new basketball floor

3,804 Views | 20 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by greg.w.h
Gman7709
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So, I like the new basketball floor, but I'd prefer a parquet style, a la the Boston Garden style. Have we ever done a parquet/Celtic style floor?? It's a very unique look. I think we missed an opportunity.
aggiejohn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
We had a subtle parquet look in the 2008-ish era:

Callate Donnie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm with you. However, you heard non-stop beeching about the parquet floor when we had it. Might be why it got changed. I thought it was rad/distinctive.
expresswrittenconsent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's a "very unique" look?
Lol at the idea of anything being "very" unique, let alone the idea of ripping off arguably one of the 3 or 4 most famous courts.
TyperWoods
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Want "rad" without ripping someone else off?

Court with boards running sideline-to-sideline instead of baseline-to-baseline.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You mean a ripoff of the Memphis Grizzlies?
greg.w.h
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The parquet was an homage not a rip off. It was tasteful and attractive as shown in the photo.

Nothing in life is unique. There is nothing new under the sun.
Hop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
aggiejohn said:

We had a subtle parquet look in the 2008-ish era:


I look at the players on that team and that was a very, very good team that probably under-performed.

Joe Jones
Chin Elonu
Bryan Davis
Deandre Jordan
Don Sloan
Derrick Roland
Josh Carter
Dom Kirk
BJ Holmes
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Kinda disagree. We were really good, there could conceivably be a debate to be had between that team, 2009-10, and the 2015-16 team for which is the 2nd best A&M team of this era. In 2008 we were in an extremely strong conference, where all the **** teams were in the other division (for scheduling), and then basically because of that we got ****ed on seeding and still almost beat a team that went to the final four. In 2016, there was basically only one other team in our conference that was very good. We could have won a couple extra games I guess, and ended up with a stronger looking season I guess, but I'm not sure its really "underachieving"

It was a strong and deep roster, but its hard to be really great without a true star player, which that team didnt really have. I think we underachieved more the next year.
Hop
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
JJxvi said:

Kinda disagree. We were really good, there could conceivably be a debate to be had between that team, 2009-10, and the 2015-16 team for which is the 2nd best A&M team of this era. In 2008 we were in an extremely strong conference, where all the **** teams were in the other division (for scheduling), and then basically because of that we got ****ed on seeding and still almost beat a team that went to the final four. In 2016, there was basically only one other team in our conference that was very good. We could have won a couple extra games I guess, and ended up with a stronger looking season I guess, but I'm not sure its really "underachieving"

It was a strong and deep roster, but its hard to be really great without a true star player, which that team didnt really have. I think we underachieved more the next year.
The team won the preseason NIT and was ranked in the Top 10 as late as January 19. They limped into the end of the season and squeaked into the NCAA's as a No. 8 seed.
greg.w.h
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It had a future defensive star. Who has a first team All-NBA nod from 2016. Who didn't get much pt for whatever reasons.

And Josh Carter didn't find a way to make his own shots and lost some of his touch, too.

But I think we did lack leadership for whatever reasons.
expresswrittenconsent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hop said:

JJxvi said:

Kinda disagree. We were really good, there could conceivably be a debate to be had between that team, 2009-10, and the 2015-16 team for which is the 2nd best A&M team of this era. In 2008 we were in an extremely strong conference, where all the **** teams were in the other division (for scheduling), and then basically because of that we got ****ed on seeding and still almost beat a team that went to the final four. In 2016, there was basically only one other team in our conference that was very good. We could have won a couple extra games I guess, and ended up with a stronger looking season I guess, but I'm not sure its really "underachieving"

It was a strong and deep roster, but its hard to be really great without a true star player, which that team didnt really have. I think we underachieved more the next year.
The team won the preseason NIT and was ranked in the Top 10 as late as January 19. They limped into the end of the season and squeaked into the NCAA's as a No. 8 seed.

All of what you said top about 10 early and then they had a lot of weird losses. I chalked it up to the adjustment btwn BCG and Turge.
4 or so blowout road losses to the good teams (35 pts at oklahoma). Inexcusable home losses to the two last place teams in the b12 (okie st and nebraska) including choking away the Acie Law IV jersey retirement game.
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The conference was strong and we struggled some. Im not sure that the teams we played early ended up having all that great of seasons either. To me we did fine, I dont think we had like an elite 8 or final 4 roster, particularly not with the experience level of that team. We could have easily made the sweet sixteen though just by not playing UCLA.
Callate Donnie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
expresswrittenconsent said:

It's a "very unique" look?
Lol at the idea of anything being "very" unique, let alone the idea of ripping off arguably one of the 3 or 4 most famous courts.
Context and comprehension > semantic mental masturbation.

Everyone got what OP meant. Congrats on being "that guy."
JJxvi
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I consider the fact that nobody told the OP "WTF the court was parquet until just like 5 years ago" to be a win for courtesy.
greg.w.h
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
JJxvi said:

I consider the fact that nobody told the OP "WTF the court was parquet until just like 5 years ago" to be a win for courtesy.

Well...the Zoo proper is up there in the list. We down here.
Broncos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Since we're still on the second thread about the floor... I like the new clean look over the parquet.
Gman7709
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I completely forgot we had this floor at one time. We should bring this back with MINIMAL logos (I'm lookin' at you, beveled maroon stars in the corners!!). We need to go darker though on the parquet.
greg.w.h
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That State Farm sponsorship of the Lone Star Showdown in all sports was a major corporate sponsorship.
expresswrittenconsent
How long do you want to ignore this user?
greg.w.h said:

That State Farm sponsorship of the Lone Star Showdown in all sports was a major corporate sponsorship.

That says it all.
TyperWoods
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JJxvi said:

You mean a ripoff of the Memphis Grizzlies?

Who?



J/K...didn't realize their court was like that.
greg.w.h
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
expresswrittenconsent said:

greg.w.h said:

That State Farm sponsorship of the Lone Star Showdown in all sports was a major corporate sponsorship.

That says it all.

It was a good concept and we became more competitive along the way. State Farm is HQ'ed in the Dallas area now, too.

I refuse to join the turning up of noses at corporate sponsorship. We are majority funded by media revenue already and that inventory is sold to generate ad revenue.

Now if we want to drain the swamp of all money to fully de-professionalize intercollegiate athletics to enforce a kinder, gentler shamateurism in the name of some complex virtue signaling, I would support that. But it would have to be stem to stern. Half measures like minimizing Title IX spend by reducing men's sports to reduce women's sports while maintaining the current revenue intake of football would be hypocritical.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.