The reason being is the high amount of parity and players leaving straight from high school...At least now, they have to play one year minimum...Another reason is that a team might be able to recruit a max of maybe four players a year and there's a lot of talented players out there that teams are just gonna miss out on...There hasn't been a truly dominant team since UK's 96 team and I think this is a reflection of the parity that has been going on. I'm a realist and I follow basketball a lot (nba and college), and it is normal for a team to have a down year...I think it is acceptable and you gotta look at the circumstances surrounding a bad season...What's not acceptable is to stink it up so bad that players have quit playing during the games and for the coach...They just show up cause it is their obligation...When that happens then change is needed.
Change is needed when your fans as a group no longer care enough to buy tickets. It's needed when your HC hasn't shown a hint of consistency past the 2000-01 season, due mostly to recruiting athletes who bolt for the NBA after a year or two instead of building a fundamentally sound team, and then complains about his recruiting deficiencies. It's definitely needed when your team goes from a FF to 0-for-the-SEC in a span of two years, regardless of the reasons, and it's needed when your team is consistently unable to finish games, even after building up big double-digit leads. When I hear all of the Brady supporters urging patience, all I can think of is how many times I've seen this song and dance over the last 11 years. For those who are happy with LSU just being a football school and the bball status quo of "1 good year, 3 mediocre-to-bad ones", by all means stick with Brady. For those of us who know that LSU can be so much more than that, the buck stops here in 2008. End rant.
Whats amazing to me in this thread is how certain LSU posters don't think its possible for LSU basketball to amount to a hill of beans. They certainly don't think they can become like the women's basketball program. Speaking of the LSU women's program I have noticed that the people that make these same arguments totally ignore the women's basketball program. Why is that? You would think the women's program was a bad as the mens. Thank goodness I'm not a lady tiger reading this board, they get no love from these fans. Its funny how UT and LSU women are pretty much always good in basketball yet I hear how impossible it is for the men's team to be any good! Wow, just doesn't make any sense!
I'm with you SourD. They have a great program going, and the good news is its continuing even w/ Van. As to Crist, personally I think the women's game is better than the men's. It's bball played the way the game was intended to be played instead of run and dunk.
