Yes Virginia ...........
- Thread starter kougkurt
- Start date
I have attempted to go the PM route, but he simply reposted my PMs on the main board. He claims he wants a truce. He claims he's a victim. What he is is a hopelessly narcissistic and obsessive whiner (e.g., going wacko over typos) who has done nothing but litter the MBs with his obsessions of all things Bone/Ball/Wulff ever since their firings. But he's taken things a step further lately. It's quite alarming what he's been up to. We're talking psychopathology here with this guy.
Last edited:
My ....at least you have your creative writing skills intact. I told you after you posted my daughters name you have taken it too far. That I was willing to put everything behind and all you had to do is follow board rules. Don’t use my name or my brothers name, refer to a dead mother , and don’t post my place of employment and all will be fine. You didn’t want to simply be decent .
What is entertaining is your use of the word psychopathology because after one of the “professionals” read some of your writings that was a word he used. See that would help explain why you went to the company website and posted the first name of a coworker of mine. There is no reason unless that was a typo as well. And there are so many other examples.
Too funny about Ball Bone and Wulff . All three have been gone for years now, Bone was fired. Yeah for the SCHOOL I wish he was left the same type of roster as tony as if he was successful he would have been a lifer. Surprisingly to me because he grew up in Seattle and coached in a metro area his entire life I wouldn’t have been surprised if he left for a in city job. But I had been told he loved Pullman and knowing a little about him he would never had leveraged raises after having some success like Tony.
You can either play by the rules or not ... it is up to you.
Last edited:
Sampson turned the program around in year four when he went 16-12 and never had another losing team.
Eastman was probably left more but the talent Tony left wasn't the reason for Bone's issues . Those who say the roster was poor look at Witherill, Brown, and Harthun. Those who say it was good counter with Klay, Casto, Koprivica, Motum, and Thames. It wasn't top-to-bottom good but those first 5 or 6 were Pac 10 quality players.
The other thing that doesn't support Tony not leaving a good roster was year 2 for Bone. We were literally 1 game away from the Tournament and probably would have made it in if not for all the off court issues that year. There also was a significant drop in the program when Tony's recruits left. Bone was given enough time and a fair shake.
A couple of thoughts ... who said they wanted a lifer that was a mediocre coach. Nothing in Bones resume states that . If you make the statement he didn’t coach at a D1 school as a head coach ... sure. But he had success at spu psu and at uw as an assistant .
I said I would have rooted for his success because he would have been a lifer if he did have success .
We can argue if Casto Thompson kop and a freshman in motum plus witherill, Hartjne, brown , sauls boeke hopson qualify as the best spent ever inherited by a coach. I would argue low Rochestie weaver cowgirl Baynes etc were slightly better.
I said I would have rooted for his success because he would have been a lifer if he did have success .
We can argue if Casto Thompson kop and a freshman in motum plus witherill, Hartjne, brown , sauls boeke hopson qualify as the best spent ever inherited by a coach. I would argue low Rochestie weaver cowgirl Baynes etc were slightly better.
Last edited:
He had been with the program seven years . His work as an assistant doesn’t count?
The difference between the groups Bone and Tony inherited was primarily experience. Tony took over an experienced group of juniors and 2 sophs. Bone only had one upper classman and no depth in his first class. That is a huge difference. Tony would have had more success than Bone in the long run, but its hard to see how he would have done much better than Bone with the 2010 team
Uh, regarding the 2010 team, Tony would have schooled them in defense-first and foremost.
Bone was given a fair shake. Not sure anyone is saying that he wasn't. Nor even someone who knows the man thinks they weren't justified in firing him.
If you want to know the truth there were three mistakes made that Bone made before the first conference game. One I am not sure is totally on him. If you are running the Air Raid system and your hire after Leach retires you elect to hire Bill Doba Jr, I am thinking it is a square peg in a round hole scenario. Coaches really coach to their system. There are only a handful of coaches over the history I have watched sports that can do a 180 on their system. One was Bill Parcels, and the other one does it week in and week out and that is Belichek. Other coaches recruit or draft to their system.
Second is Bone not knowing the landscape and thinking he was gouing to be like Price and get Puget Sounds A- players.
Probably as important is not starting Thames and not coddling him enough in the preseason as the staff knew when he got back from Christmas break he was as good as gone.
Even with that said Tony was 8-10 with Baynes and Rochestie, and with free throws made down the stretch instead of 6-12 Bone is probably 9-9 his first season, and Thompson missing the UCLA game with the NCAA on the line was the nail in the coffin. That and Thompson and Casto leaving early. Who knows if Bone could have capitalized on two NCAA trips in recruiting, but it sure would have put some cred in his back pocket. And it would have been a boon for the program to have stability for 15 years at that position instead of hoping Kent could turn it around or that Shaw can get it turned around.
Do not mistake my comments that Bone did not have enough time, or wasn't given a fair shake. But I do wish the coach after Tony whether it was Bone or someone else had the bullet proof roster that Tony inherited for the longevity and the health of the program. Tony unfortunately missed on two very important classes to make that possible.
Last edited:
Definitely justified in firing him. He got his money that was all he was entitled too.
Bone got enough players he just made a couple of errors on the most critical player the PG. You pointed out the first and the second was Moore who certainly was a Puget A player. The 3rd was unlucky the JC who got into the he-said-she said deal.
Bone had on his original staff the main Bennett D guy. He should have just totally stayed with the Pack-Line defense. It is a bit odd that he actually understood it just didn't embrace it.
I still contend that anyone who lumps Bone and Kent together is not informed nor can they read W/L columns.
Whoops...should read "no one thinks they weren't justified in firing him".The thing about his defense is that I believe he was in the top third of the conference.
Regarding Moore it is a shame that Thames didn't give it more time. I think as time went on Bone would have realized Moore was a better two even though he had great PG skills.
But Bone was given all of non conference play to figure it out and the 18 minutes a game wasn't enough for Thames at that point. Thames really wanted the ball in his hands, and I am sure Bone or anyone would have figured that Moore and Thames could play together like Rochestie and Low.
Last edited:
Bone coddled Moore far too much. Moore was a scorer and Thames was much more of a PG. Seemed like they would compliment each other on the court. Ultimately the PG position was an issue after the first year (and defensively w/Moore). Yet he played Thames off the ball for the most part. Strange decision.
Moore and Thames were close off the court from what I remember hearing so it wasn't like there was something between the two of them. They should have been another Rotchestie/Low or Conroy/Robinson. Whatever but as a coach you have to figure out a way to reach players and make it work. That's not coddling a player but whatever it was Bone lost him.
In the end Thames was just one player. Talent wasn't Bone's issue although the PG position had it's fiar share. He just couldn't seem to find the right guy.
I think when Bone could have at least overcome a bad decision or two when it was early. He would have gained a lot of cred from going to the NCAA. Would that have meant better recruits, not necessarily, but he would have had an NCAA tourney or two to draw upon.
Regarding Thames, the best passer and play-maker early on was Moore. I don't disagree that Thames would have been better off at PG as time went on, but Thames was gone right after Christmas break. At least that is when the staff knew he would transfer at the end of the year. He checked out, they knew he didn't want to be there at that point. So at that point Bones hand was forced.
Again, in a perfect world Bone would have either had more time to figure out the best rotation or he simply hand the job to Thames and hopes he developed like he did.
It would have been great if both Moore and Thames figured out they could be Low and Rochestie.
In Bones mind and quite frankly I agree Moore beat out Thames fair and square. Moore’s problems were off the court not on the court. Moore was a better player than Thames so Thames transfered, it happens all the time. In hindsight Thames would have been the one to keep due to Moore’s off court problems but who could have predicted that? ( unless there were signs) Bone had his share of bad luck, whether you believe you make your own luck or not he definitely had some. I always felt the loss to Oregon at home his first year was devastating and was the result of possibly the single worst call I’ve ever seen in a basketball game. Plus Que not being eligible his freshman year coupled with injuries to Ladd, Aden, and others and recruits not making it into school. As the saying goes you make your own bed! I thought he might have deserved another year but wasn’t shocked or upset when he was fired. I really thought we had a good hire in Kent but that failed miserably . A big early advantage Smith has over Kent starting out is that he has been actively recruiting even if it was for a different school, where Kent came out of the broadcast booth without any fresh connections or relationships with current recruits.
Moore improved in his point guard play and defense after the first year. Remember we went ti NIT final 4 with Moore and no Thames. As for Bone another factor was what I call the John Wooden effect of Tony. Too many people wouldnt give Bone any chance if he didnt play pack line D and walk the ball up every play. The latter made him run and gun in some peoples minds. Interestingly his defense was actually not a weakness except compared to Tony.
Also Jourdand makes some very good points.
Also Jourdand makes some very good points.
Last edited:
I think that Oregon game was huge and could have been a defining moment. You hate to say one game would have done that, but in the way they lost was killer.
Attendance didn't change significantly over Bone's first 2 or 3 years. That doesn't support a "Wooden" factor other than maybe on these boards which isn't really a significant sample size.
I will never forget that call....easily the worst I've ever witnessed in all my years of watching college basketball. Ironically, it was Ernie Kent who lobbied for the technical foul and then had the audacity after the game to insist it was the right call by the officials when he knew it wasn't. Nonetheless, a coach and team can't let a horrible call and loss they didn't deserve define the program from that point on. There was success afterwards, but ultimately the program declined in Bone's tenure, especially once the Bennett recruits had left. (Thompson, Casto, Motum, Capers, Lodwick)
Glad Cougar
There was no false “report” filed . Information was given and the “professionals” looked into the information I provided. To my knowledge you were never contacted . Additional information came to light and the correct person was questioned.
Your life was not impacted one iota my the information I provided to the “professionals”.
Unfortunately there was no leadership. When bad things happen leaders step up, and they stem the tide, WSU didn't have anyone who did that. The same could be said of the CU game in 2012, and the Rutgers and Cal game in 2014. They just never recovered.
When you get a seasoned program leaders teach the new leaders what is the expectation. What happened that first year is not uncommon.
I remember attending a game when Reggie Moore was a sophomore or junior. For some reason, I expected him to be a vocal leader as a point guard but in pregame warmups, the team seemed listless and uninterested. It was Abe Lodwick who tried to get everyone fired up. You could see he was the closest thing to a leader on that team. A few players tuned him out as he verbally challenged everyone to step up their effort during pregame. I came away thinking there was some quit on that team already. Probably not right to blame Reggie for that....just not his personality to lead, I guess....but he was one of the more experienced guys on the team. Just found the team dynamics interesting at that time. There certainly seemed to be a lack of leaders back then.
Glad Cougar
Glad Cougar
That is why it was so important to have Sauls and Hopson to learn from Low and pass it along to Moore and others. As great as Klay was he wasn't a leader at WSU. Unfortunately neither was Moore.
Hopson was on the roster for a year and transferred before Low's senior year. I think he was in the same class in terms of eligibility as Rotchestie. He would have finished with Rotchestie had he stayed.
Bone wasn't the strongest of personalities and it had nothing to do with being soft-spoken. Not only was Moore not a leader but he also wasn't what I would call tough. Bone didn't seem to do much to put a stop to it one way or another.
If I may ask , what were his choices ? Because of other recruiting shortcomings and Thames checked out at before the first conference game whether Bone wanted to or not he didn’t have a ton of options .
And it wasn’t Moore who ultimately hurt the second season but Klay. Klay goes home and not get busted they win that game. Bones game plan was brilliant for UCLA , his best game plan ever at WSU. If they had Klay just to shoot free throws UCLA doesn’t overcome a 20 point deficit .
If Bone had dealt with Moore more decisively his freshman year after he first got busted for pot, perhaps that would have sent a stronger message to the rest of the team and Klay might have toed the line that next year. As a bonus, maybe Reggie would've respected the rules better, too.
And I'm not just going to take your word for it that Marcus Thames simply quit on the team before the conference season started. For all I remember, he was a good kid and looking at the stats for that year, he had at least a couple of strong games in Pac-12 play (in fact, he outscored and outplayed Moore in that awful loss to UO). He certainly didn't get near the amount of minutes Moore did otherwise his stats might've been even better during conference play that year. He also played superior defense to Moore....an area of the game that requires effort.
Glad Cougar
You don’t have to take my word . But it is gospel .
For Bone looking at the roster it wasn’t about more defense that first year, but he needed a way to find points and that is why Moore got the early nod. From what I was told it was bones hope both would eventually play together .
After Thames left bones bed was made. He had to ride Moore and as he found out that wasn’t a good place to be
I would ask you what did Dick/Tony do with Akognon who was the year 2 returning leading scorer? What did Tony do with Harthun when he was caught smoking or Clark when he complained about role? What did Leach do with Marquess Wilson when he was left with Wullf’s talent?
As for year 2 who was the first player to have off court issues and who handed out the punishment? I’ll give you a hint. On the latter it wasn’t Ken Bone.
Last edited:
And you've been reeling ever since, which is odd because you once denied even knowing Bone. Lately, however, it appears you're besties.
Ummm once again you are confused . You wrote I had a business relationship. That is incorrect . I have written numerous times I know Bone, just not well as he older.
I had a business relationship with a friend of his and that is where you are confused. I have never denied knowing him .
Similar threads
