Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Buck Stops Here

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Buck Stops Here

    President Harry Truman, around 60 years ago, coined the phrase, "The Buck Stops Here" and put a sign on his desk with those exact words on it.

    His meaning was that he is in charge and he and he alone is responsible for everything. If something goes wrong, the blame ends with him. Not his underlings, not his top advisors, not the little guys out there fighting the battles and putting their blood on the line.

    I fully respect GM. I firmly believe he has the potential to be the very best coach the Shockers have ever had. He has all the credentials and in a couple of years, we'll be back. We should support him, we should honor his decisions, and we should respect him.

    Nevertheless, the total responsibility for this years teams' play rests solely on his shoulders. If his players fail, it's his fault, no one else's. One would certainly expect he knew exactly what he was getting into when he accepted this job and if he didn't, shame on him.

    The Buck stops with GM. It did so the moment he became coach. You can't delegate responsibility. Personally, I think the coach needs to take the pressure off of his players and unconditionally accept and shoulder the blame for the terrible shooting, the mounting missed shots, and for all offensive and defensive deficiencies. Hopefully he did so today and will continue to do so in the future.

    I'm sure many of you will disagree with the above, fine. I will appreciate your comments.

  • #2
    Here! Here!

    Coach promised us at the beginning of the season that it may not always be pretty but we are going to put a team on the floor each and every night that works its ass off!

    Let's get those "division 3" players fired up coach!!!


    T


    ...8)

    Comment


    • #3
      President George W Bush coined this phrase. I dont thinks its on his desk yet.


      "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." George W. Bush

      osterwu: 8)
      I have come here to chew bubblegum and kickass ... and I'm all out of bubblegum.

      Comment


      • #4
        B.S.
        The coach is not the one shooting the ball....
        Well, um, actually a pretty nice little Saturday, we're going to go to Home Depot. Yeah, buy some wallpaper, maybe get some flooring, stuff like that. Maybe Bed, Bath, and Beyond, I don't know, I don't know if we'll have enough time.

        Comment


        • #5
          They can only be in organized practice and games for 20 hours a week. And also need a minimum of 1 day with nothing scheduled. This time includes meetings, mandatory weights, and practice as well as the games. Shooting is something that needs to be worked on when they are not practicing, because taking alot of time out of the 20 hours for shooting will only cause more problems. If the guys aren't practicing their shots on their own time, then there really isn't much coach can do.

          Comment


          • #6
            The buck

            Exactly right, TD and rr: Marshall -- and his staff -- haven't missed a shot yet this year. Not from the field, not from the line. They have yet to fail to box out, and they haven't missed a defensive assignment.

            Comment


            • #7
              60Shox –

              You are correct in stating that Marshall is ultimately responsible the success or failure of WSU Basketball. If you want to take issue with CGM's strategy, game plan, in game coaching, etc. – I think that is fair game. I also think that if the players are not playing with maximum effort that reflects poorly on the coaching staff. The coaches get paid not just to teach players but motivate them as well.

              Where I disagree with you, for a couple of reasons, is that Marshall should take responsibility privately or publicly for the team's inability to shoot a high percentage: (1) CGM inherited a lot of these players and he had very little time to sign the players he did recruit. Turgeon did not leave this program is very good shape; (2) As others have pointed out CGM can't shoot the ball for these kids – all he can do is provide an offensive system to get them open looks. The players have had plenty of open looks this year; (3) the only people with the power to turn this around is the players themselves and Marshall taking responsibility for their poor shooting won't help matters.

              As for Marshall knowing exactly what he was getting into – I am not sure he did. How could he?

              A couple of years from now, if CGM has a team of players that shoot like this one – then the blame will fall squarely on his shoulders. This year; however, it is not his fault.

              Comment


              • #8
                He is not just responsible for their poor shooting but also how they do in class!!!! When the next one knocks up a coed who is to blame ? Clearly, Gregg Marshall!!!! The next time one of our players misses a layup, I know I'll be yelling " nice shot, Coach".
                I want a coach in my life, I'll never be responsible for anything. If my wife is annoyed with me I'll just say "yo baby, blame coach".
                Unleash Brett Burley, let all tremble before him!!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  I understand the "buck stops here" principle, but it's not something I'm going to apply to someone else when I'm intelligent enough to see where the real fault lies.

                  Marshall isn't missing open looks or not finishing on drives to the basket. He isn't the weak-side defender helping so much a guy is wide open in the corner. I know we like to call the players "kids", but if they are old enough to serve our country and old enough to vote, they are old enough to accept some responsibility for their poor performance. If they shoot 28% from the field, I'm holding them accountable. Of course the coach has to accept some responsibility, but not all of it.

                  At some point you have to accept that the coaches know what they are doing and aren't coaching players to miss shots or leave opponents open in the corner.

                  Now, once a coach has had a few years to fully shape his program, you can apply the buck-stops-here principle.

                  But for now, I'm trusting my eyes and sensibilities.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The coach can guide the team, but the team has to do it. Maggie said it very well, although

                    Several players have not performed as advertised previously:

                    Griskenas was said to be a good shooter, Ellis was said to be a good shooter, and they both have not proven it yet. I don't think either one has made the impact to the team that was expected of them. I would only give both of them a C- so far.

                    Gal, although pretty good with more Potential, has not adjusted fully to
                    "American" style of ball, is not a PG, has some good moves, does not have a fast release for his shot, but he is trying, and he can't do it by himself.

                    PJ is not having a very good year. I feel he would be more productive at the 3 rather than a 2.

                    Clemente is what I expected, except a little better shooting from 4-6 feet.

                    Hatch is about what I thought, ups and downs.

                    Durley, is more than I expected, Offensively.

                    Phil is playing hard, especially for being undersized as a 5.

                    And Matt, is the one that made this team, and previous teams, work.
                    He was the catalyst to the team, plus he shoots good.

                    Although they have played 'hard' a few games, and bad some games, but face it, we are not running over with talent this year.

                    Coach had lots of problems and issues to face when he came here, and is doing the best he can, but things haven't quite panned out like he expected.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So far this year, WSU has been outscored by 21 total points in 15 games. We've shot 28.1% from 3 and 40.4%from the field other than 3-pt attempt. Last year's percentages were 36.6% and 45.9%. FT% is 67.1 to last year's 71.1. If this year's team shot last year's percentage on this year's shot attempts, WSU would have scored 129 more points or 108 more points than the opponents in 15 games.

                      The coach is at fault if no open looks are available...that is system, effort and motivation. If good looks (shots) are available and missed, what can the coach do. PJ knows how to shoot layups...but he missed several crucial ones. There is some teaching in FT technique, but when a 96% shooter misses 3 in one night, blame the coach.

                      Other than the dribbling by the point guards with 10 seconds left on the shot clock and our play in the final minute of the half, the system seems to be getting pretty good shot opportunities, except of course when the turnovers prevent anything from happening.

                      I'd say that I'm 85% pleased with HCGM's system and preparation at this point.
                      "I not sure that I've ever been around a more competitive player or young man than Fred VanVleet. I like to win more than 99.9% of the people in this world, but he may top me." -- Gregg Marshall 12/23/13
                      ---------------------------------------
                      Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
                      "We have to pass it, to find out what's in it".

                      A physician called into a radio show and said:
                      "That's the definition of a stool sample."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        First, has the coach said something or done something to suggest that he does not believe he is ultimately responsible for the program? I think if you asked him who is responsible for the program he would say that he is.

                        Second, if a player blows a wide open lay up and we lose the game by one, does that mean the coach is avoiding responsibility under the "buck stops here" theory, by pointing this out? Seems to me the coach might be avoiding his obligation to do what is in the best interest of the program by "sugar coating" problems and not doing what he thinks is right to fix that problem. Part of that fix may well be to point out that the player needs to take the responsibility to make wide open lay ups.

                        Being ultimately responsible for a program, a company, a team, or whatever does NOT mean ignoring issues that need to be fixed and simply falling on the sword. Good leaders understand that they must have the right people in place to be great. Part of getting the right players in place may be pointing out deficiencies in existing ones.

                        Incidentally, if one of Truman's subordinates had engaged in illegal conduct about which Truman had no idea, I am confident Truman would not have gone to jail for him.
                        Wear your seatbelt.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by RoyalShock
                          I understand the "buck stops here" principle, but it's not something I'm going to apply to someone else when I'm intelligent enough to see where the real fault lies.

                          Marshall isn't missing open looks or not finishing on drives to the basket. He isn't the weak-side defender helping so much a guy is wide open in the corner. I know we like to call the players "kids", but if they are old enough to serve our country and old enough to vote, they are old enough to accept some responsibility for their poor performance. If they shoot 28% from the field, I'm holding them accountable. Of course the coach has to accept some responsibility, but not all of it.

                          At some point you have to accept that the coaches know what they are doing and aren't coaching players to miss shots or leave opponents open in the corner.

                          Now, once a coach has had a few years to fully shape his program, you can apply the buck-stops-here principle.

                          But for now, I'm trusting my eyes and sensibilities.
                          Royal, you are smarter than this...

                          I let the other "coach doesn't take the shot" rhetoric go because it's hopeless to argue with some but you?...

                          Does the coach take the shot in any game? Will that same excuse work with every losing game? This position is absolutely silly.. ESPECIALLY when you consider the SAME PLAYERS have shot much better in the past.

                          P.S.

                          My complaints have had very little to do with shooting and MUCH more to do with effort and motivation of which the coach is VERY responsible for. The players came into Springfield and played with zero effort. That part is on the coaches shoulders.

                          Coaches promise:

                          "We may not always be pretty this year but I promise you we will put a team on the floor that gives it their all".


                          T


                          ...8)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Some of you should just stop... I'm embarrassed for you...


                            T


                            ...8)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The Buck Stops Here

                              Originally posted by 60Shock
                              President Harry Truman, around 60 years ago, coined the phrase, "The Buck Stops Here" and put a sign on his desk with those exact words on it.

                              His meaning was that he is in charge and he and he alone is responsible for everything. If something goes wrong, the blame ends with him. Not his underlings, not his top advisors, not the little guys out there fighting the battles and putting their blood on the line.

                              I fully respect GM. I firmly believe he has the potential to be the very best coach the Shockers have ever had. He has all the credentials and in a couple of years, we'll be back. We should support him, we should honor his decisions, and we should respect him.

                              Nevertheless, the total responsibility for this years teams' play rests solely on his shoulders. If his players fail, it's his fault, no one else's. One would certainly expect he knew exactly what he was getting into when he accepted this job and if he didn't, shame on him.

                              The Buck stops with GM. It did so the moment he became coach. You can't delegate responsibility. Personally, I think the coach needs to take the pressure off of his players and unconditionally accept and shoulder the blame for the terrible shooting, the mounting missed shots, and for all offensive and defensive deficiencies. Hopefully he did so today and will continue to do so in the future.

                              I'm sure many of you will disagree with the above, fine. I will appreciate your comments.

                              Ultimately, you are 100% correct. The problem with your logic is that "ultimately" is no where close to 9 months on the job.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X