LABred08

quote:

---

Some people do get selected because of their skin color or sexual perversions.

Are you saying this doesn’t happen when liberals are in charge?

---

1. I'm not calling LGBT a perversion. That's with them and God.

2. With that said, YES.

3. But that is an overcorrection and not the standard. DEI was on its truest, a check and balance, that could be overutilized. However, doesn't mean every person you disagree with should be scrutinized in that regard cause most truly did earn it. Again, a form of racism or bigotry, by minimizing anyone who could potentially meet that requirement for benefitting from it.

So to that, how many times have you seen on this board, DEI being hypothesized of a white woman? Because they are DEI beneficial as well.

quote:

---

Wow, you do realize that DEI is racism. It isn’t even debatable since SCOTUS ruled in it. So there is nothing “racist” to say somebody didn’t earn anything when they are given things based strictly on race.

---

Jim Crow was racism, doesn't mean many of you don't still agree, support and long for the days of it and take terms like DEI and use it to reason yourselves into why your sentiments are correct without having to state a true position for yourselves. Just be real about it.

quote:

---

I have not seen that. Can you provide actual examples or are you just making a sweeping generalization?

---

Nope. Not about to go search for what's easily accessible to you.

I've been on this board for years. I know what I've seen. Go find it and do whatever you need to do to convince yourself that it isn't the case but it absolutely is for MOST who have commented it on this board.

What's with the whole DEI thing? Just say what you really want. It's not thinly veiled racism if it isn't thinly veiled. Just be out right racist. Just be who you are!

quote:

---

PK says retarded shite but the basketball fans know it has nothing to do with basketball, it’s an Ed O thing he’s obsessed with. You have exceeded his retardation but you’re serious. Nothing you’ve said is true or less say provable because we know what you people do with terms like true. “He loses everywhere he goes” “empty trophy cases”, these are factually false and the only hint at data you’ve provided ego every attempt at “fact” you’ve made has been the inverse of reality

---

Sure .sure...so then what has he won as a head coach other than mid major conference titles? And does that equate to the success you expect at LSU...a second time around? Cause that's the baseline.

quote:

---

Absolutely zero context

---

You want context? Recent final fours on average boost recruiting and success rate for P4 teams in following years even thru coaching changes. Especially if he's the coach you all believe then he should have been able to immediately get the ball rolling in those respects, right? What hindered him? Unlike McMahon, who as much of a shxt coach he is, had to contend against the damaged reputation of this program, due to Wade.

Context. Keep up... mentally.

quote:

---

So why are you here?

---

Why are you? Dick riding a requirement to post? I didn't realize. My bad.

Yes, most of this board worships at the feet of all things born and bred of idiocy.

He can't coach x's and O's and now that everybody is paying folks, there is no advantage to sacrifice playing for a competent coach over a payday when you can have both.

Down vote it to hell, IDC.

McMiller is an interesting one. High profile out of high school, lived up to it at each stop at Rutgers and Penn State. Heard about the huge ego, that's Kim's jam but sharing the ball has not been her thing. If she's finally tired of trying to do it alone, she's a great fit for Kim and the style of play but then, what's the lineup because she's not an off the bench player. Does Fulwiley agree to come of the bench again in that scenario?

Janneh, would be a great pick up off the bench subbing Knox or vice versa.

Crump is a great fit to spell the 2/3 with an elite 3 point shooter to space the floor. Her with any of the 3 guards and the way they can penetrate and kick would be very hard to stop.

Edwards would be an obvious yes, its her and Knox on the floor at the same time that makes me excited. Those 2 running both sides of the floor with any guard who can dish for the next 3/4 years would be great.

Trygger, I just don't get unless you can add an athletic 5 too, because she's just Koval with a better shot. Nice to have bodies but we need someone who can run and defend athletic bigs from other teams as well.

The discussion of dominance came from the post I replied to stating about how we get dominated by other teams big girls and need some to return that. If you read that you'd understand the context in which I stated, Merkle is not that.

My point was she would not be as productive with LSU because 1. Our pace is too fast for her to succeed because Mulkey like to play a certain style. 2. She would not be a focus of the offense like at Penn State

My previous post becomes even more relevant after last night. The two games I mentioned, that mattered are the two teams in the national championship tomorrow. She has decent, not great showings in blowouts. The worse of the two against the style we play and see night in and night out. It's not a match.

Hence my mentioning Woolfolk who's a perfect fit. Reynolds who we played this year and cause us problems is also a good fit. I'd hoped Cody and Jones and Bama had gotten in the portal since Curry left bit the didn't.

Why a 1 year, non fit isn't what you're looking for? Because Williams and Fulwiley are Seniors next year. You have a chance to compete for a title. You don't bring in a piece you expect to swallow up extensive starting time, that changes your whole pace and style of play and then make them have to do a total rebuild on chemistry. You need plug and play pieces and that boosts you for the year after where currently we don't have a true star on this roster as of now.