RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Fire McCallie NOW
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
osubeavers



Joined: 07 Jan 2017
Posts: 88
Location: West Hills, Portland, OR


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/04/20 5:32 pm    ::: Re: Fire McCallie NOW Reply Reply with quote

readyAIMfire53 wrote:
osubeavers wrote:
PickledGinger wrote:
I am a UW/PAC 12 fan first and foremost, but I’d like to think I’m speaking for the entire WBB community when I say that woman is a blight on her program and is absolutely #1 on the list of coaches who should lose their job.

They just lost to friggin Wake Forest IN DURHAM. That’s not OK. Can we start a petition, or something?

Not sure why an underachieving Duke WBB is an issue of concern for the entire WBB community. Duke will do what’s best for Duke.


Just like when y'all had trouble at your school, all fans of women's basketball should want the program cleaned up. It's about respect for women athletes and standing up when they are disrespected. Duke is absolutely not "doing what's best for Duke." For whatever reason, they're catering to a very bad coach and paying her a cool mil per year. This does not reflect well on Duke.
In the case of Rueck’s predecessor LaVonda Wagner, I don’t recall much sympathy for OSU’s situation. I think most of our PAC-10 (at the time) competition were happy to have the Beavs at the bottom of the conference and two automatic victories on their schedule. OSU ultimately had to do what was best for OSU, pay off Wagner’s contract to the tune of $1 million and look for a new coach. I’m eternally grateful for the players who abandoned Wagner’s ridiculously abusive program and precipitated the hiring of Scott Rueck. In this case OSU did what was best for OSU. I expect Duke will do what is best for Duke. If not, talented WBB players have numerous options and Duke WBB will not be their choice.



_________________
Stepping out of a triangle into striped light - Everything is wrong, at the same time it's RIGHT!


Last edited by osubeavers on 01/04/20 6:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
osubeavers



Joined: 07 Jan 2017
Posts: 88
Location: West Hills, Portland, OR


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/04/20 5:58 pm    ::: Re: Fire McCallie NOW Reply Reply with quote

readyAIMfire53 wrote:
osubeavers wrote:
PickledGinger wrote:
I am a UW/PAC 12 fan first and foremost, but I’d like to think I’m speaking for the entire WBB community when I say that woman is a blight on her program and is absolutely #1 on the list of coaches who should lose their job.

They just lost to friggin Wake Forest IN DURHAM. That’s not OK. Can we start a petition, or something?

Not sure why an underachieving Duke WBB is an issue of concern for the entire WBB community. Duke will do what’s best for Duke.


Just like when y'all had trouble at your school, all fans of women's basketball should want the program cleaned up. It's about respect for women athletes and standing up when they are disrespected. Duke is absolutely not "doing what's best for Duke." For whatever reason, they're catering to a very bad coach and paying her a cool mil per year. This does not reflect well on Duke.
Sorry for duplicate post.



_________________
Stepping out of a triangle into striped light - Everything is wrong, at the same time it's RIGHT!
ucbart



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 1582
Location: New York


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 11:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Howee wrote:
lynxmania wrote:
PickledGinger wrote:
I have never disagreed with your argument. Abby Waner was my favorite player in the country during her Sophomore year under Goestinkors. McCallie completely ruined her as a player the next year and I heve never forgiven her for that.

She's a terrible in-game coach, can't teach offense, and doesn't develop her players up to their pro potential (see: Jasmine Thomas, Karima Christmas-Kelly, probably Leaonna Odom). Do. Not. Like.


Same. I was a huge Duke fan for the longest time and Waner was one of my favorite players and then she just was ruined and I haven't cared of Duke and JPM since. End the suffering.


I still remember that time period well....back to back FFs under GG....Lindsay, Ali, and Abby rocked. I was a huge fan of Duke's. They were on track to rival TN's and UConn's dynastic status. Crying or Very sad

Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Of COURRRRRRRRSSSSSSSSSEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Consistent, Mr Fair Weather Fan, if nothing else. Wink


Hey. I've been a consistent fan of YOURS, despite your steady decline. Laughing Wink Wink


HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! That was hilarious.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 10153



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 12:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What's really sad about Duke's decline is that NCAA women's basketball needs nationally recognized programs that basketball fans can identify -- and thus have some kind of reaction to when results are posted.

Parity is great, but it then requires a fan to make an effort to keep up and recall if Arkansas is good now, or why Notre Dame is losing games against teams it used to beat handily.

Duke was one of those programs fans could react to, and now it's irrelevant, primarily because the school doesn't really value the program that much. So really, this isn't about McCallie but rather Duke's lack of interest in having a nationally relevant team. Until that changes, Duke will remain just another team, like Tennessee and Texas, and the game itself will suffer as a result.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12325
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 3:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ucbart wrote:
Howee wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Howee wrote:
lynxmania wrote:
PickledGinger wrote:
I have never disagreed with your argument. Abby Waner was my favorite player in the country during her Sophomore year under Goestinkors. McCallie completely ruined her as a player the next year and I heve never forgiven her for that.

She's a terrible in-game coach, can't teach offense, and doesn't develop her players up to their pro potential (see: Jasmine Thomas, Karima Christmas-Kelly, probably Leaonna Odom). Do. Not. Like.


Same. I was a huge Duke fan for the longest time and Waner was one of my favorite players and then she just was ruined and I haven't cared of Duke and JPM since. End the suffering.


I still remember that time period well....back to back FFs under GG....Lindsay, Ali, and Abby rocked. I was a huge fan of Duke's. They were on track to rival TN's and UConn's dynastic status. Crying or Very sad

Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Of COURRRRRRRRSSSSSSSSSEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Consistent, Mr Fair Weather Fan, if nothing else. Wink


Hey. I've been a consistent fan of YOURS, despite your steady decline. Laughing Wink Wink


HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! That was hilarious.


Gotta admit it...good one, Duckee! Wink

-------------------------------------

Punk, you'll get yours Thurs. Mad



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12325
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 3:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What's great is that Duke is battling at Lou and leads 47-46 early in the 4th.
JPM defenders will be inspired.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
Conway Gamecock



Joined: 23 Jan 2015
Posts: 848
Location: Here


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 6:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Smite the Blight...... Surprised


osubeavers



Joined: 07 Jan 2017
Posts: 88
Location: West Hills, Portland, OR


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 6:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
What's really sad about Duke's decline is that NCAA women's basketball needs nationally recognized programs that basketball fans can identify -- and thus have some kind of reaction to when results are posted.

Parity is great, but it then requires a fan to make an effort to keep up and recall if Arkansas is good now, or why Notre Dame is losing games against teams it used to beat handily.

Duke was one of those programs fans could react to, and now it's irrelevant, primarily because the school doesn't really value the program that much. So really, this isn't about McCallie but rather Duke's lack of interest in having a nationally relevant team. Until that changes, Duke will remain just another team, like Tennessee and Texas, and the game itself will suffer as a result.
Duke has never won a NC. has 2 second places and 2 other final four appearances. Don’t really see them as some type of touchstone program for NCAA WBB. I don’t wish them ill, far from it. But if they can’t get their act together I fail to see how that is “bad for WBB”.



_________________
Stepping out of a triangle into striped light - Everything is wrong, at the same time it's RIGHT!
patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2182
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 6:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

osubeavers wrote:
ClayK wrote:
What's really sad about Duke's decline is that NCAA women's basketball needs nationally recognized programs that basketball fans can identify -- and thus have some kind of reaction to when results are posted.

Parity is great, but it then requires a fan to make an effort to keep up and recall if Arkansas is good now, or why Notre Dame is losing games against teams it used to beat handily.

Duke was one of those programs fans could react to, and now it's irrelevant, primarily because the school doesn't really value the program that much. So really, this isn't about McCallie but rather Duke's lack of interest in having a nationally relevant team. Until that changes, Duke will remain just another team, like Tennessee and Texas, and the game itself will suffer as a result.
Duke has never won a NC. has 2 second places and 2 other final four appearances. Don’t really see them as some type of touchstone program for NCAA WBB. I don’t wish them ill, far from it. But if they can’t get their act together I fail to see how that is “bad for WBB”.


Yeah, I almost never disagree with Clay, but this time I do, and I agree with you. I think if one were to ask casual national hoops fans (who have at least passing familiarity with women's ball) to list the all-time classic heavy-hitting women's programs, I think most would get pretty far down the list before mentioning Duke (if they ever do). UConn, Tennessee and Stanford would be up at the top of that list probably, with Baylor and Notre Dame probably in the subsequent tier. MAYYYYBE Duke sneaks into the next grouping, but even that is kinda doubtful, IMO.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12532
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 8:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

patsweetpat wrote:
....MAYYYYBE Duke sneaks into the next grouping, but even that is kinda doubtful, IMO.


Laughing M'thinks yer youth is showing.

Not that you're mistaken about the current status of Duke's place in wbb herstory, BUTTTTT......Gail G had them on the cusp of dynastic greatness. And this was just a bit over a decade ago, not ancient history like Old Dominion or LA Tech.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2182
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 8:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm happy to be called a young whippersnapper at any time, by any person, for any reason.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12325
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/05/20 11:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
patsweetpat wrote:
....MAYYYYBE Duke sneaks into the next grouping, but even that is kinda doubtful, IMO.


Laughing M'thinks yer youth is showing.

Not that you're mistaken about the current status of Duke's place in wbb herstory, BUTTTTT......Gail G had them on the cusp of dynastic greatness. And this was just a bit over a decade ago, not ancient history like Old Dominion or LA Tech.



Was it Beard who proclaimed they were a dynasty?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
ucbart



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 1582
Location: New York


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 9:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
Howee wrote:
patsweetpat wrote:
....MAYYYYBE Duke sneaks into the next grouping, but even that is kinda doubtful, IMO.


Laughing M'thinks yer youth is showing.

Not that you're mistaken about the current status of Duke's place in wbb herstory, BUTTTTT......Gail G had them on the cusp of dynastic greatness. And this was just a bit over a decade ago, not ancient history like Old Dominion or LA Tech.



Was it Beard who proclaimed they were a dynasty?


I thought it was Gail. Barry? RAF?


Iluvacc



Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 2872



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 11:27 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ucbart wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Howee wrote:
patsweetpat wrote:
....MAYYYYBE Duke sneaks into the next grouping, but even that is kinda doubtful, IMO.


Laughing M'thinks yer youth is showing.

Not that you're mistaken about the current status of Duke's place in wbb herstory, BUTTTTT......Gail G had them on the cusp of dynastic greatness. And this was just a bit over a decade ago, not ancient history like Old Dominion or LA Tech.



Was it Beard who proclaimed they were a dynasty?


I thought it was Gail. Barry? RAF?


No, it was definitely one of the players, either Beard or Tillis.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5878
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 12:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Iluvacc wrote:
ucbart wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Howee wrote:
patsweetpat wrote:
....MAYYYYBE Duke sneaks into the next grouping, but even that is kinda doubtful, IMO.


Laughing M'thinks yer youth is showing.

Not that you're mistaken about the current status of Duke's place in wbb herstory, BUTTTTT......Gail G had them on the cusp of dynastic greatness. And this was just a bit over a decade ago, not ancient history like Old Dominion or LA Tech.



Was it Beard who proclaimed they were a dynasty?


I thought it was Gail. Barry? RAF?


No, it was definitely one of the players, either Beard or Tillis.


After Duke beat Tennessee in the 2002 Jimmy V Classic, Beard said the game was "like the beginning of our dynasty."

Was she wrong?

It depends on the definition of "dynasty". If we restrict that word only to winners of the national championship, that would include only eight schools since 1995 and raise longevity questions as to whether Purdue, Texas A&M or South Carolina have really been dynastic.

I'll suggest a different definition: Given that there are about 350 DI schools, any school that has been ranked in the top ten in a final poll or has reached the Sweet 16 -- consistently for, say, about 10 years -- has been dynastic. As to Duke, this definition has been met in the last 10 of Goestenkors' 15 years (1998-2007) and in 10 of McCallie's 12 years (not including 2016 and 2019).

This is consistently "dynastic" under the proposed definition. GG's dynasty was stronger than JPM's, and there is certainly evidence that the Duke dynasty is now crumbling.
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 5618
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 1:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Duke a dynasty? Maybe not, but it was definitely a marquee program during the Goestenkors years, just as certain other programs that are not dynasties but are still very prestigious and recognizable were or are: back then, ODU, Texas, Texas Tech perhaps, USC; today, such rising programs as Oregon (which is arguably not yet a dynasty), Oregon State, Arizona, Louisville, NC State. Duke is no longer on the list. JPM tore down the marquee all by herself.



_________________
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
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2398
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 2:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
today, such rising programs as Oregon (which is arguably not yet a dynasty), Oregon State, Arizona, Louisville, NC State.


I would argue that Arizona doesn't belong in the same breath with those other 4 programs you listed. They haven't been to the NCAA's since 2005 but are definitely poised to return this year. I would say that Louisville has approached dynasty status more so than Oregon based on the number of years in a row they have been among the top 10 or so teams in the country and their Final 4 appearances.


mzonefan



Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 3410
Location: Ann Arbor, MI


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 2:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm perfectly happy to watch JPM flail. I suffered through a great many of Michigan's losses to Michigan State when she was there. Mr. Green


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 5618
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 2:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
today, such rising programs as Oregon (which is arguably not yet a dynasty), Oregon State, Arizona, Louisville, NC State.


I would argue that Arizona doesn't belong in the same breath with those other 4 programs you listed. They haven't been to the NCAA's since 2005 but are definitely poised to return this year. I would say that Louisville has approached dynasty status more so than Oregon based on the number of years in a row they have been among the top 10 or so teams in the country and their Final 4 appearances.


Apparently you you either didn't read, or MISread, what I wrote. I characterized them as rising programs, not dynasties. The only dynasties there are right now are Stanford, which is kind of up and down but pretty much stays there, UConn, and Notre Dame, and the latter two are in a slight down cycle at the moment. Oregon hasn't been at it long enough to be a dynasty. Get back to me when they've had 10 years at or near the top, please.



_________________
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: 12532
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/06/20 4:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
It depends on the definition of "dynasty"....I'll suggest a different definition: Given that there are about 350 DI schools, any school that has been ranked in the top ten in a final poll or has reached the Sweet 16 -- consistently for, say, about 10 years -- has been dynastic. As to Duke, this definition has been met in the last 10 of Goestenkors' 15 years (1998-2007) and in 10 of McCallie's 12 years (not including 2016 and 2019).

This is consistently "dynastic" under the proposed definition. GG's dynasty was stronger than JPM's, and there is certainly evidence that the Duke dynasty is now crumbling.


I'd agree with that, and yes, 'definitions' vary. I'd also add Baylor to that mix, given her 3 NCs spread over significant time frames. Stanford, UConn, TN, ND, ODU, LaTech? Absolutely. Duke certainly seems to have waved good-bye to its glory days. Reminds me a bit of USC.

In the next tier are the 'maybe/maybe nots/maybe, not-just-yet'.....L'ville, OR-State, OR, MD, NC-State. AZ's star is rising. What about UNC? They had a looong string of quality seasons, right?



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
PickledGinger



Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 523



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/20 3:16 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Regardless of the subjective definition of "dynasty", the objective fact is that JPM has and continues to underdevelop the hoards of elite talent that she somehow continues to recruit. I can only imagine that this is entirely because Duke is an elite academic school, and because the Athletics department in general has access to a shit-ton of Coach K money.

The mediocre performance of her top-ranked recruits throughout her career at Duke compared to the generally unexpected success of those same players in the WNBA...THAT is the real crime here. See: Jasmine Thomas, Krystal Thomas, Karima Christmas-Kelly, Elizabeth Williams, Haley Peters, Chelsea Gray.

There were 5 McCallie graduates on end-of-year WNBA rosters in 2019. That's as many as Tara Vanderveer. That's one more than Kim Mulkey. The only coaches who have produced more current pros than her are Geno Auriemma, Muffett McGraw, Dawn Staley, and Brenda Frese.

All of those coaches have National Championships. JoJo ain't come ANYWHERE close at Duke.

Sorry bout it. Somethin's gotta give.


readyAIMfire53



Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 5645
Location: Durham, NC


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/07/20 12:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PickledGinger wrote:
Regardless of the subjective definition of "dynasty", the objective fact is that JPM has and continues to underdevelop the hoards of elite talent that she somehow continues to recruit. I can only imagine that this is entirely because Duke is an elite academic school, and because the Athletics department in general has access to a shit-ton of Coach K money.

The mediocre performance of her top-ranked recruits throughout her career at Duke compared to the generally unexpected success of those same players in the WNBA...THAT is the real crime here. See: Jasmine Thomas, Krystal Thomas, Karima Christmas-Kelly, Elizabeth Williams, Haley Peters, Chelsea Gray.

There were 5 McCallie graduates on end-of-year WNBA rosters in 2019. That's as many as Tara Vanderveer. That's one more than Kim Mulkey. The only coaches who have produced more current pros than her are Geno Auriemma, Muffett McGraw, Dawn Staley, and Brenda Frese.

All of those coaches have National Championships. JoJo ain't come ANYWHERE close at Duke.

Sorry bout it. Somethin's gotta give.


The days of top recruits coming to play for JPM is at an end. A very abrupt end. Out of four recruits this year, one seems to be decent. The rest are bottom half of the ACC. There is ONE recruit signed for next year. Will probably get some tall bench fodder grad transfers/mid major transfers/jr college. The cupboard will be BARE when the new coach comes. But I bet the team will look better and play smarter with a new coach.

The first half vs Louisville, you could see what the last of the talented players can do. Any other coach would take this bunch and have them playing like that all game. But another JPM halftime speech brought out the usual doldrums and stagnation. Duke has to be the lowest scoring 3rd Q team in the country.



_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.

~rAf
mzonefan



Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 3410
Location: Ann Arbor, MI


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/20 1:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Is 14 points in a half an all-time low for Duke?


readyAIMfire53



Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 5645
Location: Durham, NC


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/20 8:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mzonefan wrote:
Is 14 points in a half an all-time low for Duke?


Duke is setting all kinds of records right now. The wrong kind of records. Clemson had not beat Duke since Jim Davis left. Almost 2 decades. Loo



_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.

~rAf
goforit77



Joined: 09 Jan 2015
Posts: 80



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/20 9:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

readyAIMfire53 wrote:
mzonefan wrote:
Is 14 points in a half an all-time low for Duke?


Duke is setting all kinds of records right now. The wrong kind of records. Clemson had not beat Duke since Jim Davis left. Almost 2 decades. Loo




I will take a loss in every single game if it means JPM will be gone....


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin