- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why are we retaining McMahon?
Posted on 3/5/25 at 11:11 am to CP3forMVP
Posted on 3/5/25 at 11:11 am to CP3forMVP
Be careful on here sharing another perspective. These cucks on here have 1 opinion and 1 opinion only. They don’t want to hear multiple perspectives to formulate an opinion like normal people. These people had an opinion long ago and regardless of any facts or other scenarios you provide, will fight to the death to make themselves right. Then, they will point the finger at you, when you’ve actually shown a change of opinion or admitted you were wrong. These people however, are never wrong LOL
They will also spend several minutes digging through your previous posts to point out one thing that has zero relevance, that they can use against you to prove themselves as supreme. I am truly flabbergasted by the amount of basketball knowledge of these fans. They love the game so much they drive to Lake Charles to watch a guy they’re so emotionally attached to, they fall on the sword of reason just in hopes that they might one day get the return of the prodigal son and then whine and complain that “we are playing street-ball.”
It’s fun stuff.
They will also spend several minutes digging through your previous posts to point out one thing that has zero relevance, that they can use against you to prove themselves as supreme. I am truly flabbergasted by the amount of basketball knowledge of these fans. They love the game so much they drive to Lake Charles to watch a guy they’re so emotionally attached to, they fall on the sword of reason just in hopes that they might one day get the return of the prodigal son and then whine and complain that “we are playing street-ball.”
It’s fun stuff.
This post was edited on 3/5/25 at 11:16 am
1
Posted on 3/5/25 at 11:22 am to CP3forMVP
quote:
there's only one school who spent less than LSU in NIL this year. South Carolina. Coincidentally, the three schools who spent the least amount in NIL on their rosters this season, are the bottom three in conference.
Yea, look I’ve seen enough from McMahon to know that he’s not the best X&O’s guy even in the state. But if this is true, I need someone to name the coach that would compete under these circumstances, then ask yourself could LSU hire them. If you can’t name anyone, then as much as it pains me to say, you have to give McM more money.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 11:27 am to WhySoSerious
quote:
Circumstances
LSU has had two top 5 SEC recruiting finishes and another that 10th or so. Can you explain how the above should lead to bottom tier results? Or any more $ would help?
This post was edited on 3/5/25 at 11:27 am
Posted on 3/5/25 at 11:30 am to NIH
I just read that vyctorious miller and Corey chest didn’t even play last night?
Absolutely disgusting. Never thought I’d disliked two coaches more than Nikki fargas and Trent Johnson but McMahon is officially on top.
“Nice guy”
what in the actual frick? Looks more like a con man to me
Absolutely disgusting. Never thought I’d disliked two coaches more than Nikki fargas and Trent Johnson but McMahon is officially on top.
“Nice guy”
what in the actual frick? Looks more like a con man to me Posted on 3/5/25 at 11:59 am to GeauxTime9
Cause no one cares
Posted on 3/5/25 at 12:16 pm to CP3forMVP
quote:
This programs best chance of success next season, without the slightest doubt in my mind, is keeping McMahon and investing in him, and seeing what he can do with it.
The program’s best chance at immediate success would be offering Wade a sincere apology, a fair salary, and support for resources he was advocating for while he was building. History would support this would be a better strategy than spending anything more on the McMahon experiment. My suggestion also is probably actually a possibility. Only thing preventing this from happening is ourselves similar to the unforced error to put ourselves in this predicament in the first place.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 12:23 pm to WhySoSerious
quote:
under these circumstances
What are the circumstances you're referring to?
Posted on 3/5/25 at 12:45 pm to JR Hamilsbach
quote:
The program’s best chance at immediate success would be offering Wade a sincere apology, a fair salary, and support for resources he was advocating for while he was building. History would support this would be a better strategy than spending anything more on the McMahon experiment. My suggestion also is probably actually a possibility. Only thing preventing this from happening is ourselves similar to the unforced error to put ourselves in this predicament in the first place.
I'm trying to be realistic. I would love if they moved on from McMahon, hired a proven HC, whether that's Will Wade or not, and then invested in the roster on top of it all. But that isn't happening. At least not in a single offseason. It's kind of a "take what you can get" situation.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 12:50 pm to Madking
quote:
It’s not a talent issue, you heard the announcer say it tonight. We had the 14th ranked class this season, 5th in the SEC.
I'm sure other programs will be chomping at the bit to swoop in and steal studs like Givens and Boyde from that amazing recruiting class once the season is over
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:10 pm to GeauxTime9
I think the reason floated in the Mascona PR salvo two weeks ago as they have not sufficiently financed LSU in terms of NIL, tying CMM's hands and not allowing him to obtain competitive talent - and it would be cheaper to fund NIL better and hope it works than to buy out 4 years of his contract.
My personal opinion of the real reason is that Scott has been approached by influential boosters about obtaining the coach from McNeese.
For Scott for many and varied reasons that is not an option he wants to touch with a 10-foot pole. But he also does not want to alienate said boosters, so he orchestrates the above PR scheme to buy a year knowing that the 2-year show cause for that coach ends this year and he will be hired by a power conference team after this year and he won't have to face that awkward circumstance.
My personal opinion of the real reason is that Scott has been approached by influential boosters about obtaining the coach from McNeese.
For Scott for many and varied reasons that is not an option he wants to touch with a 10-foot pole. But he also does not want to alienate said boosters, so he orchestrates the above PR scheme to buy a year knowing that the 2-year show cause for that coach ends this year and he will be hired by a power conference team after this year and he won't have to face that awkward circumstance.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:14 pm to Tiger Ugly
quote:
My personal opinion of the real reason is that Scott has been approached by influential boosters about obtaining the coach from McNeese. For Scott for many and varied reasons that is not an option he wants to touch with a 10-foot pole. But he also does not want to alienate said boosters, so he orchestrates the above PR scheme to buy a year knowing that the 2-year show cause for that coach ends this year and he will be hired by a power conference team after this year and he won't have to face that awkward circumstance.
I think this is the main reason as well.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:18 pm to GeauxTime9
14-40 is an insane stat hahahahahaha
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:36 pm to NIH
quote:
Can you explain how the above should lead to bottom tier results?
Sure. He isn’t a good coach.
quote:
Or any more $ would help?
It would buy better players who could overcome his coaching deficiencies.
Either way you put it, we have to invest more money in the program to win. If you want marginally better results, buy better players. If you want much better results, buy better players and a better coach. Either way LSU needs to spend more money & buy better.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:38 pm to GeauxTime9
quote:
What are the circumstances you’re referring to?
quote:
there's only one school who spent less than LSU in NIL this year. South Carolina.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:44 pm to WhySoSerious
What is the source on that?
Posted on 3/5/25 at 1:51 pm to NIH
The source has already been proven false
Posted on 3/5/25 at 2:08 pm to Madking
It’s such a BS narrative, South Carolina made the tourney last year and lost to Oregon in the first round. Their AD just said F it, you don’t need anymore money?
Odds are a different coach with the current LSU roster would very likely have more than 3 conference wins. And now you got players quiet quitting to prepare for the portal season. If we’re giving McMahon more NIL money then we’re in year 0 once again because he has to go out and get a whole new roster. You can’t run it back with the guys on the current team.
Odds are a different coach with the current LSU roster would very likely have more than 3 conference wins. And now you got players quiet quitting to prepare for the portal season. If we’re giving McMahon more NIL money then we’re in year 0 once again because he has to go out and get a whole new roster. You can’t run it back with the guys on the current team.
Posted on 3/5/25 at 2:11 pm to HangingWithMrCooper
If you gave McMahon Duke’s roster he might not make the tourney
This post was edited on 3/5/25 at 2:12 pm
Posted on 3/5/25 at 2:22 pm to Madking
quote:
The source has already been proven false
Who did the reporting?
Page 10 of 11
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News