So, which is it?

[TheRealZeebart]

RCAJUN90?

haha.. nope

[CajunJeaux]

Uhhhhhhh, we need to bring Hammer51 out of mothballs.. He needs to be back here, NOW!!!

Z

Whoa, Hammer51...I remember that poster...he’d get owned these days

[ULvictory]

Whoa, Hammer51...I remember that poster...he’d get owned these days

Really?

[TheRealZeebart]

Whoa, Hammer51...I remember that poster...he’d get owned these days

Hmmmmm, I doubt it...

Z

[CajunEXPRESS]

There you go assuming again. I guess anything I counter you with sounds like I am content on winning games against bad competition. If you were busy reading here, you wouldn't think I'm content with anything we are currently doing in our MBB program. I don't want to be the teams you suggested, I want to be better than them. Loyola Chicago was likely a one hit wonder. George Mason has been a one hit wonder. I want to build a program that is fixed on winning. That breeds better recruiting, better coaching, resources and expectations. If you have a winning program with a winning culture, the post season success will come. I think a team that just wins a conference title over an 18 game home and away schedule is much more prepared to win the conference tournament. You aren't hoping to get lucky as you've been the best team over a longer period of time.

The funny thing is that I've been as big a critic of Marlin as anyone here. I don't feel the money we are paying him is justified, especially when looking at a lack of postseason success. I was hoping last year was a building block of consistency but its looking bleak in that department right now.

Out of curiosity, if we went 17-17 during the year but got hot, won the SBC tournament and went to the NCAA, would you consider that a successful season?

Going to the NCAA is always a gem in your crown. The gem isn’t a crown. Being .500 and being good for three games isn’t a successful season. Winning regular season titles on a regular basis yet not getting to the NCAA again is a gem without being a crown.

Thank goodness it’s absolutely isn’t ever an either, or. Listening to the Big Fish you’d think it is.

[ULvictory]

Out of curiosity, if we went 17-17 during the year but got hot, won the SBC tournament and went to the NCAA, would you consider that a successful season?

If we were to make the tournament, then yes. It would be successful due to publicity as well as noteriety across the country. I wouldn’t want to be .500 every year, though. Like you, I would love to win conference championships just as much as anyone. But which gets more recognition? NCAA appearances or Sun Belt Championships? Just look at Tech. They haven’t been to the dance since 1991.

[CajunJeaux]

Really?

What do millennials tweet...💯??

[zephyr]

If we were to make the tournament, then yes. It would be successful due to publicity as well as noteriety across the country. I wouldn’t want to be .500 every year, though. Like you, I would love to win conference championships just as much as anyone. But which gets more recognition? NCAA appearances or Sun Belt Championships? Just look at Tech. They haven’t been to the dance since 1991.

First off, there are a lot of teams that make the NCAA that you forget about. Look at all the notoriety that those appearances over the past 16-17 years have brought us. Again, you guys are looking at this from an all or none standpoint. I'm not saying that the NCAA is not a goal and should not be expected. I'm just saying that a focus on winning is going to bring those NCAA and NIT appearances.

A program that comes to mind that we don't compete with for kids but is built the right way is Harvard. Tommy Ammaker has been there 12 years. He has 6 regular season titles and 4 NCAA appearances and is now the standard in the Ivy league. He is able to recruit based on a winning tradition AND their ability to get to the big dance.

[zephyr]

Going to the NCAA is always a gem in your crown. The gem isn’t a crown. Being .500 and being good for three games isn’t a successful season. Winning regular season titles on a regular basis yet not getting to the NCAA again is a gem without being a crown.

Thank goodness it’s absolutely isn’t ever an either, or. Listening to the Big Fish you’d think it is.

Thank you

[zephyr]

How do you know I haven't spent any time here reading or perhaps posting under a different username? But hey, if you're content with winning 27 games a year against Loyola-New Orleans, Xavier, and Louisiana College, and losing in the semifinals of the Sunbelt Tournament, then perhaps you're of the same opinion that Arkansas St. gets up for our games because we "have the nicest gym." I want to be George Mason, Loyola-Chicago, and VCU. Not a team that gets Sunbelt regular season championship rings. Those are nice, I guess, but an invitation to the "Not Invited Tournament" doesn't do much for me. You're playing for second best. I'd take ten first round exits in the Big Dance to one deep run in the "Not Invited Tournament." We can agree to disagree on what "success" means. I don't seem to be alone in this line of thinking. UT-Arlington fired their coach last year for not making the tournament, regardless of how many regular season championships he has.

Scott Cross won 2 regular season titles and got to 1 NCAA in 13 years. He was fired because he just didn't win enough with the talent he's had come through there. I have no problem with it and hope we hold Marlin to the same standard.