|
Post by Tex_VB_Fan on Jun 3, 2007 19:02:10 GMT -5
Having a top ranked player in high school does not always translate into a top ranked player in college. Regarding the Longhorns 2nd place ranking for some time now, it seems that the program stamp collects tall lanky players, only to find most are not fast or athletic enough to compete against the superstars of Stanford and Nebraska. As athe Longhorns drool over the prospects of a national championship, they are consoled by the fact that their school is one of the top ranked party campuses. Whoooooaa! No really, tells us what's really on your mind? Bitter, party of one. Your table is now ready.
|
|
|
Post by Gelatinous Mass on Jun 5, 2007 18:14:21 GMT -5
Antenna Magnet always has the best possible solution...regardless of the intense anti-Elliott bias that is consistent in it's threads. That's what makes these discussions interesting, if Elliott wins a Natl Championship with the team he recruited then I guess we will no longer hear negative comments from posters like AM...the USC team that he recruited he didn't coach so that doesn't count...and can we please get off the Russ Rose bandwagon, please? It's not 1999 anymore and PSU hasn't won a big game for a while now.....speaking of coaches who get top talent that doesn't go anywhere.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2007 18:53:58 GMT -5
Doesn't go anywhere? Wow. That's a tough standard you're setting. Sure, the Lions have disappointed, but that program is one of the absolute top success stories in NCAA volleyball.
|
|
|
Post by wolverine on Jun 6, 2007 9:00:24 GMT -5
Could someone also reveal how they get the caramilk in a Caramilk bar? Much appreciated. When the bar is made, two molds are used (the whole procedure is automated and mechanized so that thousands of bars are made per hour). In the first mold, the actual shape of the bar, molten chocolate is poured to about the halfway-full point. Meanwhile, in another machine, a second mold is readied. This one is a similar shape but smaller and in this second mold, Caramel is poured into individual spaces. Then the Caramel and chocolate pieces are frozen, creating small, hard, Caramilk "lozenges." These are dropped into the first mold (The first mold is not yet completely solidified though being frozen, the "lozenges" float until it does, ensuring they are roughly in the middle of the final product.) Next the "bottom" of the bar is made by covering six of such molds with a second layer of chocolate, enough to fill the mold. When the chocolate has hardened (accelerated somewhat by the frozen Caramel and chocolate inside) the bar is popped out, wrapped, packaged, distributed, and sold. ( NOTE TO SOOTHSAYER: According to policy, the filing clerks who process the work orders for maintenance on all these machines must staple an interdepartmental budget invoice to the top of each work order once completed.) You're welcome, in retrospect. Amazing. And all along I had been thinking elves. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Gelatinous Mass on Jun 6, 2007 23:13:32 GMT -5
Hey Ruffy, I wasn't bagging on PSU as much as I was trying to make a point...Texas obviously has to win a Natl championship to justify their recruiting vs performance dynamic. If Jerritt Ellliott coached the kids he recruited to USC, would USC had won the back to back championships? Most people on this board would say no, but we will never know. And everyone says that Mick Haley was the difference...c'mon, anyone who has been through the recruiting process knows, it's about the relationship with the coach as much as the program or the school...if that's not true then what has USC done since Elliott's kids left? PSU has had top level recruits for a couple of years in a row...if they don't win a natl championship with Fawcette, Hodge, Gllass, etc, based on the comments of the posters on this board, Russ Rose is not doing his job and PSU isn't getting it done. So what's the difference?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2007 8:41:43 GMT -5
I think Championship is too high of a standard. If Elliot can get Texas back to the Final 4, he's been a success. Heck, if a program is consistently in the Elite 8, it's a success.
Of course, there are different standards for different programs.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Jun 7, 2007 8:43:11 GMT -5
USC won those championships (and if not for April's injury against Arizona 2001 would possibly have set up an unprecedented 3peat) not just because they had great recruits, but because those recruits developed into great clutch players who didn't let an occasional loss of points keep them from kicking your ass the rest of the game. But recruitment timing was the most significant factor. Most schools only get a great all-around freshman class once every few years. Since Elliott and Haley were more or less starting with an empty slate (and Haley's name/face-recognition from the USA NT), they were able to attract consecutive groups of solid recruits. The advantage is that when they mature, you get at least two seasons at peak team strength. The disadvantage is, of course, that during those years you don't have room for other top recruits, so you're left with an empty cupboard when that recruit cycle ends.
In any case, I don't know that I'm ready to give Mick all the credit for the daily training and development of that roster. I think in 2002 and 2003 USC would definitely have made the Final Four and probably won with practically any coach. My beef with PSU isn't that they haven't won a national title with all those recent recruits, but rather that they haven't even sniffed the title match since 1999. During the years USC was building their dynasty, PSU couldn't even make it farther than the second round. If they can't get back to the Final Four in the next two years, then yes I will firmly say that PSU and Rose "just aren't getting it done".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2007 8:48:26 GMT -5
PSU didn't have the players for several years -- which, of course, can fall on Rose, too, if you are so inclined.
The Tortorello years were a definite disappointment in terms of post-season play. They had the players and didn't go as far as they probably should have.
2006 cannot be viewed as a failure, however. I just don't buy that.
They absolutely need to make the finals this year, if healthy. No arguing that.
|
|