did BCG when he left UTEP.

It's how it works.

I don't argue about any of it. I have my own reasons for choosing who I root for. I reject your insistence on telling me who to root for...and more importantly, who to root against.

This is something that you and HT cannot seem to grasp.

quote:

---

kentucky's scheme last night was fine. guys were lost in transition and just playing horribly all around (i'm not going to get started on some of the entries). if you play D under bcg like he teaches, you'll be in EVERY game. if you **** around outside getting lost and can't figure out the transition the other way, there isn't much he can do other than sit guys who refuse to follow his lead, which he will do to anyone.

---

Translation = UK losses are never BCG's fault

i know when you play man D like he teaches it, that stuff doesn't happen unless no one's making shots.

they weren't playing D, they weren't hitting shots and it snowballed. it happens.

he is a perfect man in an imperfect world. I understand. thanks for clarifying.

hank, please stop trolling here

8T2, show me where we've tried to get you to root for BCG. I don't root for him; I just am not obsessed with rooting against him and I don't try to pretend that he didn't perform a near miracle at A&M. I don't hide my gratitude for what he did nor my belief that I think he could have been a legend here. And I don't hide my understanding of why he went. I've been pretty clear that I thought on a personal basis he was an ass, but he was OUR ass. Now he's somebody else's ass. Folks didn't care much that he was an ass when he was here. It only became an issue after the left. Not different really from the "how" of his arrival at A&M/departure from UTEP and the very similar circumstances on his departure to Kentucky.

You seem to think it's an either/or kind of deal and it's not. It's a mixed bag. I didn't like how he left but I recognize why he left and how similar it was for UTEP. He was incredibly stubborn and incredibly gifted. He was both loved and hated. A classic dichotomy. Those that simply hate him can't recognize the other half of the coin and it's that blindness to truth/fact that pisses me off.

he's not trolling. He's pointing out how ridiculous these clowns look.

[This message has been edited by bendover (edited 2/13/2008 12:13p).]