Jimmy B vs. Andy Katz

Which, as you know, is why reporters frequently ask the question after the game, right? There are so many times in which it appears that a safety or corner blew coverage, when it was the other way around. But you don't know unless you ask. At which point, the Boeheims of the world blow a gasket.

A lot of these same questions are asked after victories as well as losses. I would imagine that everyone here except for Riptide, who instead supports soothing the losing coach, would agree that they are appropriate after each. Asking isn't necessarily challenging. Sometimes a question is just a question.

 

Wrong again, Whitman.
You're making false assumptions and assigning them to me.
Stop speaking for me. You have enough of a challenge thinking for yourself.

 

If a coach fucks up, he's the first to know it. Why rub his nose in it? The real experts are playing and coaching the games.

 

Second-guessing coaching decisions is walking a thin line, isn't it?

 

Maybe Boeheim was upset because esoteric media narratives like "leadership" and "clutch" really aren't that importatnt in sports. Run the offense and hope your shots fall. Good coaches spend a lot more time worrying about that then they do thinking about who is going to "step up" and "lead" with a minute left.

 

Have enjoyed this discussion and appreciate both points of view. However, I'm cannot equate college coaches with Obama or Boehner in importance.

 

You should consider defending your point of view if you don't want it mocked. Because right now, Dick Whitman is going off what you said (and expounding on it because you won't say anything more). And what you said was pretty fucking shallow, especially for someone in this profession.

 

For many of our posters, being polite to each other left the building a long time ago.

And Riptide is not one of the usual suspects.

 

Of course not. But that actually cuts against Riptide's stance, not in favor of it. We can challenge Obama, but we should back off of Jim fucking Boeheim, because his status is so lofty? Puh-leeze.

 

I think sometimes we're so worried about looking "stupid" to the rest of the people in the pack that we forget to ask the simple questions. Sometimes a simple, "what happened on that play?" can get a good, articulate answer out of a coach that you can use to actually explain what happened from the eyes of someone who knows a hell of a lot more about the subject matter than you do.

Sometimes the coach gives you a, "what the fuck do you think happened?" And you lick your wounds and move on. But I know I don't know as much about the ins and outs of the sports I cover as the coaches do. That's why I ask.

 

Well stated. And good to see ya back on the NHL thread.

 

I was covering an AAU game once and the coach who I covered sat down next to me and said, "OK, you just saw the same game I did, give me your impression of Player X vs. Player Y."

I was thrilled that he trusted me enough to ask, but the question made me uncomfortable." I tried to answer it as honestly as I could. I said, "I think Player Y has better raw talent, but Player X is more coachable and will probably be a better college player."

He opened his notebook and pointed to a note on Player Y and said with a laugh, "Great minds..." because he had written "not coachable" about Player Y.

He signed Player X who started for him for three or four seasons and has had a nice NBA career. He failed to sign Player Y, who was one and done in college and then went to the NBA where he's been an all-star for the majority of the last decade...