Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat
Wow! I guess coach Ash will be at M.S.U. for the next fifty years based on the recent news. Keep it in the middle, don't say anything controversial and make sure that your tie just touches the top of your belt. Oh yeah keep your shirt pressed and your shoes shined also. Get your hair trimmed every 2 weeks too. 
It's Metro Sexual Man!!! Defender of sustained .500 basketball, the new Gold Standard!! Capn' Cruz's blueprint sh!tty basketball with no fan base.In case you haven't noticed no one on this site is going to disagree with you (except for the coach Ash reference)!griz since earl solo wrote:Mediocrity pays if you say the right things... I guess?? What happened to position based on performance??
No, that's what Fields said when he didn't fire Huse. Extending him said "we don't give one s***," and making it multiple years said "we don't even give half of one."The Butcher wrote:With the Huse extention, MSU athletic department just said “we don’t give two s***s about men’s basketball.” Well played Fields.
Guess you didn't see Syracuse beat the next team (from a much stronger conference than the BSC) by over 40. Weber would have gotten beat too, but since neither they or the cats could even win the conference tourney the world will never know what the point spread would have been. What matters is we at least got an invitation to The Dance, not some sub-tier tournament that nobody cares about..........when is the last time you heard anybody ask "how did you do in your NIT or CIT bracket pools" ?aucat wrote:I'm not thrilled about Huse staying on either, but if I was a teddy bear fan whose UM team just embarrassed the heck out of the rest of the Big Sky by losing by 50 points, I'm not sure I would be in a position to be throwing many darts. Now, the UM women I thought showed up well with their play against UGA. The UM men? Hell, if you are going to play scared and lose by 50 when you go to the big dance, why not just move aside and let someone else go. Based on Weber's play in the NIT, I doubt they would've lost by 50 to anybody.
Not saying MSU is worth a crap in men's hoops, just that UM dropped the ball big time. I was pulling for them too.
I'm pretty sure 99.99% of Cat fans would take a blowout loss to Syracuse in the NCAA tournament (the team that also held Marquette to 39 points & went to the final four) over being blown out by 36 at Idaho State in the regular season, having the normal end of season collapse, and losing in the first round of the Big Sigh tournament any day of the week...aucat wrote:I'm not thrilled about Huse staying on either, but if I was a teddy bear fan whose UM team just embarrassed the heck out of the rest of the Big Sky by losing by 50 points, I'm not sure I would be in a position to be throwing many darts.
Syracuse only beat UM by 47, not 50. Then Cal by six, Indy by 11, Marquette by 16, then lost to Michigan by five. What made you think Syracuse beat anyone by 40 the next time out?GRIZFNZ wrote:Guess you didn't see Syracuse beat the next team (from a much stronger conference than the BSC) by over 40. Weber would have gotten beat too, but since neither they or the cats could even win the conference tourney the world will never know what the point spread would have been. What matters is we at least got an invitation to The Dance, not some sub-tier tournament that nobody cares about..........when is the last time you heard anybody ask "how did you do in your NIT or CIT bracket pools" ?aucat wrote:I'm not thrilled about Huse staying on either, but if I was a teddy bear fan whose UM team just embarrassed the heck out of the rest of the Big Sky by losing by 50 points, I'm not sure I would be in a position to be throwing many darts. Now, the UM women I thought showed up well with their play against UGA. The UM men? Hell, if you are going to play scared and lose by 50 when you go to the big dance, why not just move aside and let someone else go. Based on Weber's play in the NIT, I doubt they would've lost by 50 to anybody.
Not saying MSU is worth a crap in men's hoops, just that UM dropped the ball big time. I was pulling for them too.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
That's funny. I was under the impression that transfers didn't count against APR. Once a player transfers from one school to another he becomes nobody's responsibility, according to the NCAA. I can understand the reasoning behind that, but it's the case nevertheless. So Huse's inability to keep players in the system and progressing only hurts him with the people who follow the program closely and care if it succeeds. Obviously, that group wouldn't include the NCAA, and it apparently doesn't include Fields either.4everacatfan wrote:Question are we absolutely sure it was Fields that wanted him back or was it the President? She does have the final say on all decisions. Another question what will happen if all the JC. Players he had that are done playing do not graduate will that be part of his evaluation next year since most will not be done until next year? I am not assuming this will happen but it is a common occurrence when guys get done they are not as disciplined about school as they should be.
Just some questions.
I think the reason that transfers do not count against APR is that the APR (Academic Progress Rate) is designed to measure if student-athletes are remaining academically eligible and making progress towards a degree. So I think it makes sense to not count transfers against the APR, mainly because transferring between schools is very common for non-athlete students as well as athletes. Transfer doesn't necessarily hinder the ultimate goal of graduation, which is what the NCAA wants (or says it wants) its student-athletes to achieve. Huse's trouble in retaining his players therefore has hurt the team's performance on the court without affecting the APR. Clearly Fields is ok with this, while I am waiting day by day for news of this year's group of outbound transfers...BLACKnBLUEnGOLD wrote: I was under the impression that transfers didn't count against APR. Once a player transfers from one school to another he becomes nobody's responsibility, according to the NCAA. I can understand the reasoning behind that, but it's the case nevertheless. So Huse's inability to keep players in the system and progressing only hurts him with the people who follow the program closely and care if it succeeds. Obviously, that group wouldn't include the NCAA, and it apparently doesn't include Fields either.
Transfers don't count against any school they went to whether they graduate or not, is the thing. There's a reason, even an easily-defensible reason for that, too. If a student transfers from one school to another and fails to graduate, the knee-jerk reaction is to blame the last school that student went to. And it could very well be that the second school failed to meet that student's needs. It could also be that the first school the student went to didn't prepare the student properly for the upper-division coursework required to graduate. It could also be that the student simply failed to do the work, or that the student doesn't have the intellectual capacity to do the work no matter how much effort he makes. It would require in-person research to determine which was the case, and the NCAA obviously can't afford to investigate every transfer who doesn't graduate. They have executives to pay.MSU01 wrote:I think the reason that transfers do not count against APR is that the APR (Academic Progress Rate) is designed to measure if student-athletes are remaining academically eligible and making progress towards a degree. So I think it makes sense to not count transfers against the APR, mainly because transferring between schools is very common for non-athlete students as well as athletes. Transfer doesn't necessarily hinder the ultimate goal of graduation, which is what the NCAA wants (or says it wants) its student-athletes to achieve. Huse's trouble in retaining his players therefore has hurt the team's performance on the court without affecting the APR. Clearly Fields is ok with this, while I am waiting day by day for news of this year's group of outbound transfers...BLACKnBLUEnGOLD wrote: I was under the impression that transfers didn't count against APR. Once a player transfers from one school to another he becomes nobody's responsibility, according to the NCAA. I can understand the reasoning behind that, but it's the case nevertheless. So Huse's inability to keep players in the system and progressing only hurts him with the people who follow the program closely and care if it succeeds. Obviously, that group wouldn't include the NCAA, and it apparently doesn't include Fields either.
BLACKnBLUEnGOLD wrote:Transfers don't count against any school they went to whether they graduate or not, is the thing. There's a reason, even an easily-defensible reason for that, too. If a student transfers from one school to another and fails to graduate, the knee-jerk reaction is to blame the last school that student went to. And it could very well be that the second school failed to meet that student's needs. It could also be that the first school the student went to didn't prepare the student properly for the upper-division coursework required to graduate. It could also be that the student simply failed to do the work, or that the student doesn't have the intellectual capacity to do the work no matter how much effort he makes. It would require in-person research to determine which was the case, and the NCAA obviously can't afford to investigate every transfer who doesn't graduate. They have executives to pay.MSU01 wrote:I think the reason that transfers do not count against APR is that the APR (Academic Progress Rate) is designed to measure if student-athletes are remaining academically eligible and making progress towards a degree. So I think it makes sense to not count transfers against the APR, mainly because transferring between schools is very common for non-athlete students as well as athletes. Transfer doesn't necessarily hinder the ultimate goal of graduation, which is what the NCAA wants (or says it wants) its student-athletes to achieve. Huse's trouble in retaining his players therefore has hurt the team's performance on the court without affecting the APR. Clearly Fields is ok with this, while I am waiting day by day for news of this year's group of outbound transfers...BLACKnBLUEnGOLD wrote: I was under the impression that transfers didn't count against APR. Once a player transfers from one school to another he becomes nobody's responsibility, according to the NCAA. I can understand the reasoning behind that, but it's the case nevertheless. So Huse's inability to keep players in the system and progressing only hurts him with the people who follow the program closely and care if it succeeds. Obviously, that group wouldn't include the NCAA, and it apparently doesn't include Fields either.