C Zach Brown

[Matrim55]

From what I'm hearing, Lipman is the one making this keep going. He wants Brown to go on all visits and really check out his options before making a decision. He'd have been ours already otherwise, so says the rumor mill. I still think we're in a really good place here, but I'm not sure Kentucky has made him a priority (though I don't know that they will).

IMO this is a good thing, since he can't sign a LOI until this time next year anyway. Make sure the kid feels like he's seen as much as he can, and that he has no doubts at all about where he wants to go before he commits. Let him go to Kentucky and Kansas and UCLA and wherever else before he makes it official with us.

Losing him to one of those visits would suck, but you know what would suck worse? What would suck worse is if he committed to UConn now, and we cooled on the other centers we're in the running for, and then 12-18 months from now, he changed his mind. And then we're stuck with a 3- or low-4-star prospect instead of one of the 5- or high-4-stars we're currently after, because we thought we had Brown all along.

So this makes certain that we'll stay hard after Brown, and we'll keep on Richards and whoever else as well. Given KO's ability to land his top targets - the guys who he seems to bond with - I'm pretty confident that we'll get Brown no matter what.

But I like that we're going to keep our options open, and that the kid will do the same, until it's time to put pen to paper on a LOI.

 

[ctchamps]

IMO this is a good thing, since he can't sign a LOI until this time next year anyway. Make sure the kid feels like he's seen as much as he can, and that he has no doubts at all about where he wants to go before he commits. Let him go to Kentucky and Kansas and UCLA and wherever else before he makes it official with us.

Losing him to one of those visits would suck, but you know what would suck worse? What would suck worse is if he committed to UConn now, and we cooled on the other centers we're in the running for, and then 12-18 months from now, he changed his mind. And then we're stuck with a 3- or low-4-star prospect instead of one of the 5- or high-4-stars we're currently after, because we thought we had Brown all along.

So this makes certain that we'll stay hard after Brown, and we'll keep on Richards and whoever else as well. Given KO's ability to land his top targets - the guys who he seems to bond with - I'm pretty confident that we'll get Brown no matter what.

But I like that we're going to keep our options open, and that the kid will do the same, until it's time to put pen to paper on a LOI.

Lipman ha$ money $o it won't be a$ ea$y to per$uade him u$ing unorthodox mean$ if you get my drift.

The article that somebody posted regarding Brown's relationship to Lipman tells me that this will be an above board and thorough review process. I like our chances.

 

[superjohn]

Brown is all about UConn and coach Ollie and Lipman is doing what a good dad does advising his son to make an educated decision, we are in a great place here.

 

[6xChamps]

I have a very poorly made Zac Brown Band photoshop with him and our other recruits for if/when Zach commits.

 

[Paesano]

Lipman ha$ money $o it won't be a$ ea$y to per$uade him u$ing unorthodox mean$ if you get my drift.

The article that somebody posted regarding Brown's relationship to Lipman tells me that this will be an above board and thorough review process. I like our chances.

A few people here would have lost their minds if I had posted this. I hope you are right, by the way. I am $ick of lo$ing recruit$ to that ba$tard!!!!

 

[jibsey]

If he wants to play 16 minutes a game as part of a 2 starting team platoon then....
Or featured stud...... It's just way too early in this process like in the Diamond Stone situation, hopefully a better result.

 

[ctchamps]

A few people here would have lost their minds if I had posted this. I hope you are right, by the way. I am $ick of lo$ing recruit$ to that ba$tard!!!!

I think I've earned the right to be blunt with you.

You are not the only one who has a strong feeling about Kentucky's program. Those of us who have expressed this unsubstantiated opinion have been taken to task by posters who insist on presenting proof to back up our claims or posters who are annoyed with people casting stones. However most of us who present this opinion don't get ostracized based just on this opinion.

Where you have caused irreparable damage to yourself is your contention that UConn should employ the same techniques as rogue programs. That claim will universally antagonize every person in this forum. It was resented prior to this seasons recruiting success. But you continued it after this seasons success because you want the recruiting to be at Duke's and Kentucky's level and choose to not be content that UConn's success is better than 98-99% of all programs.

I will make an unsubstantiated claim but one that is at the core of my belief system and the way I behave. I believe there are morally perfect people in this world and morally atrocious people in this world. Those two extremes are very few in number. I believe the vast majority of us fit between those two extremes. Most of us try to do the right things most of the time. I think that it behooves us to continue trying and not succumb to our moral weaknesses and I believe that code is ingrained in most of us.

If you think I'm wrong about this, that everyone is inherently bad and cheating, if you believe that the programs that are most successful in recruiting are successful primarily or exclusively because they are the best at cheating, you should continue to argue this contention. But realize it will always be unpopular because correctly or incorrectly most of us need to believe we are not part of the problem. Additionally your assumption could very well be incorrect.

 

[Paesano]

Fair enough. I admit that my frustration has lead me to wonder if maybe we shouldn't play the game. And I realize that is how morality spirals into the abyss. One person is a scum and gets away with it so others feel like they have to do the same to keep life fair which, of course, it never will be. But, damn, if that isn't frustrating as hell.

I don't think everyone is a cheater but there are some out there for sure. Some get caught and punished (Larry Brown) and some get caught and not punished (Duke and UNC) and some never get caught (squidy). I look at situation and it always seems obvious to me. Calhoun clearly bent fewer rules. With everything he had to sell to recruits, he got relatively few blue chippers. Some coaches have way too much recruiting success relative to what they have to sell. Some of them eventually find success and then people forget that they pulled in tons of blue chippers before they were in the situation they are now. I don't forget. That can be a bad thing.

 

[sdhusky]

Fair enough. I admit that my frustration has lead me to wonder if maybe we shouldn't play the game. And I realize that is how morality spirals into the abyss. One person is a scum and gets away with it so others feel like they have to do the same to keep life fair which, of course, it never will be. But, damn, if that isn't frustrating as hell.

I don't think everyone is a cheater but there are some out there for sure. Some get caught and punished (Larry Brown) and some get caught and not punished (Duke and UNC) and some never get caught (squidy). I look at situation and it always seems obvious to me. Calhoun clearly bent fewer rules. With everything he had to sell to recruits, he got relatively few blue chippers. Some coaches have way too much recruiting success relative to what they have to sell. Some of them eventually find success and then people forget that they pulled in tons of blue chippers before they were in the situation they are now. I don't forget. That can be a bad thing.

You write stupid stuff.

 

[Northbound]

You write stupid stuff.

That is funny right there. I just laughed my ass off.

 

[Paesano]

That is funny right there. I just laughed my ass off.

Yes, the irony is hysterical.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Yes, the irony is hysterical.

You gonna break down the cheating you implied was behind the Gabriel-to-Kentucky commitment or no?

 

[Paesano]

You gonna break down the cheating you implied was behind the Gabriel-to-Kentucky commitment or no?

I thought you were smart enough to figure it out for yourself. I'll make you a deal. Come out of the closet with your connection to the squid and I will help you out.

 

[ctchamps]

I thought you were smart enough to figure it out for yourself. I'll make you a deal. Come out of the closet with your connection to the squid and I will help you out.

BigErn has a bugaboo about homerism and over the top statements which includes unsubstantiated claims. I guess he considers them immature. And although I don't disagree with the issues he happens to be concerned about I don't like his approach to the problem. He's like a pit bull with his victims. Once in his jaws he won't let go. Just ask @Chief00 whose case he's been on a lot longer than yours. (Of course chief had his own obsession named JD.)

Isn't it interesting when someone finds something immature they can act so immaturely in dealing with it. But that is not unusual. We often are in some manifestation that which we hate.

You have several options in handling this. Laugh it off like chief. Just ignore him and the few others who don't think you've been punished enough for your "transgression". Or engage them aggressively (smack talk, respond angrily or sarcastically). Or try to reason with them. My suggestion is you just ignore them. If you do and they continue to take shots at you when you contribute less controversial statements sooner or later the herd will recognize the injustice and start to marginalize them.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Or, alternately, stop acting like a bozo.

 

[sdhusky]

BigErn has a bugaboo about homerism and over the top statements which includes unsubstantiated claims. I guess he considers them immature. And although I don't disagree with the issues he happens to be concerned about I don't like his approach to the problem. He's like a pit bull with his victims. Once in his jaws he won't let go. Just ask @Chief00 whose case he's been on a lot longer than yours. (Of course chief had his own obsession named JD.)

Isn't it interesting when someone finds something immature they can act so immaturely in dealing with it. But that is not unusual. We often are in some manifestation that which we hate.

You have several options in handling this. Laugh it off like chief. Just ignore him and the few others who don't think you've been punished enough for your "transgression". Or engage them aggressively (smack talk, respond angrily or sarcastically). Or try to reason with them. My suggestion is you just ignore them. If you do and they continue to take shots at you when you contribute less controversial statements sooner or later the herd will recognize the injustice and start to marginalize them.

What happens when someone actually asks you for advice?

 

[donyell34]

Being marginalized damm that's serious fleud.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

I thought you were smart enough to figure it out for yourself. I'll make you a deal. Come out of the closet with your connection to the squid and I will help you out.

That's what I thought. Of course you have nothing to say. At least with your "Wes helps them get Nike deals after college" you made an attempt, no matter how moronic.

Okay, fleudslipcon, that's your cue. Time to earn your paycheck . . .

 

[ctchamps]

Fair enough. I admit that my frustration has lead me to wonder if maybe we shouldn't play the game. And I realize that is how morality spirals into the abyss. One person is a scum and gets away with it so others feel like they have to do the same to keep life fair which, of course, it never will be. But, damn, if that isn't frustrating as hell.

I don't think everyone is a cheater but there are some out there for sure. Some get caught and punished (Larry Brown) and some get caught and not punished (Duke and UNC) and some never get caught (squidy). I look at situation and it always seems obvious to me. Calhoun clearly bent fewer rules. With everything he had to sell to recruits, he got relatively few blue chippers. Some coaches have way too much recruiting success relative to what they have to sell. Some of them eventually find success and then people forget that they pulled in tons of blue chippers before they were in the situation they are now. I don't forget. That can be a bad thing.

Having a good memory is not the problem. It's letting negative things affect us negatively. It's a wiring habit that can almost always be undone. Every person has something that triggers a negative response. The key is to control that response. It shouldn't be done to be politically correct or to pretend we're measured when we're not. Those solutions have some benefit and can be starting places but they don't offer a lasting solution or a solution with depth. We can selectively retrain ourselves and retain that part of us which serves us and others better and reduce or remove that part or parts of us that does the opposite.

There is a poster in this forum who has made an incredible shift in his nature. And where at one time he was argumentative to the extreme, and was uncomfortable if not disliked by other posters, has realized that he can retain his beautiful passionate self ( I think he's one of the most beautifully passionate people in this forum), state his position, and realize that if or when others are unwilling to agree with him he moves on. It's not that he's backing down. He realizes he doesn't have to win every argument. He realizes that winning every argument is impossible. In the thread where people listed who were their top ten posters he made several peoples lists. I was so happy for him. Not because of the popularity contest but because his change is a healthy change and even people who don't go to the depth of trying to understand human nature to the degree I feel compelled to do recognized his transformation.

 

[ctchamps]

What happens when someone actually asks you for advice?

I figured I'd get hit on two fronts. One for discussing something with someone who is unpopular and one for hitting the OT subject of human behavior. I expected you to hit me. You made the top of my list. You're a funny guy. I like your quips. You have it all figured out. I never expect you to need my advice. Heck I'm not sure you would appreciate anyones advice. But I haven't followed you enough to determine if that's true and I don't have any interest in following you so I guess we're both safe.

BigErn was tied with you on the list of people who I knew would hit me. I'm sure he doesn't care one bit what I think about him but there is a lot of stuff he does that I admire. However he does have a habit of belittling people and periodically I feel the need to step in. If he was a complete idiot I wouldn't give him the time of day.

You on the other hand have exceeded my interest quota.

 

[ctchamps]

Being marginalized damm that's serious fleud.

If you haven't noticed by now we have a lot of mean girl posters in this forum.

 

[David 76]

To get back to ethics and character, it is easy to have them on paper. Having them when you can easily get away with something is the true test.

Saying Squid is slimy, which I do pretty often, is different from saying Squid committed x infraction without proof is a more egregious.

 

[KembaStepback]

Can we bump this discussion to another thread? This is getting tiresome. You guys disagree. We get it. Does anyone have any news on Zach Brown?

 

[tzznandrew]

Ugh. Can we get back to Brown and stop coddling people who refuse to have nuance in their opinions? Yeah, the guy has been getting criticized by people consistently, but its because he consistently puts forth false dilemmas and speculation as fact. It's the sort of frustrating argument we've grown accustomed to on TV and radio, but is utterly vapid. Getting into this sort of conversation doesn't really help anyone. Let's just agree to move on.

So, Zach Brown?

 

[ctchamps]

Or, alternately, stop acting like a bozo.

To get back to ethics and character, it is easy to have them on paper. Having them when you can easily get away with something is the true test.

Saying Squid is slimy, which I do pretty often, is different from saying Squid committed x infraction without proof is a more egregious.

They're both egregious ( and yes I'm guilty of making unsubstantiated claims). It's just easier to hide behind generalities. The logical counter argument to both generalized and specific aspects to an argument is to ask someone to prove something wrong when asked to prove something right. But of course an unstated claim has the defense that it never put out a claim. Except even that defense has flaws. If a child is being molested and no one makes a claim how is that non claim morally superior than an "unproven" accusation which may or may not be true?

Most arguments can't be proved conclusively if we have to rely on humanity to decide in the truth or falseness of things. It's the reason I prefer discourse over censorship. It has a better chance of solving problems even if those problems can never be solved completely.