• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

BUZZ THE FUDGE IN!!!!

palmab03 said:
Who was our highest rated recruiting "get" outside of AT&T since the Duncan years. CP3 kinda fell in our laps and Duncan was an unknown, so lets say outside of that group. Eric Williams?
Click to expand...

It'd have to be, the only Burger Boy other than Chris. (And Aminu, obviously.)
 
palmab03 said:
Who was our highest rated recruiting "get" outside of AT&T since the Duncan years. CP3 kinda fell in our laps and Duncan was an unknown, so lets say outside of that group. Eric Williams?
Click to expand...

Ari Stewart, Kevin Swinton...
 
Loren Woods was a big time recruit. I'm pretty sure he was a burger boy too. He was also a headcase.
 
IrishSlim said:
And I do. You're proof positive of Ph's theory that this era is neo-Staak. Short term goes from one year to two years to five years just like that.
Click to expand...

That's really discounting the intelligence of the fanbase, although I can't fault you for that.

I just don't see how this is a losing (or LOWF) formula: each year, make reasonable expectations, and hope to surpass them. If the team surpasses them, then that's a success. The past year's expectations will always inform the next year's, regardless of which players are returning or leaving. A good year yields greater expectations relative to given talent. Thus, if we win 15 games with X group of players, next year we'd expect to win 17 or 18 with the same group. If we lose a substantial amount, we may have lower expectations, but they'll certainly be higher than if we hadn't met expectations the year before. Over time, if we deem the coach to be doing a 'good job' based on our expectations, then expectations will rise with success, and there will come a time when it's appropriate to expect NCAA tourney runs and ACC championships. That time is not now - or, for that matter, particularly soon - but following this method of evaluation and expectation, it surely will come later. I don't see anything LOWF about this.

Edit: I guess it should go without saying that continued "successes" by my reasoning lead to a longer coaching tenure, and successive failures lead to a firing.
 
Last edited:
tintinisahottie said:
Your recruiting class is exactly the same as the one Bzz inherited last year and worked miracles with. Trolling with truth. Good luck
Click to expand...

do you mean the year before last? McKie, TC, and Carson the others were knotheads. I have a good feeling about next years class they seem much different than the last few. I do worry about CMM sometimes though, but I think he will be ok when he gets to Wake with his friends.
 
TexasDeac10 said:
That's really discounting the intelligence of the fanbase, although I can't fault you for that.

I just don't see how this is a losing (or LOWF) formula: each year, make reasonable expectations, and hope to surpass them. If the team surpasses them, then that's a success. The past year's expectations will always inform the next year's, regardless of which players are returning or leaving. A good year yields greater expectations relative to given talent. Thus, if we win 15 games with X group of players, next year we'd expect to win 17 or 18 with the same group. If we lose a substantial amount, we may have lower expectations, but they'll certainly be higher than if we hadn't met expectations the year before. Over time, if we deem the coach to be doing a 'good job' based on our expectations, then expectations will rise with success, and there will come a time when it's appropriate to expect NCAA tourney runs and ACC championships. That time is not now - or, for that matter, particularly soon - but following this method of evaluation and expectation, it surely will come later. I don't see anything LOWF about this.

Edit: I guess it should go without saying that continued "successes" by my reasoning lead to a longer coaching tenure, and successive failures lead to a firing.
Click to expand...

Philosophical difference. Anything that includes "when it's appropriate to expect NCAA tourney runs" reeks of LOWF to me - like I should be politely sipping my wine and eating from my cheese plate in the mean time. Do I think this current team is capable of reaching the Tourney? Of course not. Do I expect that such should be a goal of ours every year? Absolutely. Anything else is loser language and a result of the greatly lowered expectations of the Bzz-era.
 
Exceeding low expectations does not equal success.
 
IrishSlim said:
Philosophical difference. Anything that includes "when it's appropriate to expect NCAA tourney runs" reeks of LOWF to me - like I should be politely sipping my wine and eating from my cheese plate in the mean time. Do I think this current team is capable of reaching the Tourney? Of course not. Do I expect that such should be a goal of ours every year? Absolutely. Anything else is loser language and a result of the greatly lowered expectations of the Bzz-era.
Click to expand...

I sort of agree with this but I think many people confuse expectation, improvement and progress in these discussions.

What should the expectation be for Wake? NCAA's 3 of 4 or 4 of 5 or 5 of 6?

Apparently unless you are KY, you cannot just reload an entire team. Even UNC and dook had horrendous years in the past with a lot better players than we had on some of our NCAA teams. They couldn't even flip the switch and just make the NCAA's the next year because they were dook and UNC.

Many of the Bzzouters have made absolute statements in the past (sure they can't say he can't/won't recruit because he proved them wrong, now he's won a conference road game and two BCS road games, proving more 'predictions' wrong) and as they are proven wrong they change their positions to sync up with the current reality.

So we've gone from the program with stink for x number of years, to having NIT discussion for this years and thoughts of the NCAA as possible for next year.

All that would go under the category of improvement and progress given where we started from.

Some are taking the position that it's NCAA's or it's all bad. Reality is we are coming back from so far down that, there will have to be some steps in between.

Like it or not (some believe the only answer is to get rid of Bzz no matter what) the team is making progress. Are we where we ultimately want to be (expectations for the program), no. But are we moving in that direction? Yes.

Finally BC may not be a signature win, but BC already had two ACC wins, so not a complete write off of the win, unless you are just trying to spin everything so your point of view.
 
I wonder how different these threads would be if we hadn't lost to State by 40 a week ago.
 
Making the NIT is a great goal for next year's team.
 
We could go 9-7 in the ACC next year and not make the NCAA tournament.

I seriously doubt Bzzzz gets fired if we go 6-10 or 7-9 next year.
 
jamesda3 said:
do you mean the year before last? McKie, TC, and Carson the others were knotheads. I have a good feeling about next years class they seem much different than the last few. I do worry about CMM sometimes though, but I think he will be ok when he gets to Wake with his friends.
Click to expand...

glad you "feel good" about the class. the real truth is that you never know how a class will perform until they arrive and play a few games (or career). hindsight is all that really works. to the average (fanatic) both of those classes appear similar. large, some talent, no world beaters, no known off the court issues. they show promise and i am not knocking bzz here.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
I wonder how different these threads would be if we hadn't lost to State by 40 a week ago.
Click to expand...

i guess we'll never know since we did lose to state by (nearly) 40. frankly, "losing" does not even describe it.
 
PhDeac said:
Exceeding low expectations does not equal success.
Click to expand...

This is an incorrect interpretation of what I was getting at. I may not have been clear.

Exceeding low expectations does not equal success - true. But exceeding low expectations leads to higher expectations, which is a minor success in itself. Repeated minor successes gets you back to where you need to be - high expectations, consistent success, whatever you want.

No one thinks that routine NIT appearances is good enough. In a year like this year, however, an NIT appearance would be fantastic. Teams rarely go from zero to hero that quickly, and the road back to national relevancy starts with exceeding our low expectations.

"Goals" are great for teams, but not for fans. Teams need them (if you believe in this stuff at all) because lofty goals makes players mentally sharper, gives them extra desire, keeps them positive. "Goals" for fans are pipe dreams that, really, we have no control over. "Expectations" for fans are important because they serve as a benchmark by which we can judge the success of our program. Exceeding expectations = good, under-achieving = bad. Many times, expectations and goals merge. But, I can't take seriously anyone who looks at this year's team and says our "goal" should be a Sweet 16, and any failure to get there by [Redacted] this year is a failure.
 
We are 2-3 in the ACC. What would be a non-LOWF but fair expectation to finish out the ACC slate that would get people somewhat hopeful for next year?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top