Thanks grammy - I'm glad I'm not imagining things . I  think I remember your disagreement with my choice of words in referring to the Millers as a " great" basketball family. That's as far as I got and I had to run off. Let me clarify. I meant "great" in terms of involvement, history, reputation, records, performance, etc. in the game of basketball. On the contrary, as I said, I have the very strong impression they feel entitled - that they believe they should always win, that the game owes them.

rogabee wrote:

Officer Dribble wrote:

Westender wrote:

 
Phil:
I know this is heresy in these times of "I want it and I want it now" , but  does anyone ever think of the word "loyalty" any more??

I have the same problem. The issue of feelings of entitlement was raised in an earlier post. I feel that there's a sense of entitlement that's ruining sports today. So TJ wanted to play at the "next level." I thought Duquesne gave him a scholarship worth some $100,000 so he could take Duquesne to the next level, not try it out for a couple of years & decide he was tired of it & needed to move on to a team that's already there. Duquesne wants to get to the next level, too. They're not just "there" to fill up the other schools' schedules. Meanwhile, TJ will "get" his NCAA Tournament appearance instead of earning one. Aaron Jackson was a better player & surely deserved to go to the NCAA as much as TJ. But Ajax stayed at Duquesne & almost single-handedly took 'em to within one win of the NCAA. He was loyal to the school that gave him the opportunity. It's too bad that for every player who thinks like Ajax, there's probably 10 who think like TJ.

Call me crazy, but I have no problems with the lack of loyalty of the players under the system that was in place here at Duquesne.  Perhaps some of this is personal bias from being a previous D1 athlete at DU, but here's my thoughts.

IMHO, if a coach/program shows loyalty to thier players, the loyalty should be also returned.  However, to me the coach virtually told his players, "If you can't cut it at the A-10 level...drop down and I'm revoking your scholarship at Duquesne."  The list of the Shawntez Patterson, Alex Milovic, Scott Grote, etc. I don't see a problem with a player saying back, "I can compete for a team with a shot at a national title.  I'm transferring."  TJ to me gave up on his team much the same way Everhart gave up on guys like Shawntez Patterson. 

If a coach doesn't show loyalty to his guys and forces transfers for poor play, why should it be reversed and have the players show blind loyalty to the coach and not transfer up when they play well?

You make a good point, although I don't recall Grote being pushed out. Unfortunately, most coaches do this today. It's one of the things I don't like about big time college sports.

duq81 wrote:

rogabee wrote:

Officer Dribble wrote:

I have the same problem. The issue of feelings of entitlement was raised in an earlier post. I feel that there's a sense of entitlement that's ruining sports today. So TJ wanted to play at the "next level." I thought Duquesne gave him a scholarship worth some $100,000 so he could take Duquesne to the next level, not try it out for a couple of years & decide he was tired of it & needed to move on to a team that's already there. Duquesne wants to get to the next level, too. They're not just "there" to fill up the other schools' schedules. Meanwhile, TJ will "get" his NCAA Tournament appearance instead of earning one. Aaron Jackson was a better player & surely deserved to go to the NCAA as much as TJ. But Ajax stayed at Duquesne & almost single-handedly took 'em to within one win of the NCAA. He was loyal to the school that gave him the opportunity. It's too bad that for every player who thinks like Ajax, there's probably 10 who think like TJ.

Call me crazy, but I have no problems with the lack of loyalty of the players under the system that was in place here at Duquesne.  Perhaps some of this is personal bias from being a previous D1 athlete at DU, but here's my thoughts.

IMHO, if a coach/program shows loyalty to thier players, the loyalty should be also returned.  However, to me the coach virtually told his players, "If you can't cut it at the A-10 level...drop down and I'm revoking your scholarship at Duquesne."  The list of the Shawntez Patterson, Alex Milovic, Scott Grote, etc. I don't see a problem with a player saying back, "I can compete for a team with a shot at a national title.  I'm transferring."  TJ to me gave up on his team much the same way Everhart gave up on guys like Shawntez Patterson. 

If a coach doesn't show loyalty to his guys and forces transfers for poor play, why should it be reversed and have the players show blind loyalty to the coach and not transfer up when they play well?

You make a good point, although I don't recall Grote being pushed out. Unfortunately, most coaches do this today. It's one of the things I don't like about big time college sports.

Rogabee, you mean under the system that is in place.  I recall a tweet from serveral players last spring including Marvin Binney saying they weren't going to stay where they were not wanted.  Don't want to turn this into a Ron - Ferry discussion just pointing this out.  College Basketball is a business, and as a bisiness should be measured by results and performance within the rules.  My biggest problem with the TJ transfer is the question of if there was any tampering by the Millers.  I recall after the DU Arizona game that it was reported that Sean Miller said to TJ you can play at any level.  He might as well have said DU sucks give me a call.  There are other things I head that I won't go into, but I am pissed at the way Amodio handled the Ron situation and the release of TJ that included Arizona.

CLK wrote:

Rogabee, you mean under the system that is in place.  I recall a tweet from serveral players last spring including Marvin Binney saying they weren't going to stay where they were not wanted.  Don't want to turn this into a Ron - Ferry discussion just pointing this out.  College Basketball is a business, and as a bisiness should be measured by results and performance within the rules.  My biggest problem with the TJ transfer is the question of if there was any tampering by the Millers.  I recall after the DU Arizona game that it was reported that Sean Miller said to TJ you can play at any level.  He might as well have said DU sucks give me a call.  There are other things I head that I won't go into, but I am pissed at the way Amodio handled the Ron situation and the release of TJ that included Arizona.

I understand fully and for the most part agree.  There are some successful programs out there that don't boot players (or at least not regularly).  In the A-10, look at Richmond, who after Mooney's first year has only one transfer in eight years when Mooney has had guys on the bench that he knew would never see action.  I've always questioned in my mind whether that type of loyalty is what kept Geriot around after his ACL tear for his fifth year when he could have transferred or keeping guys like Kevin Anderson and Justin Harper, both NBA players.  I also fully understand players not wanting to stay where they aren't wanted and the players wanting to transfer out and the two-way street there.

I didn't like the way the firing of RE was handled either, and posted as much.

rogabee wrote:

Call me crazy, but I have no problems with the lack of loyalty of the players under the system that was in place here at Duquesne.  Perhaps some of this is personal bias from being a previous D1 athlete at DU, but here's my thoughts.

IMHO, if a coach/program shows loyalty to thier players, the loyalty should be also returned.  However, to me the coach virtually told his players, "If you can't cut it at the A-10 level...drop down and I'm revoking your scholarship at Duquesne."  The list of the Shawntez Patterson, Alex Milovic, Scott Grote, etc. I don't see a problem with a player saying back, "I can compete for a team with a shot at a national title.  I'm transferring."  TJ to me gave up on his team much the same way Everhart gave up on guys like Shawntez Patterson. 

If a coach doesn't show loyalty to his guys and forces transfers for poor play, why should it be reversed and have the players show blind loyalty to the coach and not transfer up when they play well?

My recollection is that Grote left on his own, citing homesickness.

As for other players dismissed, what were the circumstances & how was it done? I'd have a problem with it if a kid is chased away just to make room for a better player. But if the coach did his best to coach the kid up & it wasn't working, there's nothing wrong with giving the kid an honest evaluation & suggesting that he might be better served in a lesser conference, especially if the coach then works to place the player in a good situation. After all, evaluating a recruit isn't an exact science, particularly in the A-10 where you get kids who are "projects," & thus mistaken evaluations are a possibility. Do we have any evidence that Everhart didn't first try his best with any of the kids who were asked to leave the program?

Last year I got the impression that Ferry didn't have the slightest interest in working with any of the players he inherited, all of whom have left, save one. I think that theory is corroborated by the fact that so many of 'em regressed last year. But Ferry did work to place them in situations where they're playing basketball under scholarships, so he at least deserves credit for that.

Westender wrote:

duq81 wrote:

rogabee wrote:

I didn't like the way the firing of RE was handled either, and posted as much.

Sloppy and unprofessional is a good description for it. That said, I separate the actual firing from the way Ron was treated. We may disagree with it, but you can make a decent case for making a coaching change at the time. You can't make a case for the way it was handled.

As for Fred Moon, that was a case of Mike Rice seeing something in him, where Cinicola basically saw Fred as a scrub.

 
'81 - yes, you could make a case for making a coaching change at the time RE was let go. I am an ardent supporter of Ron, have made no secret of that on this board and I agree with that. But, he was a great ambassador for the program and the University, was very well liked by the public, fans, alumni, former players and the media, wanted to stay here and most importantly did enough here in my opinion to be given the chance to save his job. I know you and many others here might say he would have failed and lost his job the next year anyway, but allowing him to play it out with his recruits would have granted him the respect and opportunity to save his job that I think he earned with the record he had here. Greg Amodio denied him that opportunity because of personal differences, and in the process embarrassed, insulted and possibly made it impossible or at least very difficult for Ron to get another D1 coaching job.

Westender, some of our friends on the board hate when I do this, but the parallels between the RE firing, and that of Dave Wanstedt at Pitt are so similar that I have to laugh when I read the posts about it on the Pitt football boards. Steve Pedersen is probably about as well loved as GA is, and like RE, Wanny is a very personable, and well liked guy. Also. like RE, the team won games, but couldn't get to that elusive "next level". There were folks calling for his head before he got fired, and there are those who are still very angry about the firing, and how it was handled, and are counting the days until Pedersen gets the axe. These people harp on every "mistake" Chryst makes, just like some on this board are constant critics of Ferry. The reason I posted this, is just to show that this stuff happens all over. It's not just us.