| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What FF team do YOU want to win the NC? |
| Iowa |
|
46% |
[ 26 ] |
| LSU |
|
7% |
[ 4 ] |
| S. Carolina |
|
19% |
[ 11 ] |
| Virginia Tech |
|
26% |
[ 15 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 56 |
|
| Author |
Message |
readyAIMfire53
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 7371
Location: Durham, NC
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/29/23 9:40 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| LOL. The two who voted for LSU have not ID'd themselves. Kind of a hostile environment for them, it seems, with so many going way out of the way to say LSU is below their last choice to win.
_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.
~rAf
|
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21927
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 12:25 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Stormeo wrote: |
anyway, one of y’all has LSU at 68, one of y’all has LSU at 70, yet no one has LSU at sixty-ni— y’know what, *sigh* nvm
not
nice |
And now you know exactly how I arrived at 70 when I wanted a number ever so slightly higher than 68.
| readyAIMfire53 wrote: |
| LOL. The two who voted for LSU have not ID'd themselves. Kind of a hostile environment for them, it seems, with so many going way out of the way to say LSU is below their last choice to win. |
In my extensive career as a sports fan there have been plenty of times I've kept supporting a team despite having a coach I didn't like, so I get it.
Fandom is full of these types of conflicts.
I've settled on hoping for a nice contribution from Last-Tear in an otherwise emphatic loss.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
Tally24
Joined: 14 Feb 2012
Posts: 2709
Location: Baton Rouge
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 12:35 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| readyAIMfire53 wrote: |
| LOL. The two who voted for LSU have not ID'd themselves. Kind of a hostile environment for them, it seems, with so many going way out of the way to say LSU is below their last choice to win. |
I voted for LSU because I’m a grad student here and I want to go to the championship game on Friday via student ticket. |
|
eibln
Joined: 26 Apr 2021
Posts: 100
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 4:26 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I will happily come out in support of LSU AND Coach Mulkey. She is one of the best ever coaches in the game. She is well liked across the board at LSU. Mulkey has been one of my favorites for years. You guys criticize her too much, she is a great coach and woman. LSU and Iowa are at the top of my picks to win a title. I only pick Iowa second because Bluder has always been a class act in the Big Ten.
1. LSU
2. Iowa
3. VA Tech
4. South Carolina
|
|
wnbafan
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 737
Location: Delaware
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 6:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
My honest first reaction is anyone but South Carolina, even though I participate in hyping them because I think they deserve the hype. However, I didn't want to create four "anyone but . . ." choices in addition to the four affirmative choices.
I'd prefer to see either of the two coaches who have never won it do so, which narrows it to Iowa and VaTech.
Because Clark has been so spectacular and entertaining, and because her gritty three-year starting five will break up after this season, I tend to prefer Iowa as the winner. |
Good point. I chose SC but now I want Iowa to win.
Anyone but LSU.
_________________
Be kind, be careful, be yourself
|
|
NYSports56
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 1126
Location: New Jersey, USA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 1:29 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| There are reasons to root against all four teams as well. LSU needs no explanation. With Virginia Tech it's a little unseemly to side with the only male coach in the F4. With South Carolina you might not want them in the conversation of best ever or maybe you don't like dynasties. With Iowa the hype around Clark can be oppressive and crowds out everyone else. |
Why does LSU need no explanation? I'm new to college basketball this season. I was unaware of LSU hatred before this post. I picked LSU because they're the lowest seed left and I liked watching Angel Reese play.
|
|
PG4ever
Joined: 14 May 2020
Posts: 426
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 1:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="CBiebel"]
| PG4ever wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| singinerd54 wrote: |
| Serious question: how many Black male coaches have won a women's championship? (If it's handy, how many Black male coaches have won a men's championship?) |
Other than Brooks, on the D1 level (outside of HBCU's) I can't think of a Black male who has ever been a head coach let alone won a championship. |
Quentin Hillsman, formerly of Syracuse. He even once coached in the Championship game.
BTW, I read that Syracuse and ND are the only Div 1 schools (outside of HBCU's) with black head coaches in Football, Men's Basketball, and Women's Basketball. Both just hired black head coaches for their Men's Basketball programs. |
Oh yeah. Forgot about Hillsman (who's out of the game now).
|
|
PG4ever
Joined: 14 May 2020
Posts: 426
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 2:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| It'd be interesting to see a comparison between who folks want to win vs who they think will win.
|
|
singinerd54
Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 1817
Location: Missouri
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 2:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PG4ever wrote: |
| It'd be interesting to see a comparison between who folks want to win vs who they think will win. |
I don't think that's that interesting this year, because I'm sure an overwhelming majority thinks South Carolina will win.
|
|
readyAIMfire53
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 7371
Location: Durham, NC
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 7:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYSports56 wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| There are reasons to root against all four teams as well. LSU needs no explanation. With Virginia Tech it's a little unseemly to side with the only male coach in the F4. With South Carolina you might not want them in the conversation of best ever or maybe you don't like dynasties. With Iowa the hype around Clark can be oppressive and crowds out everyone else. |
Why does LSU need no explanation? I'm new to college basketball this season. I was unaware of LSU hatred before this post. I picked LSU because they're the lowest seed left and I liked watching Angel Reese play. |
Just speaking for myself here. Kim Mulkey is well known for being a homophobe, telling players like Brittney Griner they have to stay in the closet to play for her. She said some really stupid things during Covid, taking marching orders from the idiots at FoxNews (it's no big deal, the teams should play even when they're riddled with Covid). Then there's the fact she dresses like a drag queen, while not supporting actual drag queens...
And you add in the polarizing Angel Reese. She's had an outstanding year but wouldn't even be playing at schools that have a 2.0 GPA minimum. As we learned we she was left off the finalist list for an award, her GPA is below 2.0, but above LSU's minimum of 1.8, so she's in "good academic standing" at LSU. Not a good look for LSU. I mean, why not lower it all the way down to "anything above failing all your classes? Clearly, they're gunning for athletes who are below average academically.
_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.
~rAf
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 8:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
As for me, I never liked Kim Mulkey as a player at LA Tech…she was cocky and had a kind of nasty, unsportsmanlike attitude as I saw it. Okay, she was good, but so what? And I still don’t like her, for some of the same reasons rAf has cited. She’s a good coach, I’ll give her that, but I would never advise a young woman of talent that I cared about to consider playing for her.
YMMV and probably does, which is fine with me.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 9:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
MY pick here ends in a tie: Louisiana State tied with Iowa. I like them and their seasons' stories equally. Virginia Tech is a close second. South Carolina....who are they again?? 
| NYSports56 wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
There are reasons to root against all four teams as well. LSU needs no explanation. =  With Virginia Tech it's a little unseemly to side with the only male coach in the F4. With South Carolina you might not want them in the conversation of best ever or maybe you don't like dynasties. With Iowa the hype around Clark can be oppressive and crowds out everyone else. |
Why does LSU need no explanation? I'm new to college basketball this season. I was unaware of LSU hatred before this post. I picked LSU because they're the lowest seed left and I liked watching Angel Reese play. |
THANK YOU! It's very refreshing to hear a *new* voice here that isn't so prejudiced as some - you see Kim and her team for what they are THIS SEASON: Fantastic!
Now, rAf, this is some hackneyed baloney:
| readyAIMfire53 wrote: |
| Just speaking for myself here. Kim Mulkey is well known for being a homophobe, telling players like Brittney Griner they have to stay in the closet to play for her. She said some really stupid things during Covid, taking marching orders from the idiots at FoxNews (it's no big deal, the teams should play even when they're riddled with Covid). Then there's the fact she dresses like a drag queen, while not supporting actual drag queens.... |
Kim CAN'T be a homophobe, cuz if she was, she'd never deal with all the talented athletes she has over the years. You're thinking of Renee Portland, maybe? IFF she was TRULY homophobic, do you really think Brit (or any others, for that matter) might have stayed with her all that time?
You 'n I were never privy to her conversations with Brit, and I've never heard any of her players say, "Kim's homophobic". You haven't either. And you know me: I say all this as a happily out gay man - I cannot judge her accurately on this count until I actually hear/speak with her myself, or read that in a legit publication.
What is often confused in her past situation is that BAYLOR is "homophobic" by virtue their religious orientation. Call them out all you want - I'll join ya. But then....THEN....we must give equal protest against: Notre Dame, Sacred Heart, Loyola, BYU, California Baptist, Valparaiso, etc., etc.
| readyAIMfire53 wrote: |
| And you add in the polarizing Angel Reese. She's had an outstanding year but wouldn't even be playing at schools that have a 2.0 GPA minimum. As we learned we she was left off the finalist list for an award, her GPA is below 2.0, but above LSU's minimum of 1.8, so she's in "good academic standing" at LSU. Not a good look for LSU. I mean, why not lower it all the way down to "anything above failing all your classes? Clearly, they're gunning for athletes who are below average academically. |
This is just pure elitist prejudice. So she couldn't have played for Stanford or Princeton - I don't think she cares. As a retired educator, I KNOW X% of kids are not good at traditional academics. And OFTEN, it's the athletically talented kids. And go ask Taurasi, Griner, DelleDonne, Leslie, Parker just how much their GPA has done for them in their careers. Given where she is, and what she's doing, I certainly can't judge Angel on that.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18029
Location: Queens
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 9:47 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Virginia Tech somehow both being a #1 seed and an underdog story amuses me. Besides, I want to see Kitley and King try to steal another bracket.
Iowa would make u_p happy.
South Carolina would at least be expected.
Kim Mulkey can kick rocks with no shoes.
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
NYSports56
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 1126
Location: New Jersey, USA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 10:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| readyAIMfire53 wrote: |
| NYSports56 wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| There are reasons to root against all four teams as well. LSU needs no explanation. With Virginia Tech it's a little unseemly to side with the only male coach in the F4. With South Carolina you might not want them in the conversation of best ever or maybe you don't like dynasties. With Iowa the hype around Clark can be oppressive and crowds out everyone else. |
Why does LSU need no explanation? I'm new to college basketball this season. I was unaware of LSU hatred before this post. I picked LSU because they're the lowest seed left and I liked watching Angel Reese play. |
Just speaking for myself here. Kim Mulkey is well known for being a homophobe, telling players like Brittney Griner they have to stay in the closet to play for her. She said some really stupid things during Covid, taking marching orders from the idiots at FoxNews (it's no big deal, the teams should play even when they're riddled with Covid). Then there's the fact she dresses like a drag queen, while not supporting actual drag queens...
And you add in the polarizing Angel Reese. She's had an outstanding year but wouldn't even be playing at schools that have a 2.0 GPA minimum. As we learned we she was left off the finalist list for an award, her GPA is below 2.0, but above LSU's minimum of 1.8, so she's in "good academic standing" at LSU. Not a good look for LSU. I mean, why not lower it all the way down to "anything above failing all your classes? Clearly, they're gunning for athletes who are below average academically. |
Thanks for the answer. The drag queen line is funny even if the topic isn't. Go Virginia Tech!
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 10:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Howee wrote: |
| must give equal protest against: Notre Dame, Sacred Heart, Loyola, BYU, California Baptist, Valparaiso, etc., etc. |
I'm not on the inside at ND, but I have never had an anti-gay feeling from there. I've lived within 100 miles of ND all my life and I just don't get that vibe from them like I do from some other schools. I know several gays that have gone there and never heard them say anything negative either.
Maybe cbiebel can speak to this with more insight than I can from the outside looking in.
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18029
Location: Queens
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 10:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Howee wrote: |
What is often confused in her past situation is that BAYLOR is "homophobic" by virtue their religious orientation. Call them out all you want - I'll join ya. But then....THEN....we must give equal protest against: Notre Dame, Sacred Heart, Loyola, BYU, California Baptist, Valparaiso, etc., etc. |
Most of us *do* give equal protest against BYU, while most of the other ones haven't come up.
and I've had to weigh my lack of religious beliefs against the fact that most of my schools are Catholic (and Seton Hall and Fordham have both had culture clashes between the people running the school and the people attending/working for it), but we're veering into Area 51 territory here
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 10:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| Howee wrote: |
| must give equal protest against: Notre Dame, Sacred Heart, Loyola, BYU, California Baptist, Valparaiso, etc., etc. |
I'm not on the inside at ND, but I have never had an anti-gay feeling from there. I've lived within 100 miles of ND all my life and I just don't get that vibe from them like I do from some other schools. I know several gays that have gone there and never heard them say anything negative either.
Maybe cbiebel can speak to this with more insight than I can from the outside looking in. |
I do NOT view Notre Dame as "homophobic" in their treatment of lgbtq athletes for as long as I've followed them. I'm naming them, like the others, who are based in, or founded by Christian denominations that ARE Homophobic. ANY Roman Catholic university must denounce homosexuality as damnable by connection to their planet-wide credo: it's their doctrine. How they conveniently ignore homosexuality in their campus life, athletics, etc., is just a testament to how hypocritical they are. And the Baptists, Mormons and Lutherans are practically as bad....there's just fewer of them.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
PG4ever
Joined: 14 May 2020
Posts: 426
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/30/23 11:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
And you add in the polarizing Angel Reese. She's had an outstanding year but wouldn't even be playing at schools that have a 2.0 GPA minimum. As we learned we she was left off the finalist list for an award, her GPA is below 2.0, but above LSU's minimum of 1.8, so she's in "good academic standing" at LSU. Not a good look for LSU. I mean, why not lower it all the way down to "anything above failing all your classes? Clearly, they're gunning for athletes who are below average academically.[/quote]
I am not an LSU fan and I'm definitely not a Mulkey fan (though I liked watching her and the "Lady Techsters" play back in the early '80s). I've read some negative criticisms of Angel Reese and I have no idea what's deserved or not but I must say I do feel bad for her regarding the negative comments about her alleged GPA and having her GPA be made public. Let me preface my next comments by saying that I had a 3.8 GPA in both H.S. and college and have earned two grad degrees so I'd say academics and education are important to me. Having said that, I don't think Reese should be harshly judged about her GPA. If it is the case that her GPA is between a 1.8 and a 2.0, that means it's a C- average. She won't make any dean's lists with that GPA but she's not failing, she's playing within the rules, and she alone will have to be prepared to deal with any consequences of her GPA (how potential employers might judge her, for example). Like it or not, a lot of schools have similar GPA requirements which was surprising to me.
|
|
wnbafan
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 737
Location: Delaware
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/23 7:35 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| PG4ever wrote: |
| And you add in the polarizing Angel Reese. She's had an outstanding year but wouldn't even be playing at schools that have a 2.0 GPA minimum. As we learned we she was left off the finalist list for an award, her GPA is below 2.0, but above LSU's minimum of 1.8, so she's in "good academic standing" at LSU. Not a good look for LSU. I mean, why not lower it all the way down to "anything above failing all your classes? Clearly, they're gunning for athletes who are below average academically. |
| Quote: |
I am not an LSU fan and I'm definitely not a Mulkey fan (though I liked watching her and the "Lady Techsters" play back in the early '80s). I've read some negative criticisms of Angel Reese and I have no idea what's deserved or not but I must say I do feel bad for her regarding the negative comments about her alleged GPA and having her GPA be made public. Let me preface my next comments by saying that I had a 3.8 GPA in both H.S. and college and have earned two grad degrees so I'd say academics and education are important to me. Having said that, I don't think Reese should be harshly judged about her GPA. If it is the case that her GPA is between a 1.8 and a 2.0, that means it's a C- average. She won't make any dean's lists with that GPA but she's not failing, she's playing within the rules, and she alone will have to be prepared to deal with any consequences of her GPA (how potential employers might judge her, for example). Like it or not, a lot of schools have similar GPA requirements which was surprising to me. |
Well, I was mad at Reese for leaving Maryland. However, in one of her pressers Frese said last year's locker room was more 'me' than 'we', so I thought maybe Reese wasn't happy with her ball touches. I don't know what Maryland's minimum gpa is for athletes, but maybe that is why she left.
_________________
Be kind, be careful, be yourself
|
|
CBiebel
Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 1055
Location: PA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/23 8:11 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| singinerd54 wrote: |
| PG4ever wrote: |
| It'd be interesting to see a comparison between who folks want to win vs who they think will win. |
I don't think that's that interesting this year, because I'm sure an overwhelming majority thinks South Carolina will win. |
Pretty much. For the record, I voted for Va Tech.
|
|
CBiebel
Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 1055
Location: PA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/23 8:38 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
| Howee wrote: |
| must give equal protest against: Notre Dame, Sacred Heart, Loyola, BYU, California Baptist, Valparaiso, etc., etc. |
I'm not on the inside at ND, but I have never had an anti-gay feeling from there. I've lived within 100 miles of ND all my life and I just don't get that vibe from them like I do from some other schools. I know several gays that have gone there and never heard them say anything negative either.
Maybe cbiebel can speak to this with more insight than I can from the outside looking in. |
It's changed quite a bit since I was a student (which, to be fair, so has society in general). I was there in the late 1980s and there was a gay/lesbian club on campus, but due to the official Catholic church stance on homosexuality (which has also officially changed it's stance a bit since then) , the school didn't officially recognize it at the time (IOW, it wasn't an "official" club).
Today things are completely different. When Indiana passed an anti-gay law in 2015, the ND Athletic Department actually put out a pro-gay video:
https://youtu.be/ca9bUC7jqAs
For those who remember Melissa Lechlitner (ND PG 2006-10), she's an out lesbian (married and according to one article I found online, trying to have a kid) who works at ND as the Regional Director of Development.
|
|
CBiebel
Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 1055
Location: PA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/23 8:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Howee wrote: |
| ANY Roman Catholic university must denounce homosexuality as damnable by connection to their planet-wide credo: it's their doctrine. |
Technically speaking that's not completely true anymore. The Catholic Church now has the stance that Homosexuality itself is fine, but homosexual sex isn't (technically, they say the same thing about premarital sex, but how many Catholics really follow that one?). I know it sounds like a semantics thing, but hey, at least it's a step in the right direction. It's at least making some kind of movement in position, unlike some other religions.
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/23 9:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| CBiebel wrote: |
| Howee wrote: |
| ANY Roman Catholic university must denounce homosexuality as damnable by connection to their planet-wide credo: it's their doctrine. |
Technically speaking that's not completely true anymore. The Catholic Church now has the stance that Homosexuality itself is fine, but homosexual sex isn't (technically, they say the same thing about premarital sex, but how many Catholics really follow that one?). I know it sounds like a semantics thing, but hey, at least it's a step in the right direction. It's at least making some kind of movement in position, unlike some other religions. |
Ummm...."homsexuality" without "homosexual sex" is....what?? Well, a kind of oxymoronic conundrum. This manipulation of semantics is how religious universities all over the country squirm out of the conflicts that arise if they ACTUALLY ENFORCE their scriptural credos and dogmas that condemn.
Frankly, I say it's GOOD if a place like ND or Seton Hall can move past that - it IS a step in the right direction - but then....take if *off the books* as an illicit behavior.
My ONLY (and hopefully final) point in all of this comparative analysis is that BAYLOR PRACTICED WHAT IT PREACHED, obviously to a much higher degree than a Notre Dame or BYU. That was Mulkey's backdrop for the job she had, which was coaching basketball, which typically contains a high % of lgbtq kids. I can't hold her employment at Baylor against her.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
eibln
Joined: 26 Apr 2021
Posts: 100
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/23 11:28 am ::: |
Reply |
|
It really just sounds like you guys don’t like Mulkey because her political stances don’t line up with yours or those of “Woke” culture. We don’t all have to agree so quit hating on people who may not believe the same, it’s part of the freedoms we get as an American. Kim doesn’t have to support homosexuality / LGBTQ+ if she doesn’t want to. Not everyone supports it or agrees with the ideas behind it, and that’s okay. Kim Mulkey is a southern raised gal, she has her beliefs. If she voted red and you voted blue, everyone would be hating on her for that. We can’t we all just GET ALONG with different opinions. She had her opinions on COVID, as did everyone else, who cares.
As for the how she dresses, she doesn’t dress like a drag Queen, she just has a unique fashion style that to me doesn’t reflect what you are saying.
As for Angel Reese’s academics: LSU’s academic standards are the lowest in the SEC and don’t take much to get by. There is a reason why a lot of southern schools recruit better, lots of the academic standards in the south are awful. This is why it’s harder to transfer or recruit at schools like Michigan, ND, Stanford, Northwestern, and Vandy. Mulkey can’t force her kids to do better at schooling, that is a choice. I would be willing to bet Mulkey does get on to them about it.
So what if Mulkey didn’t comment on Griner’s status in Russia. I would be willing to bet that yes Mulkey supported her trying to get home, but Griner made decisions in other countries that can get you in trouble. The US doesn’t have great relations with Russia. Griner should have been more careful, and she wouldn’t have gotten locked up. I still don’t agree with what the US traded for her. People have to be held accountable for their mistakes and Griner was, and unfortunately it happened to be in another country that has stricter laws. It is not Mulkey’s job to defend every little thing that her ex players do and she certainly doesn’t have to support or condone their decisions. Not to mention since then, Mulkey has come out and said that she is glad Griner is back, so….
Mulkey has a winners attitude and cares about her student athletes. The fans, staff, and players always show their support of her. Stop making everything political and give her the credit she deserves. She has turned around two programs and has coached some fantastic players. She is a great coach, one of the best in history whether you like it or not. I understand the reasoning behind why she left Baylor and why she does what she does. She has a winners attitude. I love how animated and emotional she gets during games, it shows her passion. She loves the game. She is classy and shows her support for other coaches and players as well.
Mulkey is a great coach. STOP making it political because she doesn’t view things the way you do.
_________________
Go Blue!
|
|
singinerd54
Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 1817
Location: Missouri
Back to top |
|
|
|
