1. That's a description of their style, which is a good start. But you forgot reasons. Why wouldn't that style work in a big conference? 2. They jacked up 3's this year at a lesser frequency than Duke, Florida, Wisconsin, Vanderbilt, Michigan, and Iowa State. And just a touch more than Mizzou. 3. #2 is convenient, as it narrows my question down. My narrowed down question: Would you care to articulate for us some reasons why a pressing defensive style wouldn't be able to win consistently in a major conference?
I didn't forget anything, I have no desire to list reasons for you. All you need to know is they had Indiana beat and continued to crank 3's and shot themselves into an L.
Why do I need to know anything? I just asked you a simple question. Well, anyway, I do know that they shot themselves into the final four last year. Is that 4 Ws that they shot themselves into?
And, to be clear, I'm not referring to anything grammatical. Rather, I'm asking because you don't understand what the word "reason" means. You wrote five posts ago that you doubted their ability to win consistently because of their style. Unclear why you're repeating this conclusion. But understand that it is a conclusion. A "reason" is something that is going to act as a nexus between your prediction of future losses and a pressing style. You following? [conclusion] because [reason]. You can use that as a template sentence going forward.
[Conclusion]Inability to win consistently because of their style [/Conclusion] because [reason] Right? Think about this sentence. Jason never gets laid because he has a tiny tiny penis. Now with this sentence, no elaboration is necessary because societal understandings make it implicit. But what if penis size was totally irrelevant? Or normally irrelevant? Then we're going to need a little bit more. Jason never gets laid because he has a tiny tiny penis. Poor guy always goes after the dirtiest girls in town who are used to a good 8 inches deep, and so they just laugh at him whenever he whips out his stumpy little pecker. Maybe if he goes after that band chick instead, he might get his junk wet. I'm pretty sure she hasn't had anything substantial balls deep in her. JZ is writing : Jason never gets laid because he has a tiny tiny penis. KB is asking: Why is the fact that he has a tiny penis preventing him from getting laid? And then JZ is again writing: Jason never gets laid because he has a tiny tiny penis. And then I become concerned about the future of our society.
We have confounding. Jason lacks confidence. If we elaborate on the style of play, we can ask: Has similar style been effective in major conferences? If we have no evidence, we must assume that 1) the conference has had good coaches, good coaches aren't idiots, and therefore good coaches in that conference haven't adopted that style because they don't think it will work, and we should conclude that it won't work. If there have been similar styles, we can take from that either 1) it works, or 2) it doesn't work. Or, we can say that each style is based on the abilities of the coach, not the style itself, and thus Shaka's style will work, because it fits him. In which case, we have to wait and see, and we can't come to any conclusion prior to that; we can only speculate. In which case argument is pointless.
I can't disagree with any of that, but now I must ask: when did we add in the "phone-a-friend" feature on the board? How many do we get per week? I'm going with BPV as my friend for phone-a-friend.
In the words of Willie The Supervisor...."whose fault was that" [video]http://www.comedycentral.com/video-clips/x8cw7a/crank-yankers-yps-loses-a-package[/video] [video=youtube;KGZFIadWD9w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGZFIadWD9w[/video]
I have no idea what that means. And I'm not overly concerned with Diddy's words. But what I do know is that the following is a very simple question: "Can you explain why you believe defensive pressing to be non-conducive with winning consistently in a major conference?" And you answered that question with: "the press is the reason they won't win consistently" I guess that makes you the big winner.
I would also like to offer my services as well. I'm excellent in the category of "female translator". For example: female (on first or second date as you proceed back to your place): "You know we're not having sex tonight, right?" translation: "if you have even a modicum of persistence and social savvy, you're gonna be balls deep in me in roughly T minus 28 minutes" See how accurate that was?
