• 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!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

Why the Deac Not said:
It doesn't matter to you RChill as folks here give you contextual supporting evidence all of the time to support their assertions, but you choose to only focus on the context of one example (Bzz to Manning) when we're all quite familiar with it. Yet other coaches typically don't squander the momentum of one good year unless they are using inherited players from a previous coach in said year.

Was Collins a fluke, or a good example of Manning's ability to pinpoint off the radar talent? Because many of his other attempts to do so have not been so good (Hudson, Rondale, SJM, Rick Wash, Eggleston, Mitchell?). But perhaps the bigger mistake was his over-reliance on substituting recruited talent with transfers-in and hole-plugs while ignoring the importance of setting your foundation. Mitoglou was a good step in that direction in retrospect, but where are the other "foundation" guys? He was overly fond of Wilbekin, Woods decided to leave for greener pastures (again), Chill is a capable back up, and the rest of 2016 said "sayonara!" So, who are \ will be the true replacements for Craw and Moore next year and beyond? BC\Lewis and Lorng?

I'll be more inclined to believe he might have a shot at turning this around if he can recruit better talent at the PG & C positions to complement Hoard and Brown, and Zeke and Sarr in 2019-20. But I still have major misgivings about his ability to manage his roster and coach in-game.
Click to expand...

Lol
 
RChildress107 said:
1. I agree. More than one definition of simple though.

2. With Woods’ departure he would have been our 8th man. His departure was no more an indictment than any other transfer.

3. Similar to the “by the way” fiasco, it smacked of a smug “I know something you don’t know” attitude that comes with greater but still limited access. If you have a source in or close to the program that has indicated more transfers are coming but you don’t feel comfortable naming names, then say that. How many more transfers? When should we expect to hear? How reliable is the source? Are we taking about starters or reserves? If BSD can’t or isn’t willing to answer those questions then they should have left that part out.
Click to expand...

Saying that Woods would have been the 8th player in our rotation next is the kind of takes so hawt I am here for. If the ACC 6th man of the year, is going to be your 8th man next season your looking at a potential championship caliber team.

Wake might not win 10 games next season.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
Saying that Woods would have been the 8th player in our rotation next is the kind of takes so hawt I am here for. If the ACC 6th man of the year, is going to be your 8th man next season your looking at a potential championship caliber team.

Wake might not win 10 more games this calendar year.
Click to expand...

Was clearly taking about Mitchell. As to the bold, perhaps, but there’s a decent chance they do.
 
Top 40 team at Wake once was viewed as an off year. DM has had one top 40 team followed by a complete shit storm with multiple embarrassing losses.
 
RChildress107 said:
This isn’t true, but even if it were, off isn’t awful.
Click to expand...

That is true. A top 40 team is a bubble team. And bubble teams were off years. And "Off" is literally the first syllable of "awful."
 
When Manning is gone, I'd be willing to kick in some funds to buy a Top 40 trophy to send to RChill to commemorate Manning's greatest coaching achievement. Since Manning won't be getting a billboard or ads in the paper, it's the least I could do.
 
RacerDeac said:
When Manning is gone, I'd be willing to kick in some funds to buy a Top 40 trophy to send to RChill to commemorate Manning's greatest coaching achievement. Since Manning won't be getting a billboard or ads in the paper, it's the least I could do.
Click to expand...

ap607323078318.jpg
 
Pretty remarkable run from 1990 through 2010 considering how bad we suck now.

Using our NCAAT seed X 4 in those years we didn't crack the AP (and a few years where we peaked in the AP poll, but faded badly are notated), here are our "ranks" for the last 28 years: 20, 36, 16, 20, 3, 9, 9, peaked at 23 remarkably in '97-'98, "OFF", peaked at 18 in '99-'00, 23, 28, 8, 17, 5, peaked at 16 in '05-'06, OFF, OFF, 12, 36, OFF X 6 yrs, 44(!!), OFF, TBD.
 
PhDeac said:
That is true. A top 40 team is a bubble team. And bubble teams were off years. And "Off" is literally the first syllable of "awful."
Click to expand...

You’re pronouncing at least one of those words wrong.

The Butler year is the only example I can think of and that year was more “epic collapse” than “off.”
 
RacerDeac said:
When Manning is gone, I'd be willing to kick in some funds to buy a Top 40 trophy to send to RChill to commemorate Manning's greatest coaching achievement. Since Manning won't be getting a billboard or ads in the paper, it's the least I could do.
Click to expand...

If that ends up being his greatest accomplishment then I won’t be around to receive it.
 
Why the Deac Not said:
Pretty remarkable run from 1990 through 2010 considering how bad we suck now.

Using our NCAAT seed X 4 in those years we didn't crack the AP (and a few years where we peaked in the AP poll, but faded badly are notated), here are our "ranks" for the last 28 years: 20, 36, 16, 20, 3, 9, 9, peaked at 23 remarkably in '97-'98, "OFF", peaked at 18 in '99-'00, 23, 28, 8, 17, 5, peaked at 16 in '05-'06, OFF, OFF, 12, 36, OFF X 6 yrs, 44(!!), OFF, TBD.
Click to expand...

Or maybe we could just look at actual rankings at the end of the season.
 
Why the Deac Not said:
Pretty remarkable run from 1990 through 2010 considering how bad we suck now.

Using our NCAAT seed X 4 in those years we didn't crack the AP (and a few years where we peaked in the AP poll, but faded badly are notated), here are our "ranks" for the last 28 years: 20, 36, 16, 20, 3, 9, 9, peaked at 23 remarkably in '97-'98, "OFF", peaked at 18 in '99-'00, 23, 28, 8, 17, 5, peaked at 16 in '05-'06, OFF, OFF, 12, 36, OFF X 6 yrs, 44(!!), OFF, TBD.
Click to expand...

We were essentially a top 20 basketball program for 2 decades. Everyone needs to remind people of that when they throw out some LOWF bs that Wake "can't compete with the big boys".
 
CreamyGoodness said:
We were essentially a top 20 basketball program for 2 decades. Everyone needs to remind people of that when they throw out some LOWF bs that Wake "can't compete with the big boys".
Click to expand...

Yup. And in 4 years we collapsed to not even being a top 100 program. I’m not sure why people expected the road back to be quick or easy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top