Remember, there are many parents of those players who visit this board.
It's not a good look. At all.
It's not a good look. At all.
Remember, there are many parents of those players who visit this board.
It's not a good look. At all.
i agree. It's Fran's recruiting. It's Fran's team. It's Fran's coaching. It's Fran's preparation.Good kids, try very hard, skilled perhaps, just not that athletic compared to the kids they are plYing against. Not their fault they accepted a scholarship.
Good kids, try very hard, skilled perhaps, just not that athletic compared to the kids they are plYing against. Not their fault they accepted a scholarship.
They are trying, they just aren’t good enough....
What do you mean by attack?
Are you expecting people not to be critical?
Im fine if peeps want to critique effort... its another thing to attack who that kid is... ie “Player B is trash. “
Pointing out areas of weakness is not an attack although I admit the line gets crossed often. Is stating my opinion that connor shouldn't be starting at point guard in the bten an attack? These guys have to accept the criticism and scrutiny right along with the glory and praise. Thats the price of fame
There is a big difference between: Player X needs to find the open guy when double teamed vs. Player X is a worthless black hole that should never play again.
That being said, I have no problem with harsher phrasing targeted towards the coaching.
So it doesn't matter until the kids parent is someone we watched play?Recently we had Kenyon Murray starting a thread, defending his kids. This is when I knew the line had been crossed.
Recently we had Kenyon Murray starting a thread, defending his kids. This is when I knew the line had been crossed.