So, it appears that our Podcast superstars are making the argument that we, Ole Miss fans, should expect or demand no more than mediocrity for the simple reason being that Ole Miss has never had success in the past. This is the dumbest argument I have ever heard the Podcast superstars make on their program. So, can we all assume that when the all star break of the MLB arrives and the Cubs are at the bottom of their division, we can expect commentary about how the Cubs season is going as expected and that there is joy in Chicago for such an sub-mediocre performance? They certainly better not make trades to try and strengthen their team. I don't know why they bothered making a coaching change. They haven't won a world series since the first decade of the twentieth Century. It was 1940's when they last appeared in a World Series. What the hell where they thinking hiring Joe Madden as a manager? Don't they know their place in MLB? What a stupid act of defiance. Don't they know that they have no recent history of success?
This argument by the podcasters is just silly. They used Florida as an example of a program that Ole Miss is not, and should not aspire to be. Let's look at Florida. How about the Kid from Memphis, who seems to pride himself in alcohol consumption, investigate how much Basketball success Florida had prior to the hiring of Billy Donnovan? How much NBA presence did Florida have before Billy took over the Florida job? Did that stop them from seeking Basketball success?
I am not making an argument that Andy Kennedy needs to be replaced. I believe that Andy Kennedy is one of the top five coaches in the conference. Ole Miss isn't and shouldn't replace Andy Kennedy. Kennedy's problem is that he hasn't been able to recruit players that can dominate around the basket. Look, basketball is like having a good running game in football. If you can run the football predictably against everyone you face, then you end up with season outcomes like Alabama has the past six years. Basketball is no different. If you can dominate the paint you will win 90 percent of your games (unless your Johnny Jones). If Andy can use the new arena to attract some big guys that can play at an elite level then he can get away from jump shooting game plans. AK's teams win and lose games according to how well they shoot. If they shoot 40% from the perimeter then they are going to win games, but those same players may have a night where they shoot 25% next time they step on the court. Why are his teams like that year in and year out? Because you can find more six foot even jump shooters than you can seven foot centers that are NBA prospects. Hopefully this new arena gives Kennedy the leverage that he needs.
But please, put away the argument that Ole Miss should not aspire to success based upon the overall history of the program. Ole Miss's lack of NCAA presence two decades ago should have no bearing on a fans desire for success today any more than the Ole Miss football win/loss totals of the 70's should determine expectations for Hugh Freeze.
This argument by the podcasters is just silly. They used Florida as an example of a program that Ole Miss is not, and should not aspire to be. Let's look at Florida. How about the Kid from Memphis, who seems to pride himself in alcohol consumption, investigate how much Basketball success Florida had prior to the hiring of Billy Donnovan? How much NBA presence did Florida have before Billy took over the Florida job? Did that stop them from seeking Basketball success?
I am not making an argument that Andy Kennedy needs to be replaced. I believe that Andy Kennedy is one of the top five coaches in the conference. Ole Miss isn't and shouldn't replace Andy Kennedy. Kennedy's problem is that he hasn't been able to recruit players that can dominate around the basket. Look, basketball is like having a good running game in football. If you can run the football predictably against everyone you face, then you end up with season outcomes like Alabama has the past six years. Basketball is no different. If you can dominate the paint you will win 90 percent of your games (unless your Johnny Jones). If Andy can use the new arena to attract some big guys that can play at an elite level then he can get away from jump shooting game plans. AK's teams win and lose games according to how well they shoot. If they shoot 40% from the perimeter then they are going to win games, but those same players may have a night where they shoot 25% next time they step on the court. Why are his teams like that year in and year out? Because you can find more six foot even jump shooters than you can seven foot centers that are NBA prospects. Hopefully this new arena gives Kennedy the leverage that he needs.
But please, put away the argument that Ole Miss should not aspire to success based upon the overall history of the program. Ole Miss's lack of NCAA presence two decades ago should have no bearing on a fans desire for success today any more than the Ole Miss football win/loss totals of the 70's should determine expectations for Hugh Freeze.
