kbrks

But why burn two timeouts for your defense on BA's 2 point conversion attempt which they converted anyway to tie game in regulation? Your offense has been moving ball all night long, there is a minute left and you have a good kicker. It was a great game by both squads. Obviously Chandler and Oatsvall were impressive. JO's arm strength with accuracy and the way he made people miss was exciting to watch. Has improved even more from last time I saw him play early in season.

"I told you so" can also be the objective approach to evaluating what happens at CPA. All kinds of options... To this point never really won anything what people consider truly matters in terms of competition without having at least 2 and somtimes up to 5 D1 players on the floor. A tremendous advantage so it will be interesting to see what happens if/when that advantage is no longer a factor. And this appears to be the year when that advantage not in place.

Yes and many coaches have led their teams to the sectionals and even state tournament without having any D1 type players on the floor.

It can, but not always. The discerning eye looks at the system, player movement/footwork, how players develop during their careers, defensive fundamentals, not just winning because of more talent.

That is simple to answer - because the body of work is based on having far superior talent than opponents. Most TN HS teams do not have any players that can play at the D1 level. In basketball one makes a big difference, 2 can definitely put you in contention for state title. Now imagine having 3-5 of those type players on the floor over each of the last 6 years which has been the case at CPA.

Interesting and potentially valid point based on the types of posts one has read over last several years. Too many automatically equate great records with great coaching. Sure, that is possible, but one of the truest litmus tests of a coach's ability is beating teams when you do not have as much talent as your opponent. Since that has not been the case, this year appears to be provide a clearer test for people who want to debate coaching ability.

We have different definitions of "lashing out." I have a good memory, no sense in repeating yourself which you continue to do, so feel free to keep your JMHO to yourself.

So are you saying if he was the one who did not renew my contract, I could be bitter? For the record, since you brought it up, if you do not think he and his cronies did not use influence and play a role, you would be sadly mistaken. He made his agenda well known at my expense. Still, I have no right or does it do me any good to be bitter. The topic of the thread is CPA basketball and coaching. And unless you have never stated what might be considered by some an unfavorable opinion of a coach, either publicly or privately, it would be hypocritical of you, or anyone for that matter, to try and call me out on it.

Sure there is because I am not bitter, but those like you can continue to try to feed your perception, that is your choice. Here is a truth, I can disagree with others, reveal a fact or state an opinion and does not make me bitter.

Not the space to go in and cover all the dynamics of what 4 out 1 in means, but never once did I say Mason was "purely a post" and could not be used on the perimeter. I certainly understand the theory by playing 2 posts together, but what is good "on the grease board" does not mean it is good for the team. I can assure you with that personnel it was not the best way to play because then it was easier to bring help on Z when he got the ball inside which made it tougher on him, along with space to allow perimeters to get to the basket, dish to Z when help came, etc. Merely one example from that year of a team that still won plenty of games, but not what I would describe as well coached.

Don't confuse style with scheme. In college you can recruit to both. In HS unless you have the same personnel each year, it is better to fit the scheme to the personnel. That year a scheme with 4 perimeter and one interior better suited the personnel as opposed to two post players especially since Zelnik was very limited on perimeter. And it wouldn't in the least limit Z Mason from being on the perimeter within that scheme in order to change it up.

I've questioned both. Granted, my opinion was developed relatively early, but have seen nothing yet to change it. Take for instance Mason, Miller, Anderson Sr. year, talented enough,but did not return to state. I saw role issues, offensive and defensive scheme issues. Example - playing Mason and Zelnik (double post) together IMO big mistake, since it brought an extra defender into paint to jam things up. Should have surrounded 4 perimeter shooters around Mason since no one in the state could match up. That is all about coaching, plain and simple.

No, since it is not something you suddenly learn overnight. More like whether past success has been based more on talent then coaching. Many "coaches" can win at HS level if they have more talent then everyone else. But when the talent is not there, coaching ability becomes readily evident and easy to gauge.

You mean now that they are back to being a high school competing against other high schools? Not sure yet, haven't seen this team play. I have always said the system and past success was based on being able to overwhelm the opponent with superior talent. Since that doesn't seem like it will happen this year due to departures and no new DI talent transfers that I am aware of I would expect it to be much different this year unless the system has changed and some real coaching rises up.

What, CPA fans not appreciative? Guess I shouldn't be surprised. I can remember when divepix posted the year after two straight years of winning, first ever championships, state tourney appearance, etc. the CPA fan base was discouraged when a young, inexperienced team was competitive, but had a losing record. Sad how the pendulum swings back and forth.

With all that they have going for them in the other areas, the bottom line is they have good, talented players for HS, which over the years certain CPA posters want to attribute success to everything BUT. It is not like CPA football is going out there week after week facing opponents consistently more talented. Of course there are those who understand this including Coach Martin: "God has a whole lot to do with kids being D-I players — a lot more than coaches," CPA coach Ingle Martin said. "I can’t make a kid tall enough or fast enough…â€

Continues to be a common theme from these past few years, yet based on a recent article in the Tennessean, CPA is listed as the D1 Middle Tennessee program with the highest number of FBS college players on current rosters, trailing only DII BA and Ensworth. Go figure...

Typical nerd, starts out like it is all about the game and then quickly digresses. I find it amusing nerd talks about someone being classless. A class response would have been acknowledging how certain factors could have an effect on a game knowing it can't change the actual result, so why get into the name calling? Nature of fans is to speculate what could happen before (predicting the result) and what could have happened IF..., doesn't make anyone classless.

That has been answered, read all the TSSAA regulations on the subject and you will find it is a very narrow and stringent definition of what it means for all members of a school community to follow the rules/spirit of the rules. Good points and I couldn't agree more in how strong a role the whole topic of PT plays in the equation. That is another reason why this whole idea that has been brought up many times in the past that all these kids simply transfer based on winning program and coach without knowing their role/PT is a very small minority, happens few and far between.

The kids have transferred, what difference would it make especially since it does not sound like a surprise the why behind it? But don't name the kids if you are uncomfortable, just start with the actual number.

Saying kids leave because they do not want to play for a terrible coach is far different then saying parents and kids on their own are simply seeking the winningest programs with the best facilities and best coaches which is the argument many want to make. But for the sake your point, list all the players from your old school over the last 5 years who have transferred to play elsewhere, I'd be interested to know.

Agreed, not really a public-private issue as much as it is an association issue which includes the members and the governing board. If members followed the rules/spirit of the rules no problem, but when that does not happen and members can't police each other, they look to the governing board. But an association that relies primarily on the current structure, self-investigation, is doomed to failure. Disagree, at the HS level in this day and age this is by far the exception rather then the rule and happens most when recruiting violations and inducements occur. These decisions are rarely made in a vacuum without a quality player knowing what to expect. And how do you think that happens...

Should not be a problem of how many games are won. Winning brings about scrutiny as to the "why" which leads to the issue of "level playing field," which if there isn't one leads to the issue and questions of whether or not it was created against the rules/spirit of the rules. If it actually is done without transferring HS All-Americans/DI type players maybe there will be the right reasons this time around, ones that also actually support the school mission. That is what CPA should want to happen.

For me, comments attributed to Childress have been very disappointing throughout the entire process since he frames them in a way that does not take proper responsibility and deflects from the real issue. Not hard to see through at all. Statements like "need facts, can't act on unsubstantiated statements from anonymous sources" like that is the only type of information the TSSAA has received and then stating "last 8 proven recruiting violations were by public schools" only displays how unwilling and out of touch the organization and its leader are in dealing with it.

The way it was designed, Coach King was a real representation of blending the academic with the athletic.