mackie

Better be careful with this approach. Not that big a deal if you can keep winning, but if the overall talent level decreases or doesn't quite measure up to the other boro teams and the wins falter a little, gets a lot of naysayers rumbling about the "talent" walking the halls. Case in point is just across town.

Agreed.

Just for the record, I played for Turnham and I never wanted to quit. It never even crossed my mind.

Fair enough my friend. I don't mean to silence you (or anybody else for that matter), I'm just trying to do my small part to lead this thread into deliberate, well-thought out discussion/debate on a sport and district that I enjoy following. I try to be as objective and non-personal as I can and I hope that is respected. I think Siegel will no doubt be able to win without Hammonds. Will they miss him - sure, but they have the horses to still play at a high level. The interesting thing to watch will be how well they adjust when he comes back.

I hate to do it boro, but I'm gonna keep firing away. Before it's all said and done, I may turn you into a decent debater. haha Lavergne was a .500 team last year and lost in the first round of the district. A handful of their wins were against "weaker" teams. Your previous posts would indicate that your own definition of success would not fit last year's Lavergne team. Furthermore, if that is in fact successful in your opinion, then Burks and Turnham have both had better seasons along the way and your comments about each would be negated. On another note, looks like Hammonds is in fact out with a broken foot. Wish him the best of luck in a speedy and complete recovery. Siegel has some marquee games over the break and I'm sure he is disappointed about possibly missing them.

Not exactly. I don't believe Couey has ever coached at Briarcrest. Maybe you meant to say Bartlett. Couey was at Bartlett for 1 season (07-08) and they were something like 4-22. He was at Cannon County 2 seasons and they won around 15 games or so in those 2 years. I am NOT saying that Couey is a bad coach. He didn't have much to work with at either place. Boro, you still have the right to your opinion that Couey is a top 3 coach (although I think it's a little early to tell either way), but the reasoning you offered to suport your opinion is not accurate.

I respect the Ric Flair mentality you and the Stars are displaying (to be the best you got to beat the best) when it comes to Siegel's scheduling. I'm just trying to help you be a little more objective in how your viewing other teams schedules. I'm not trying to validate the reasons posted above. You stated that you were curious as to the reasoning behind the scheduling and I just pointing out some of those potential reasons. High school scheduling isn't as easy as just picking up the phone and scheduling a game. Sometimes you just have to play teams that have open dates. Not everyone wants to fundraise or stay in a hotel over holiday breaks. As far as false confidence - I assume that Riverdale isn't thinking to themselves, "we beat Hickman Co, so we are ready for Siegel". Let me provide 2 scenarios using Riverdale and Siegel as an example: 1) Setting is first Riverdale-Siegel game this year. Riverdale goes into it knowing that Siegel is the favorite and has the big name players. The Warriors have played well up to that point and are riding some momentum into the game. Wins over "weaker" opponents have helped them to understand that practicing hard, working/playing together, and executing a gameplan can result in positive outcomes and they think to themselves if we can do those things during this game, we may give ourselves a chance to compete and who knows, maybe even pull this thing out. I don't view that as false confidence. 2) Same setting but Riverdale has struggled through the first half of the season losing a number of games to very talented squads. They didn't just lose them, they got beat by 15-30 pts each game. Siegel is of similar talent as the previous teams Riverdale has played. Do you not think that they would have great doubts in their minds on if they could even compete against the Stars? There would be little reason for them to believe otherwise. As you stated, coaches are trying to get their team ready to win championships. Burks knows his team better then anyone, and using the scenarios above maybe he feels that their best chance for playing good basketball during the district is in Scenario 1. The expectations comment was not to be taken from a broad perspective. I agree that year after year expectations for Riverdale should not be to beat up on weaker opponents and I don't think that is their long term intentions. As far as hardware is concerned, how quickly it's forgotten that the Warriors won the District Tourny a short 3 years ago. FYI - other then Siegel, I believe they are the only team to hoist that trophy in the past 5 years. Sorry for the lengthy post, but there isn't a lot of on the court stuff to discuss at this point. Either way, I think I'm done with the scheduling discussion. We may just have to agree to disagree.

The potential reasoning has been explained by more than one person (i.e. learning how to win again, budget restraints, consideration of girls opponent, instill some self confidence for younger guys, create player "buy-in" to the system, etc.) I have not been to a Riverdale game so I can't speak on their emotions directly, but I will say that part of learning how to win again involves learning to act like you've done it before. I do consider their wins successful. Those boys have won the games that were placed in front of them. There are a lot of teams on every level that don't win games they are supposed to, and Riverdale has done that. Keep in mind that in sports (and in life), the definition of success is often relative to the expectations.

No mention of Siegel in his post or mine. The fact of the matter remains that the right thing to do is count the HOF games win or lose, regardless of who the team is.

Bobby Luna is one of the better coaches in the mid-state. He always has a well prepared squad that typically finishes in the top tier of District 9. Gallatin may be a lot of things, but undisciplined is not one of them. I agree with all of that. Once again, why the continued bashing? Nobody from Riverdale is on here saying they are great or that they've beaten great teams. Riverdale's early success doesn't take away from Siegel's talent, expectations, or tough schedule.

In regards to the ongoing scheduling discussion, DNJ sports writer Tom Kreager had a great blog post about Hall of Fame games counting in the Win/Loss column. Scheduling weaker opponents isn't the only way to attempt to inflate a team's record. http://www.dnj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=PluckPersona&U=8ee5379aa167464ab1e6decf74f9e2bd&plckPersonaPage=BlogViewPost&plckUserId=8ee5379aa167464ab1e6decf74f9e2bd&plckPostId=Blog%3a8ee5379aa167464ab1e6decf74f9e2bdPost%3a74b4aa14-00b4-4041-985c-d5c5461633e2&plckController=PersonaBlog&plckScript=personaScript&plckElementId=personaDest

I was originally going to let starfan and boroballer's "quality win" and "good competition" quotes slide due to the fact that they didn't include any disparaging remarks about other teams. However, that is no longer the case. Historically, Hillcrest and Trezevant have been less than stellar AA teams. It doesn't appear as though Trezevent has had a winning season in over 8 years. Hillcrest has had small windows of success, advancing to a Sectional game twice in that same 8 yr time frame (4 yrs ago and 6 yrs ago), and I think they will be a decent team this year. However, let's not pretend like they are White Station and Ridgeway. Again, I will be the first to say that Siegel is good and their overall schedule is without question a tough one. I don't believe anyone on this board has stated otherwise, but for some reason star and boro still feel the need to belittle other district teams/players. Siegel posters constantly complain about people hatin' on Siegel. In my opinion, Siegel doesn't get a lot of respect because some people who claim to be affiliated with the Stars don't give any! (i.e. see post about Shelbyville's Andrews)

Please clarify. Are you saying that Siegel and Oakland's tough scheduling is why they consistently get out of the region? In the past 7 years, Oakland has advanced past the region 4 times. Siegel 3, Shelbyville 3, White Co 2, Columbia 1, and Blackman 1. Scheduling has had little to do with Oakland's and Siegel's success. As a result of superior talent, they have both been the cream of the crop in the region (along with Shelbyville) the past few years.

Boro point taken, but where are these numbers coming from? The CoachT schedule/results are not accurate, but your numbers don't even reflect the CoachT data. Did you just make these up to support your argument? Siegel has a good team, you and starfan don't have to continually bash everyone else or fabricate stats to validate that. A little research this morning resulted in the following: (please correct if there is anything wrong) Riverdale's opponents' combined record: 8-20 (May be missing 1 of Warren Co's games) Columbia 1-2 Hickman Co 1-3 Dickson Co 1-4 Hillsboro 1-0 Warren Co 1-3 Lebanon 2-3 Lincoln Co 1-5 Oakland's opponents' combined record: 8-10 (May be missing 1 of Warren Co's games) Warren Co 1-3 Franklin Co 2-4 Gallatin 1-1 Independence 4-2 Siegel's opponents' combined record: 9-8 (Can't find any info on Hillcrest other then 1 loss to Siegel, are they the team with 4 losses?) Liberty Tech 3-2 Independence 4-2 Trezevant 2-3 Hillcrest 0-1 ?

Although we have had our fair share of run-ins, I'm gonna have to side with boro on this one. he never stated that Siegel would beat Oak Hill, all he said was to not be surprised if Siegel did beat them. While it will be a very tough feat, you do have to give credit to the Stars for their scheduling this year. They are most definately not shying away from anyone. Boro, I agree with your above statement. Can you also see how it would be detrimental for a fairly young inexperienced Oakland team with a new coach to schedule the Arby's, White Station, or Oak Hill? Replacing coach King is no small task. As an outside observer, it will be critical for Wright to get buy-in from his players. If they falter early and often, he could potentially lose them for the year (and even worse, he could potentially lose them for good). What about a Blackman squad that has good individual puzzle pieces trying to find the best way to fit them together. Or a young Riverdale team trying to build confidence. Try to keep in mind that not all teams would benefit by scheduling the strong opponents Siegel has lined up. There's no question that Siegel's scheduling will help them make a run at the title. But not all teams have the same talent, confidence, experience or post-season potential as the Stars.

I'm o.k. with this post. boro, you are proud of your stars and I don't blame you. Siegel has facilitated the growth of these young men to a certain degree. On the other hand, let's not pretend that Siegel has been some bastion of discipline either. In all honesty regardless of who the coaching staff would have been, most of these guys would have received scholarships. The majority of the credit should go to these kids and their parents for working hard and (for the most part) making good choices in the classroom and in life that put them in a position to receive a free education.

Boro, I think even if you include managers, that the remaining county teams are still ahead, albeit not by much. However, I do not know for a fact that all of these kids actually received scholarships, I just know they signed with and/or played for college teams. I recognize that some are jr colleges and some of these guys may of never even shown up on campus. I'm not trying to argue one way or the other, I was just curious to see what the numbers were. Siegel has 9 players (not including Montori) plus 2 managers for a total of 11 scholarships. Oakland-at least 5 (Allen-NE, J-Wade-Columbia St, Epps-Milligan College, Joines-Hanover College, Adareus Dixon-Roane State) Riverdale - at least 3 (Kevin Smith-Richmond, Michael Young-Lambuth, Labrian Lyons-Lipscomb) Blackman - at least 1 (Ben Sneed-Columbia St) LaVergne - at least 3 (Smigielski-High Pt/Trevecca/Lambuth, Theryn Hudson-MTSU, Marcus Jefferson-Chattanooga St.) Smyrna - at least 2 (Stripling-Vol State, Davis Warner-Milligan)

First, for the sake of comparing apples to apples, I'm not including managers or other sports. While it is very admirable that Siegel has had 2 managers receive scholarships, I have no way of trying to determine other schools who have had managers receive scholarships. Additionally, lets not include scholarships in other sports. I know Oakland has had at least two (Drew Fann - Vandy baseball, Shane Blissard - MT football) in the last six years, and I'm assuming Riverdale has had a few kids get football scholarships. Second, I am retracting my earlier statement. With the above criteria, I believe Siegel has had 9 (includes Hammonds and Tate) scholarship players. The following list is far from exhaustive, but the best I could do with limited resources and time. Oakland-at least 5 (Allen-NE, J-Wade-Columbia St, Epps-Milligan College, Joines-Hanover College, Adareus Dixon-Roane State) Riverdale - at least 3 (Kevin Smith-Richmond, Michael Young-Lambuth, Labrian Lyons-Lipscomb) Blackman - at least 1 (Ben Sneed-Columbia St) White County - at least 2 (Aaron Puckett-Sewanee, Stewart Mitchell-Vol State) Warren County - at least 1 (Chris Weitzel-Freed Hardeman) Lebanon - at least 2 (Andrew Donald-Auburn-Montgomery, Jesse Allen-Vol State)

Why the Blackman reference? Choppin is a Riverdale fan. Pay attention. No one can argue the college talent that has come through Siegel. Since they've opened, they may even have more scholarship players then all the other district schools combined. Congrats to both Hammonds and Tate. Was a ball-boy at MT when Hammonds Sr was there. Always seemed larger than life to me (and probably to a lot of his opponents as well) and super nice. Good luck to both.

Not exactly. Former player. Who just so happens to have a good relationship with him. Hard for you guys to swallow I know. Just say that you don't like him and hate the way he coaches and I'm fine with that. Agreed OP, these guys are completely unable to be objective and have no understanding or insight into the history that they try to use in their character attacks.

Please show me these "public records" you speak of. Fact... Turnham was head coach at Chattanooga State and was ranked nationally while he was there. Was not fired. Fact... Turnham was head coach at Cleveland State and took Riverdale job to be closer to family. Was not fired. Fact... Turnham was hired by Hulon Watson at Riverdale, Watson left 2 years later, Nolan was hired and didn't like Turnham so he didn't offer tenure after Turnham's third year. You want to call that fired? fine, but don't act like it was because Riverdale didn't improve while he was there. Fact... Turnham willingly left Franklin County after he got tenure and after Blackman contacted him and offered the job (again to be closer to family). Was not fired! Not exactly "everywhere" he has been. Again, you have no clue what you are speaking of, just trying to stir crap up.

Just wanted everyone to know that not all of us 'boro people feel like we are the center of the universe. LA has had some very solid teams over the years, regardless of schedule and cchs supporter has done a fabulous job of explaining the bball heritage from woodbury. I never get a response from baller when I confront him with factual arguments, so I wouldn't hold my breath guys. Good luck to LA this year.

boroballer, starfan, and Choppin, You guys crack me up. You think that people don't like siegel because they are good. While there may be some truth to that (as is the case for a lot of perenial winners i.e. Patriots, Yankees, etc.), you guys aren't helping your cause with your posts. This whole thing started when a Blackman fan posted how he/she thought that Blackman would be better this year and they were looking forward to seeing Brown and Smith back on the floor to see what they could accomplish. The poster also opined that he/she thought Blackman had a good coach. Nothing was mentioned about Siegel or Dotson. Then you guys immediately started with the Turnham/Burks bashing (and even threw Kevin Thomas in there). But as soon as someone questions Dotson's coaching abilities, you guys start name calling. A little hypocritical don't you think? You have no clue about some of the stuff you are posting about (i.e. Turnham firings, players quitting, player relationships, etc.). There are plenty of people (not just Blackman fans) that will tell you that Blackman has overachieved each year Turnham has been there (including the bleak season last year). You guys don't like Turnham and his style? Fine, but Blackman consistently puts a team on the floor that scraps, plays solid defense, hustles, is disciplined, and well prepared. That's hard to argue! (I think wingman10, 2Priceless, and OaklandPatriots will all agree, again non-blackman posters) And prior to the tough season last year, Blackman ranked third in district wins during the period that Turnham has been there(behind very talented Siegel and Oakland teams might I add) Before you guys fire back, that's not to say that 3rd is the greatest accomplishment in the world, but it is far from being "inept" or the "most ineffective" coach in the district.

maybe a lack of defensive discipline/desire??

Once again, here to reign in some of boro's "facts"........ 05-06 Blackman finished tied for 4th with Lebanon. 06-07 Blackman finished 2nd behind Oakland. 07-08 Blackman finished 4th. Siegel beat Blackman by 35 and 10 this season.