OSU's coach and Bennett ball
- Thread starter ttowncoug
- Start date
Re: With Nic Witherill, Michael Hartune, Anthony Brown
One thing to take note of, just because a team slows the pace and focuses hard on defense does not mean they are playing "Bennett Ball" granted it would have probably been an easier transition for some of the players we had but Klay thrived under Bones system and really so did Casto. Also for all the talk about Bone running and gunning we had a painfully slow pace many of this years. IMO part of his problem was he tried to adapt his game to the skills of his players but was out of his element coaching that kind of basketball. I think he will regret not playing the game the way he knew how to coach it and win or lose go out doing what you know. Plus playing a certain style attracts certain types of players. Once he started playing slow he stopped attracting the types of players he needed. I thnk by sticking with what he knows Kent will be able to recruit players to WSU who want to play that style. Just one mans opinion though!
One thing to take note of, just because a team slows the pace and focuses hard on defense does not mean they are playing "Bennett Ball" granted it would have probably been an easier transition for some of the players we had but Klay thrived under Bones system and really so did Casto. Also for all the talk about Bone running and gunning we had a painfully slow pace many of this years. IMO part of his problem was he tried to adapt his game to the skills of his players but was out of his element coaching that kind of basketball. I think he will regret not playing the game the way he knew how to coach it and win or lose go out doing what you know. Plus playing a certain style attracts certain types of players. Once he started playing slow he stopped attracting the types of players he needed. I thnk by sticking with what he knows Kent will be able to recruit players to WSU who want to play that style. Just one mans opinion though!
Re: With Nic Witherill, Michael Hartune, Anthony Brown
Btw, Patrick Simon was part of Bone's 2010 class, along with DKD, Aden and Winston. Yes, he committed to the Bennetts at, what, 15, but Bone didn't have to honor the offer. In '09, Bone inherited Thames, Motum, Moore and Brown.. The year before that, one in which your brain can retrieve only Harthun and Witherill, there was Capers, Thompson, Casto, and Watson, who had athleticism but washed out.
And how many point guards did Bone bring in during his glorious reign?
This post was edited on 2/6 12:46 PM by YakiCoug
I wondered when you were going to barf that one up again.
Btw, Patrick Simon was part of Bone's 2010 class, along with DKD, Aden and Winston. Yes, he committed to the Bennetts at, what, 15, but Bone didn't have to honor the offer. In '09, Bone inherited Thames, Motum, Moore and Brown.. The year before that, one in which your brain can retrieve only Harthun and Witherill, there was Capers, Thompson, Casto, and Watson, who had athleticism but washed out.
And how many point guards did Bone bring in during his glorious reign?
This post was edited on 2/6 12:46 PM by YakiCoug
Simons never worked out at WSU but he is having a very fine start to his pro career averaging just under 12 pts and 6 reb a game as a starter on a German A league team which should be somewhere in the neighborhood of $100,000 a year not to bad by my standards. My belated point is some players just don't fit certain systems but thrive in others.
This post was edited on 2/6 7:22 PM by jourdand
This post was edited on 2/6 7:22 PM by jourdand
Re: With Nic Witherill, Michael Hartune, Anthony Brown
Ed is an apologist for the horrific Bone regime.
He also apparently doesn't like Tony because he actually won games.
Ed is an apologist for the horrific Bone regime.
He also apparently doesn't like Tony because he actually won games.
I am sorry How...I thought this was about how the OSU coach
would have perpetuated the Bennett ball andwould have gone to several more NCAA tourneys.
Bone got his chance. Didn't get it done. What is to apologize. He clearly made a critical error in playing Moore more than Thames, and I guess that was the impetus for Thames quitting.
But regardless of what I like about Bone, the four names I mentioned where not Harmeling, Cowgill, Low and WEaver. That class caused a problem with WU.
And even Bennetts last year with Rochestie, Baynes and Motum, Thompson and Casto they were 7-11 and didn't go to the NCAA.
But maybe you feel Hartune is a solid replacement for Baynes, Brown for Harmeling, and Witherill for Rochestie. I would beg to differ with you.
I like Tony just fine. I wish he never left.
would have perpetuated the Bennett ball andwould have gone to several more NCAA tourneys.
Bone got his chance. Didn't get it done. What is to apologize. He clearly made a critical error in playing Moore more than Thames, and I guess that was the impetus for Thames quitting.
But regardless of what I like about Bone, the four names I mentioned where not Harmeling, Cowgill, Low and WEaver. That class caused a problem with WU.
And even Bennetts last year with Rochestie, Baynes and Motum, Thompson and Casto they were 7-11 and didn't go to the NCAA.
But maybe you feel Hartune is a solid replacement for Baynes, Brown for Harmeling, and Witherill for Rochestie. I would beg to differ with you.
I like Tony just fine. I wish he never left.
Re: I am sorry How...I thought this was about how the OSU coach
One more thing, Thames transferred at the end of the season. I don't consider that "quitting", as you put it. If anything, Bone quit on Thames by choosing the cancer-causing Reggie Moore over him, IMO.
Sorry for rehashing this tired old topic....but I don't buy your argument.
Glad Cougar
Cougs went 8-10 that year, not 7-11. You make that mistake year after year and refuse to learn the actual record....and I keep correcting you. (I know, it's not a big deal...but why not try to be accurate?) Also, are you saying Harthun (not Hartune, but you always get that wrong too) was supposed to be our big man replacing Baynes? He was a guard and I do believe Tony recruited Motum to be a frontcourt player. He ended up being a pretty good recruit. Anthony Brown for Harmeling? Daven graduated with Low, Weaver, and Cowgill, well before Bone arrived. Witheril for Rochestie? Nic was not a point guard. Tony recruited a kid named Thames to play PG. You like to cherry pick the ones Tony missed on, that's fine. But, personally, I think Tony left enough of a program for us to NOT finish in last place in Bone's first year and a good enough core to reach the NCAA tournament that next year (left him an NBA all-star for heaven's sake). Bone made his own mess of a program that was very competitive when he arrived. Now, he has put Ernie Kent in a hole that will be hard to crawl out of.
One more thing, Thames transferred at the end of the season. I don't consider that "quitting", as you put it. If anything, Bone quit on Thames by choosing the cancer-causing Reggie Moore over him, IMO.
Sorry for rehashing this tired old topic....but I don't buy your argument.
Glad Cougar
Re: I am sorry How...I thought this was about how the OSU coach
Yes, the same tired Ed posts, again and again (he even repeats his mistakes). But it's nice we have Ed to enlighten us to the fact Bone was a disaster. No one would ever have figured that out without Mr. Repetition.
Glad....you are correct...8-10 not 7-11....I stand corrected. And that
changes the discussion how? They had a losing record with Thompson, Low, Baynes, Casto....why would you not expect them to lose when the system changed and they had zero offensive threat?
Yes, they finished in 10th, and how many points were they from being in 5th? 15? Do you remember the Oregon game? What happened to cause them to lose?
If you lined up 100 coaches and asked them to choose between Thames and Moore without regard for their off court stuff, I would be willing to wager 90% would have picked Moore. Moore as a freshman was able to generate points. He was a fabulous offensive player. Bone had no way of knowing Moore would like pot more than he liked playing bball.
First year adjustments are hard. Look no further than Leach. Do you believe he is a worse coach than Wulff? Yet he lost more games in his first year than the guy who we fired did in his last year. When I see a team that lost so many two point games in that first season I don't look at coaching, I look at youth and leadership. They were young.
As for Thames, kid wanted the ball in his hand at all times. He averaged 17 minutes a game, I think Moore average 29. The following year Thames would have averaged about 30.
In hindsight I bet Bone wish he never heard of Reggie Moore. I bet he wish he started Thames and Thames stayed. But thames quit/left. I say quit because of the reason he left. You say he left. In either case, he didn't smoke so much weed to get kicked off the team. He didn't have Moores injury problems.
But Bone was close to having his team make the NCAA tourney twice.
No, I get Michael H is not Baynes DIRECT replacement. But the level of talent of Harmeling, Weaver, Varem, Low, Forrest, Clark, Cowgill, Baynes is much different than Witherill, Michael H, Brown, Simons, and several others. But that doesn't change the fact there is an adjustment period, a time needed to get rid of those players as they are not Pac 10 players. If you thought the OSu coach could come in and win or make it to 8-10 or close to that with Motum, Thompson, Capers, Casto and losing Baynes and rochestie I think you are mistaken.
In terms of coaching, I think the fact Thompson sure thrived as did Motum I would suspect Bone wasn't so far over his head.
changes the discussion how? They had a losing record with Thompson, Low, Baynes, Casto....why would you not expect them to lose when the system changed and they had zero offensive threat?
Yes, they finished in 10th, and how many points were they from being in 5th? 15? Do you remember the Oregon game? What happened to cause them to lose?
If you lined up 100 coaches and asked them to choose between Thames and Moore without regard for their off court stuff, I would be willing to wager 90% would have picked Moore. Moore as a freshman was able to generate points. He was a fabulous offensive player. Bone had no way of knowing Moore would like pot more than he liked playing bball.
First year adjustments are hard. Look no further than Leach. Do you believe he is a worse coach than Wulff? Yet he lost more games in his first year than the guy who we fired did in his last year. When I see a team that lost so many two point games in that first season I don't look at coaching, I look at youth and leadership. They were young.
As for Thames, kid wanted the ball in his hand at all times. He averaged 17 minutes a game, I think Moore average 29. The following year Thames would have averaged about 30.
In hindsight I bet Bone wish he never heard of Reggie Moore. I bet he wish he started Thames and Thames stayed. But thames quit/left. I say quit because of the reason he left. You say he left. In either case, he didn't smoke so much weed to get kicked off the team. He didn't have Moores injury problems.
But Bone was close to having his team make the NCAA tourney twice.
No, I get Michael H is not Baynes DIRECT replacement. But the level of talent of Harmeling, Weaver, Varem, Low, Forrest, Clark, Cowgill, Baynes is much different than Witherill, Michael H, Brown, Simons, and several others. But that doesn't change the fact there is an adjustment period, a time needed to get rid of those players as they are not Pac 10 players. If you thought the OSu coach could come in and win or make it to 8-10 or close to that with Motum, Thompson, Capers, Casto and losing Baynes and rochestie I think you are mistaken.
In terms of coaching, I think the fact Thompson sure thrived as did Motum I would suspect Bone wasn't so far over his head.
Re: Glad....you are correct...8-10 not 7-11....I stand corrected. And that
This post was edited on 2/9 12:55 PM by Glad Cougar
This post was edited on 2/9 12:55 PM by Glad Cougar
Stickler....
How many did Thompson average a night as a soph? How consistent was he? Yes, Casto could score 12 a night, he could also score 4. Thames was a 6 point a game player his freshman year.
But add up the points. Thompson has 15, Casto 8, Motum 8, Thames 8. That is 39. Even with Bennett's defense that doesn't get it done.
That team had no one to create a shot. They couldn't dump it into a big man to get doubled then kick it out for an open J. Thames wasn't good at getting to the rim to that point. That is why Moore played.
In terms of talking why Bone failed, there are two discussions. Bone ultimately failed because he did choose Moore and he didn't get the seattle players he thought he could get. The reason was to play Moore was sound, but he failed Bone.
Short term he failed because of inexperience and no offense, thus went to Moore. Long term he failed because he didn't win. But that wasn't the discussion. The discussion was about whether a coach could take over a team that lost rochestie and baynes that finished 8-10 and could have made a run at the NCAA tourneys the following two years of Tony's departure.
Yes, if Moore or the PG made their FT's down the stretch in seasn one and season two, we probably would have made the NCAA tourney twice. And yes, several plays here or there for Baynes and Orchesties team they would have gone to the NCAA tourney. But that didn't mean Tony left this team with experienced scores and players. Yes, there were nice parts, but the team he inherited from dad vastly different than the one he left behind.
How many did Thompson average a night as a soph? How consistent was he? Yes, Casto could score 12 a night, he could also score 4. Thames was a 6 point a game player his freshman year.
But add up the points. Thompson has 15, Casto 8, Motum 8, Thames 8. That is 39. Even with Bennett's defense that doesn't get it done.
That team had no one to create a shot. They couldn't dump it into a big man to get doubled then kick it out for an open J. Thames wasn't good at getting to the rim to that point. That is why Moore played.
In terms of talking why Bone failed, there are two discussions. Bone ultimately failed because he did choose Moore and he didn't get the seattle players he thought he could get. The reason was to play Moore was sound, but he failed Bone.
Short term he failed because of inexperience and no offense, thus went to Moore. Long term he failed because he didn't win. But that wasn't the discussion. The discussion was about whether a coach could take over a team that lost rochestie and baynes that finished 8-10 and could have made a run at the NCAA tourneys the following two years of Tony's departure.
Yes, if Moore or the PG made their FT's down the stretch in seasn one and season two, we probably would have made the NCAA tourney twice. And yes, several plays here or there for Baynes and Orchesties team they would have gone to the NCAA tourney. But that didn't mean Tony left this team with experienced scores and players. Yes, there were nice parts, but the team he inherited from dad vastly different than the one he left behind.
You are changing the argument when you introduce the team that Tony inherited from his dad. I would never argue that Bone inherited a group as good as that. But I maintain, despite their inexperience, the group Bone inherited was a good core. By the way, Klay Thompson averaged 19.6 ppg as a sophomore....so there's half of the 39 points you mentioned from the group of guys Tony gave Ken. That's more than the 15 ppg you figured. Casto averaged 10.7, Koprovica averaged 8.9, Capers 6.9, and Thames 4.9. That doesn't count Reggie Moore, of course, since Tony did not recruit him. But I add all that up and come to 51 ppg, not 39 ppg. It also doesn't factor anyone else on the team, including the 12.7 ppg from Moore. The point is, there were enough scorers on that team to be more than the "zero offensive threat" you referred to. In fact, that team, with all those zero threats Tony left Bone averaged 71 ppg...an average that was better than all but one of the 5 years Bone coached that team and just 1 ppg less than the NIT Final Four team in year #2.
To the crux of the discussion, we don't know if Tinkle or anyone else would have done any better than Bone did in his first year. I'm guessing there are some coaches out there who would have kept us out of the cellar and perhaps would have maintained a competitive program rather than let it die on the vine. But again, it's all speculation. What we do know, however, is that Ken Bone failed, his team got worse after year #2 and bottomed out once all the Bennett recruits were out of the program.
For the record, I was pulling for Ken Bone to succeed...as all Cougars fans should, no matter who coaches. I never expected him to have the success TB did but did feel it was reasonable to finish in the upper half of the conference at least once in 5 years. It didn't happen, and by early last year....I joined a lot of folks in hoping for a change.
Glad Cougar
To the crux of the discussion, we don't know if Tinkle or anyone else would have done any better than Bone did in his first year. I'm guessing there are some coaches out there who would have kept us out of the cellar and perhaps would have maintained a competitive program rather than let it die on the vine. But again, it's all speculation. What we do know, however, is that Ken Bone failed, his team got worse after year #2 and bottomed out once all the Bennett recruits were out of the program.
For the record, I was pulling for Ken Bone to succeed...as all Cougars fans should, no matter who coaches. I never expected him to have the success TB did but did feel it was reasonable to finish in the upper half of the conference at least once in 5 years. It didn't happen, and by early last year....I joined a lot of folks in hoping for a change.
Glad Cougar
Nothing fell into place...Moore over Thames. Logically made sense.
Thames leaving after year one, Casto and Thompson leaving after year two with Bone. Not sure any coach at WSU had one if not two players leaving early for professional ball. Plus Thompson getting busted right before the last game against UCLA, which probably puts us in the tourney if they win didn't help.
Glad, you watched Low, Cowgill and the rest lose under Dick Bennett year three. Why? Dick Bennett said there was a pattern at every stop he made in that year three in the rebuild was worse than year two. When I say pattern, that is what happened.
My guess is after year one you clear out the dead weight, year two you recruit young players, year three they get signicant playing time, and year four they are mature enough to hit key foul shots etc. They learn to make game winning plays.
Of all the guys you mentioned, when the game is on the line, which Bball games are in general, who do you want to have the ball with a lead that will knock down his free throws. I will tell you what I 100% believe....if Taylor R is on that squad ther eis no question in my mind they do win those close games, they do finish in 5th. The problem with that team is they didn't finish. They didn't handle pressure and the press, and they didn't hit their free throws.
Thames leaving after year one, Casto and Thompson leaving after year two with Bone. Not sure any coach at WSU had one if not two players leaving early for professional ball. Plus Thompson getting busted right before the last game against UCLA, which probably puts us in the tourney if they win didn't help.
Glad, you watched Low, Cowgill and the rest lose under Dick Bennett year three. Why? Dick Bennett said there was a pattern at every stop he made in that year three in the rebuild was worse than year two. When I say pattern, that is what happened.
My guess is after year one you clear out the dead weight, year two you recruit young players, year three they get signicant playing time, and year four they are mature enough to hit key foul shots etc. They learn to make game winning plays.
Of all the guys you mentioned, when the game is on the line, which Bball games are in general, who do you want to have the ball with a lead that will knock down his free throws. I will tell you what I 100% believe....if Taylor R is on that squad ther eis no question in my mind they do win those close games, they do finish in 5th. The problem with that team is they didn't finish. They didn't handle pressure and the press, and they didn't hit their free throws.
It's been fun going back and forth on this, Ed. The last thing I'll say about your latest comment is that if Thompson and Casto were good enough to go pro after their junior years, that's a pretty good duo to inherit as a head coach, even if they were just sophomores when Bone arrived. Certainly tends to counter the argument that Tony didn't leave much in the cupboard.
Glad Cougar
Glad Cougar
Glad...I guess it is all relative...Never saw two players, one who is
really athletic but had huge holes in his game beat a team of five with really effective PG play. I said Brown, Harthun, Witherill, Simons etc were huge misses. Thames transferirng out made it more difficult.
If Bone inherited what Tony inheroted and dropped the ball I would agree with the original premise that OSU's coach could have come in and continued what Tony had in his first two years.
really athletic but had huge holes in his game beat a team of five with really effective PG play. I said Brown, Harthun, Witherill, Simons etc were huge misses. Thames transferirng out made it more difficult.
If Bone inherited what Tony inheroted and dropped the ball I would agree with the original premise that OSU's coach could have come in and continued what Tony had in his first two years.
Re: Glad...I guess it is all relative...Never saw two players, one who is
FYI, Tinkle came into the OSU gig with no, I repeat, no starters left over from the Robinson era. He is doing what he is doing with leftover reserves and GP II. Ostensibly, a much worse scenario than Mr. Bone inherited. Thanks for your attention, CougEd, and, if you can spin that bit of info in favor of Bone than you will put Houdini to shame.
FYI, Tinkle came into the OSU gig with no, I repeat, no starters left over from the Robinson era. He is doing what he is doing with leftover reserves and GP II. Ostensibly, a much worse scenario than Mr. Bone inherited. Thanks for your attention, CougEd, and, if you can spin that bit of info in favor of Bone than you will put Houdini to shame.
Re: Glad...I guess it is all relative...Never saw two players, one who is
I think that many look back at what Tony inherited and now consider that group a sure thing in terms of success. That is only because we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. I mean, of course they were going to go to two NCAA tournaments! Right? Well, not really. No one at the time was predicting that that group would finish in 2nd place in the conference in Tony's first season. In fact, that team was picked by the pundits to finish in last place prior to their stunning performance in Tony's first season as HC. I don't recall a single WSU fan saying at the time "with that very excellent group of players, we will see historically good results the next two seasons".
The point being that coaching matters. Bone squandered away a good core of players and also failed to recruit good replacements, which is why he was fired. Even if he had been a good recruiter, he was a poor coach at this level. Any coach who is good will succeed at WSU...even with our built in disadvantages.
I think that many look back at what Tony inherited and now consider that group a sure thing in terms of success. That is only because we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. I mean, of course they were going to go to two NCAA tournaments! Right? Well, not really. No one at the time was predicting that that group would finish in 2nd place in the conference in Tony's first season. In fact, that team was picked by the pundits to finish in last place prior to their stunning performance in Tony's first season as HC. I don't recall a single WSU fan saying at the time "with that very excellent group of players, we will see historically good results the next two seasons".
The point being that coaching matters. Bone squandered away a good core of players and also failed to recruit good replacements, which is why he was fired. Even if he had been a good recruiter, he was a poor coach at this level. Any coach who is good will succeed at WSU...even with our built in disadvantages.
I'll bite...why did Bennett go 8-10 if he can coach and he had two NBA
Baynes and Thompson, a guy who left early, Casto, a PG had three years of starting experience and plays overseas and they were 8-10. And you thought they would be better the following year? For some reason that doesn't compute with me.
Baynes and Thompson, a guy who left early, Casto, a PG had three years of starting experience and plays overseas and they were 8-10. And you thought they would be better the following year? For some reason that doesn't compute with me.
Not what I asked....I simply asked the question why with more talent
did he not win? You point to inadequacies because of a base left by Bennett, and yet Bennett didn't have a winning season with a better team than he left behind. It goes to the question why would you expect a different result when Baynes and rochestie who were the glue had just graduated?
did he not win? You point to inadequacies because of a base left by Bennett, and yet Bennett didn't have a winning season with a better team than he left behind. It goes to the question why would you expect a different result when Baynes and rochestie who were the glue had just graduated?
Re: Not what I asked....I simply asked the question why with more talent
I expected a Tournament appearance in year 2 and I felt that they under performed. What we do know for sure is Bone's last year was some of the worst basketball we have seen in Pullman including the Graham years. Has he found another gig?
Re: Not what I asked....I simply asked the question why with more talent
I expected a tourney bid year two as well. I really thing Klay getting in trouble for the UCLA game costs us the bid.
Last year was bad, no question. But I do remember comparable years in the Graham and Sampson years. I do remember seeing 1-17 in Kelvin's third year as a head coach, 6th with the program.
I expected a tourney bid year two as well. I really thing Klay getting in trouble for the UCLA game costs us the bid.
Last year was bad, no question. But I do remember comparable years in the Graham and Sampson years. I do remember seeing 1-17 in Kelvin's third year as a head coach, 6th with the program.
Re: Not what I asked....I simply asked the question why with more talent
Had the right coach been in place to take advantage of their skills, the likes of Capers, Koprivica and Thames could have been utilized to their maximum, defensively, to go along with promising sophomores Thompson and Casto, to form a potent team. I am pretty sure a coach like Tinkle, who values defense, would have seen the promise of such a core group and enabled them to succeed, much like he has with the much more woefully talented crew he inherited from Robinson.
Had the right coach been in place to take advantage of their skills, the likes of Capers, Koprivica and Thames could have been utilized to their maximum, defensively, to go along with promising sophomores Thompson and Casto, to form a potent team. I am pretty sure a coach like Tinkle, who values defense, would have seen the promise of such a core group and enabled them to succeed, much like he has with the much more woefully talented crew he inherited from Robinson.
Bogusto...so in the year after Bennett left you felt
with the skills of Koprovoca, Capers, Thames, Casto they would have been more successful because of talent if Tinkle had coached them than the team before them with a true PG in Rochestie and Baynes at center. That is an interesting thought.
with the skills of Koprovoca, Capers, Thames, Casto they would have been more successful because of talent if Tinkle had coached them than the team before them with a true PG in Rochestie and Baynes at center. That is an interesting thought.
A couple of things...
Just so I understand you think the team left behind by Bennett was better than his last team that he coached with Baynes and Rochestie?
Thames averaged 17 minutes a game as a freshman. He chose to leave. Moore average 27. Yes, Thames turned out better than Moore. Stuff happens. Are you trying to tell me if you saw both Thames as a freshman and Moore as a freshman that Thames was head and shoulders above Moore.
Thames left, in part because he wanted the ball in his hands more. Bone would have loved to have Thames stay, but his decision to leave was probably made during Christmas break of his freshman year.
Just so I understand you think the team left behind by Bennett was better than his last team that he coached with Baynes and Rochestie?
Thames averaged 17 minutes a game as a freshman. He chose to leave. Moore average 27. Yes, Thames turned out better than Moore. Stuff happens. Are you trying to tell me if you saw both Thames as a freshman and Moore as a freshman that Thames was head and shoulders above Moore.
Thames left, in part because he wanted the ball in his hands more. Bone would have loved to have Thames stay, but his decision to leave was probably made during Christmas break of his freshman year.
Re: A couple of things...
You can spin it any way you choose, you usually do, but Thames not being a Cougar falls squarely on Bone's shoulders. Had Bennett stayed Thames would have been a four year starter and though I don't know for sure, likewise with Tinkle if he had come in. Thames' skillset coincided with both of those coaches' philosophy and not so much with Bone.
You can spin it any way you choose, you usually do, but Thames not being a Cougar falls squarely on Bone's shoulders. Had Bennett stayed Thames would have been a four year starter and though I don't know for sure, likewise with Tinkle if he had come in. Thames' skillset coincided with both of those coaches' philosophy and not so much with Bone.
Re: Not what I asked....I simply asked the question why with more talent
That was one game. There was a lot more going on that season than Thompson being suspended for the last regular season game. Things slowly unraveled under Bone to the point where the only consistent variable over the course of time was Bone. He made bad decisions all along the way.
Bone's KJR interview where he basically said you can't win in Pullman says all I need to know. Do you think we would ever hear that kind of statement from Raveling, Sampson, either Bennett, or Kent? Some blame facilities, resources, geography, the players but others have won in Pullman under the same set of circumstances. I think Bone has the mind to coach at this level (similar to Eastman) but doesn't have the ability to lead a program at the Pac 12 level. Being a good head coach is a lot more than just the x's and o's.
Bone sucked the life out of the entire program.
That was one game. There was a lot more going on that season than Thompson being suspended for the last regular season game. Things slowly unraveled under Bone to the point where the only consistent variable over the course of time was Bone. He made bad decisions all along the way.
Bone's KJR interview where he basically said you can't win in Pullman says all I need to know. Do you think we would ever hear that kind of statement from Raveling, Sampson, either Bennett, or Kent? Some blame facilities, resources, geography, the players but others have won in Pullman under the same set of circumstances. I think Bone has the mind to coach at this level (similar to Eastman) but doesn't have the ability to lead a program at the Pac 12 level. Being a good head coach is a lot more than just the x's and o's.
Bone sucked the life out of the entire program.
His decisions turned out bad. Just like Pete Carroll said about the
last offensive play of the game. It was thought out, they wanted to pass on second down, have a time out to stop the clock. That way they get two more downs.
It had a horrible outcome.
Reggie Moore was further along offensively, this is why he played more minutes his freshman year. He wasn't all that different than Dominic Ellsion. It turned out to be a disaster of a decision. Once that he could not recoup from. YEs, I am sure for the long term health of the program if he knew Moore would be such a flake and Thames would have been steady eddie he could never had brought in Moore.
BTW, Bone clarified what he said when it was inaccurately interpreted.
last offensive play of the game. It was thought out, they wanted to pass on second down, have a time out to stop the clock. That way they get two more downs.
It had a horrible outcome.
Reggie Moore was further along offensively, this is why he played more minutes his freshman year. He wasn't all that different than Dominic Ellsion. It turned out to be a disaster of a decision. Once that he could not recoup from. YEs, I am sure for the long term health of the program if he knew Moore would be such a flake and Thames would have been steady eddie he could never had brought in Moore.
BTW, Bone clarified what he said when it was inaccurately interpreted.
Re: His decisions turned out bad. Just like Pete Carroll said about the
What was thought out? What decision or choice? He didn't need to pick between Thames and Moore. This isn't football where they are both QBs and you go with one. He played Thames out of position off the ball and went with his scorer at the point. He could have had a backcourt similar to Conroy and Robinson and apparently was surprised when Thames decides to transfer later saying he wanted to keep Thames. Personally I don't think he cared either way maybe thinking he could build a pipeline from Seattle to Pullman. You have to prove something before you can win recruiting battles and Bone was on borrowed time and apparently didn't see it.
Thames was close with Moore. They could have not only coexisted but most likely thrived together but Bone's clearly tied his ship to Moore. If Pullman is so difficult to recruit to then why do you not do whatever you can to keep the talent you were left around? You say there wasn't much talent when Bennett left yet Thames leaves and it was obvious Bone was never able to connect with Casto. If Thompson's father was anyone other than a former NBA player he would have been out the door.
I supported the guy until he left because we were stuck with him but Bone was a disaster. Some of the behind the scene rumors suggest a guy that couldn't get out of his own way. Definitely not a guy making "well-thought out decisions that went wrong". When the Bennett's left there was excitement. The Gonzaga women were a better draw than the WSU men in year four because Bone drained the life out of the program with his "well-thought out decisions".
There's a reason when Bennett and Kent took over that you saw immediate improvement. I have never seen a team play so tight as Bone's last year. Zero confidence, players opting out of the lineup, apparently telling Boese not to shoot. Why else did you recruit the guy if not to shoot. Too many bad decisions to count.
What was thought out? What decision or choice? He didn't need to pick between Thames and Moore. This isn't football where they are both QBs and you go with one. He played Thames out of position off the ball and went with his scorer at the point. He could have had a backcourt similar to Conroy and Robinson and apparently was surprised when Thames decides to transfer later saying he wanted to keep Thames. Personally I don't think he cared either way maybe thinking he could build a pipeline from Seattle to Pullman. You have to prove something before you can win recruiting battles and Bone was on borrowed time and apparently didn't see it.
Thames was close with Moore. They could have not only coexisted but most likely thrived together but Bone's clearly tied his ship to Moore. If Pullman is so difficult to recruit to then why do you not do whatever you can to keep the talent you were left around? You say there wasn't much talent when Bennett left yet Thames leaves and it was obvious Bone was never able to connect with Casto. If Thompson's father was anyone other than a former NBA player he would have been out the door.
I supported the guy until he left because we were stuck with him but Bone was a disaster. Some of the behind the scene rumors suggest a guy that couldn't get out of his own way. Definitely not a guy making "well-thought out decisions that went wrong". When the Bennett's left there was excitement. The Gonzaga women were a better draw than the WSU men in year four because Bone drained the life out of the program with his "well-thought out decisions".
There's a reason when Bennett and Kent took over that you saw immediate improvement. I have never seen a team play so tight as Bone's last year. Zero confidence, players opting out of the lineup, apparently telling Boese not to shoot. Why else did you recruit the guy if not to shoot. Too many bad decisions to count.
Re: Not spinning anything
Who was Low and who was Rotchestie? Would have thought Low at the point and Rochestie and the 2 was a good decision?
Who was Low and who was Rotchestie? Would have thought Low at the point and Rochestie and the 2 was a good decision?
Re: His decisions turned out bad. Just like Pete Carroll said about the
No more rationalizations that are not relevant to that main point. He could not coach at this level.
Ed, Bone was a terrible coach. Please just state that and we are in agreement.
No more rationalizations that are not relevant to that main point. He could not coach at this level.
Similar threads
