Joanne P. McCallie: I Am Not Buying

[willtalk]

No you haven't. I have yet to articulate my rational. I am waiting for Cam to answer my last question. If he doesn't, then I will proceed with out it. I often can not respond right away so I want to give him plenty of time to respond.

Since Cam still has not answered my question about when his perspective shifted I am going to go ahead and make my original point despite the fact that Cam has opened up a whole new can of worms in his subsequent posts that also require a response.

In the time I spent on the Duke site I constantly heard about how coach P ruined the team that she inherited. That seemed to have been a major factor in a large percentage of the McCalley detractors dislike of her. I finally did a bit of research on the record of the previous season and what I found that the previous team got no farther in the playoffs than it did the subsequent season under McCalley. This despite having A. Bales and L. Harding instead of the two new Freshman McDonald AA. Now the records show that coach G couldn't take the team any farther in the NCAA's with those same McAA plus Bales and Harding that coach P minus them with only the new freshmen as a trade off. I was even more surprised once I found out who Bales and Harding were. Now I did hear that there were mitigating circumstances ( excuses ) for that early exit, but even more legit mitigating circumstances ( rational explanations) were never ever considered by the coach P detractors when they happened to her teams.

This was the basically all I was going to add. No this is not saying that McCalley was left with an weak team, but a very good team. But as UCMiami alluded to in a previous post, a team that needed to adjust to a new system, which some of them couldn't or resisted in doing. UC Miami also stated that a coach should really begin to be held accountable once the old coaches players are gone and she has her own recruits in place. The team actually started to gel during the Liston, Gray, Peter, etc soph season and then a series of injuries towards the end of that season began a long chain of injuries continuing through multiple season that derailed that promise.

 

[CocoHusky]

Will, not to be the grammer police but if you are going to be sticking up for someone get the spelling right. It's McCallie spelled correctly in the title of the thread and it's Peters-Haley Peters.

 

[OldAlum]

Well it is grammar...

 

[willtalk]

Willtalk, your posts on The Devil's Den were nothing close to how you describe them. In this thread, you have neither articulated your point of view nor have you presented your rationale or reasoning for your point of view. Rather, you make a generalization about Duke fans, without any evidence or support, characterizing it as "BS." If you read my initial posts in this thread, it certainly was not BS thrown together, as you generically reference in your post.

But putting that aside...

The numbers, statistics, and evidence that I presented in my original posts have not been addressed by you, either because you are ignoring them or you are asking follow-up questions in the furtherance of a healthy debate (I do not know, but I will give you the benefit of the and assume it is the latter). You asked a question, which I answered and followed up with questions for you.----------------.

You never really answered my question either in this post or the previous one. The question was if you know when your perspective on McCalley changed. You only responded with a statement as to your role as moderator. I would also like to know what those follow up questions were that you had for me. I did not see any in your posts?

It is relatively easy for you to make your claim about my posts on the Duke site because the last post ( other than an informational one on a former player) was over two years ago. Also how many people on this site would have spent time their to really know which of our perspectives were true. I made a lot of posts starting in the summer of 20o9 till about two years ago. They basically followed the same premise I am using in this thread. I hold people accountable by asking them questions if I feel that they are making blanket statements or things are being left out. If you read my actual post I never stated anything about BS being thrown together, rather that when BS is thrown together with truth some of the BS slips through. I also never made a blanket statement about Duke fans or even about the majority of the fans posting on the site. I stated that an overwhelming arguments made by detractors were invalid. Actually I should not have used the term arguments because the posts I was referring too were not even arguments but blanket statements or hate rants. It was usually those type of posts that I targeted. In my post I stated that some of the critical posts on McCalley were valid. The difference was that a small minority of the posters posted most of the negatives. They would turn almost every thread into a coach P hate fest. I just got tired of them hyjacking almost every thread. It created a atmosphere of negativity that drove a lot good posters who wanted to remain neutral off.

Why would you even assume that I would consider your previous posts BS by anything that I might have posted. I spent almost one post characterizing your posts as projecting reason before you changed your perspective. I never even implied that they became unreasonable after I perceived a perspective change on your part either. Now having reasonable arguments does not mean they are necessarily unbiased or objective. You yourself stated ' the prosecution rests". A prosecutor is not unbiased. When only one side is presented objectivity is lost.

Now I stated when it comes to who's perspective on my posts on the Duke site is correct, I hold your responses to my posts on this thread up as evidence. I know what my intent was. I stand by that. Why should reasonable people accept that you can evaluate the multitude of the posts I made for years on the Duke site, when you either misread or misinterpreted the very few I made on the very thread. I hold that your objectivity has been tainted on this issue. You accuse a non-affiliated follower of WCBB of being a coach P supporter.

Stats are often used to create an appearance of objectivity. It all depends which states are used and in what context they are used.

 

[willtalk]

Will, not to be the grammer police but if you are going to be sticking up for someone get the spelling right. It's McCallie spelled correctly in the title of the thread and it's Peters-Haley Peters.

I could never spell worth a darn. I think it might have had something to do with going to school and not being able to speak English at a time when their were no special programs in that respect. They just threw you in class and expected you to sink or swim. Coco Husky- If you don't want to be the Grammar police then don't be the Grammar police. I suspect this has more to do with a personal issue with you. You didn't like the questions I ask on that other thread as well. The good ole boy system is alive and well on the Uconn site. I this the best you can do? Attack the messenger rather than the message.

I would always chose to be able to reason rather than spell any day of the week.

 

[willtalk]

What the???????? I lost an entire post that was not posted for some reason or other. It was my rational for my original post. Now I have to redo it. I really hate to write.

 

[CocoHusky]

I could never spell worth a darn. I think it might have had something to do with going to school and not being able to speak English at a time when their were no special programs in that respect. They just threw you in class and expected you to sink or swim. Coco Husky- If you don't want to be the Grammar police then don't be the Grammar police. I suspect this has more to do with a personal issue with you. You didn't like the questions I ask on that other thread as well. The good ole boy system is alive and well on the Uconn site. I this the best you can do? Attack the messenger rather than the message.

I would always chose to be able to reason rather than spell any day of the week.

Q: Is this the best you can do?
A: No, but I have yet to see where my best is required in debating you.
C: Attack the messenger rather than the message.
R: Hardly, getting the messenger to articulate a point is not an attack. My apologies for assuming you had a point to articulate.
C: I would always chose to be able to reason rather than spell any day of the week.
R: In consecutive post now you have demonstrated the ability to do neither. There is always tomorrow!

 

[JS]

If you don't want to be the Grammar police then don't be the Grammar police. I suspect this has more to do with a personal issue with you. You didn't like the questions I ask on that other thread as well. The good ole boy system is alive and well on the Uconn site.

You're getting increasingly personal, not to mention prolix.

Cam made a brief reference to your position on another board. We don't need, from you, a book devoted to your posting adventures long ago and far away.

And incidentally, if you perceive a good ole boy system here that you don't like, you're free to spend your time elsewhere.

 

[willtalk]

Q: Is this the best you can do?
A: No, but I have yet to see where my best is required in debating you.
C: Attack the messenger rather than the message.
R: Hardly, getting the messenger to articulate a point is not an attack. My apologies for assuming you had a point to articulate.
C: I would always chose to be able to reason rather than spell any day of the week.
R: In consecutive post now you have demonstrated the ability to do neither. There is always tomorrow!

You have just validated my perspective as to the intent of your post. You did not need me to spell their names correctly to know who I was referring too so there was no articulation involved in your grammar police response. I was correct in my assumption that I offended you indirectly on that other thread about my remark on about the disingenuous intent and hypocrisy of the some of the PC crowd. Well you see I don't care. I do not go on boards to make friends but to be honest with myself and others.

 

[BlueDevils]

Since Cam still has not answered my question about when his perspective shifted I am going to go ahead and make my original point despite the fact that Cam has opened up a whole new can of worms in his subsequent posts that also require a response.

In the time I spent on the Duke site I constantly heard about how coach P ruined the team that she inherited. That seemed to have been a major factor in a large percentage of the McCalley detractors dislike of her. I finally did a bit of research on the record of the previous season and what I found that the previous team got no farther in the playoffs than it did the subsequent season under McCalley. This despite having A. Bales and L. Harding instead of the two new Freshman McDonald AA. Now the records show that coach G couldn't take the team any farther in the NCAA's with those same McAA plus Bales and Harding that coach P minus them with only the new freshmen as a trade off. I was even more surprised once I found out who Bales and Harding were. Now I did hear that there were mitigating circumstances ( excuses ) for that early exit, but even more legit mitigating circumstances ( rational explanations) were never ever considered by the coach P detractors when they happened to her teams.

This was the basically all I was going to add. No this is not saying that McCalley was left with an weak team, but a very good team. But as UCMiami alluded to in a previous post, a team that needed to adjust to a new system, which some of them couldn't or resisted in doing. UC Miami also stated that a coach should really begin to be held accountable once the old coaches players are gone and she has her own recruits in place. The team actually started to gel during the Liston, Gray, Peter, etc soph season and then a series of injuries towards the end of that season began a long chain of injuries continuing through multiple season that derailed that promise.

Ok listen STOP IT because I'm starting to like you tooooooo much... This is why I'm ok with JPM. When she had a full healthy squad of HER players that buys into HER scheme I actually didn't mind watching and as you said things started to gel. You're the first fan to fully detail an unbias analysis on JPM mixing the good with the bad and you might not even be a Duke fan. Thank you.

 

[BlueDevils]

Will, not to be the grammer police but if you are going to be sticking up for someone get the spelling right. It's McCallie spelled correctly in the title of the thread and it's Peters-Haley Peters.

Unnecessary. I still can't spell Mccaile(the first way I typed it) name by heart. And considering Will, surrounded H.Peters name with Liston and Gray I think it was pretty obvious who he was referring too. Come on now. You're better than this.

 

[meyers7]

Since Cam still has not answered my question about when his perspective shifted I am going to go ahead and make my original point despite the fact that Cam has opened up a whole new can of worms in his subsequent posts that also require a response.

In the time I spent on the Duke site I constantly heard about how coach P ruined the team that she inherited. That seemed to have been a major factor in a large percentage of the McCalley detractors dislike of her. I finally did a bit of research on the record of the previous season and what I found that the previous team got no farther in the playoffs than it did the subsequent season under McCalley. This despite having A. Bales and L. Harding instead of the two new Freshman McDonald AA. Now the records show that coach G couldn't take the team any farther in the NCAA's with those same McAA plus Bales and Harding that coach P minus them with only the new freshmen as a trade off. I was even more surprised once I found out who Bales and Harding were. Now I did hear that there were mitigating circumstances ( excuses ) for that early exit, but even more legit mitigating circumstances ( rational explanations) were never ever considered by the coach P detractors when they happened to her teams.

This was the basically all I was going to add. No this is not saying that McCalley was left with an weak team, but a very good team. But as UCMiami alluded to in a previous post, a team that needed to adjust to a new system, which some of them couldn't or resisted in doing. UC Miami also stated that a coach should really begin to be held accountable once the old coaches players are gone and she has her own recruits in place. The team actually started to gel during the Liston, Gray, Peter, etc soph season and then a series of injuries towards the end of that season began a long chain of injuries continuing through multiple season that derailed that promise.

We waited this long for that?

 

[meyers7]

I this the best you can do? Attack the messenger rather than the message.

Well you know, without an actual message to attack...leaves little room.

I would always chose to be able to reason rather than spell any day of the week.

 

[UcMiami]

I do think JPM had a perception issue in her first years where I believe a few 'fan favorite' type players ( Waner?) regressed in the new system - never a great situation.
And there is no question Duke has had a surprising and disturbing injury history - but most teams have had injury issues and some have done much better.
But I would go back to my other comments about player and assistant departures, and the nature of her public persona as reasons for dismay among the fan base, and dislike among the WCBB fan base in general.

She has had I think an above average level of starting caliber/major contributor players leave - this is hard to quantify and may just be the 'luck of the draw' - we are talking about young adults changing their mind for any of a myriad of reasons, but they also are members of what should be a very tight group that should generally be less likely to fracture.

She has not maintained normal consistency within her staff, and her staff have left in parallel moves which is atypical in the WCBB universe. Duke is an attractive community and the school and AD are well financed, so I find it hard to believe the remunerations and living circumstances for assistants is not on par with the best programs out there - retention of assistants shouldn't be that hard if the work environment is positive. And a stable staff is one characteristic of most successful athletic programs regardless of sport or gender.

Her lessons learned mantra does not cut it as no lessons appear to have been learned in season or season to season - the product on the court is indistinguishable and the results predictable - good winning percentage against the middle of the pack and inability to win against the elite teams.

Her treatment of her own players in public is not attractive, and goes hand in hand with her disrespect of her opponents by refusing to use their names. And I would be interested to know if she has ever implied any personal responsibility for her teams failures - her blaming of her players is well documented.

Great success can mitigate a lot of failings, lack of success tends to accentuate those failings - her record is good, but not great.

 

[hoophuskee]

I like McCallie a lot.

Before she came, Duke was a threat. For a while we were losing recruits and more importantly games.

Since she's been there - we've steamrolled them.

Don't care why.

Keep up the good work JP!!

 

[DaddyChoc]

personality and delivery goes a long way when wanting others to believe in your message/playbook... according to the interviews people talk about it seems that she throws players under the bus, imagine what she does behind closed doors.

Would would/could function under bad leadership/management

 

[willtalk]

You're getting increasingly personal, not to mention prolix.

Cam made a brief reference to your position on another board. We don't need, from you, a book devoted to your posting adventures long ago and far away.

And incidentally, if you perceive a good ole boy system here that you don't like, you're free to spend your time elsewhere.

[Willtalk: Use the private message system if you want to discuss. Not everyone is interested in your personal issues -- apparently vintage -- with Cam, nor in your questions to me. JS]

 

[Orangutan]

Apparently the idea that brevity is the soul of wit doesn't resonate with everyone.

 

[sarals24]

[Willtalk: Use the private message system if you want to discuss. Not everyone is interested in your personal issues -- apparently vintage -- with Cam, nor in your questions to me. JS]

Agreed.

 

[HuskyNan]

I'm happy to see fans of other programs here to discuss basketball, or other topics of mutual interest, but if you're here to lecture UConn fans on their responses or beliefs, you are invited to do so elsewhere.

 

[willtalk]

I do think JPM had a perception issue in her first years where I believe a few 'fan favorite' type players ( Waner?) regressed in the new system - never a great situation.
And there is no question Duke has had a surprising and disturbing injury history - but most teams have had injury issues and some have done much better.
But I would go back to my other comments about player and assistant departures, and the nature of her public persona as reasons for dismay among the fan base, and dislike among the WCBB fan base in general..

You appear to have an ability to put your finger on the crux of all the issues that some people have with JPM. Each one of the things you mention individually might not illicit that much dislike, but when put together it might provide enough evidence for many objective and unbiased people to begin to at least have serious questions about her. The problem as I see it was that the case for those issues was usually presented to non-Duke fans by Duke fans who's perception was already biased for a variety of different reason. All those issues that you mentioned being those reasons. The thing is that each detractor initially might have had doubts in one of those areas, and because of that doubt was more likely to have a lower lever objectivity for the other issues. Some times when we break down each issue individually we find that what we considered as facts were just questions and doubts. Put enough doubts together and they begin to have the appearance of actual fact. For circumstantial evidence to be effectively used, each circumstance must first be evaluated as to it's individual level of validity. We should all learn to discern between what is questionable and what is fact, which is what I usually attempt to do.

The issue that you brought up in respect to Waner is one that has fueled a lot of negative reaction to JPM. It was a very emotional issue that blended together with the anger of fans who loved the program and appreciated coach G and what she had done for the program. Waner and that team represent coach G's legacy to a lot of the fans. They felt that coach G was run out of Duke, which was only slightly true. As WCBB fans, they took the AD's seeming lack of support for the program personally. The initial anger was at the AD and when he left there was no one else but the successor that he had hired to replace as a potential release for that frustrated anger. This was not helped when she changed the system and in their eyes destroyed the potential of the only thing they had left of the coach and program that they loved. My initial point was pointing out that that potential was not quite up to the level that they had envisioned. I used the NCAA play off record of the much better team that coach G had before JPM took over the next season. The image of our first love is always better than the actual reality.

From what I was told Waner was supposed to have had concerns about her effectiveness in the new offensive system and went to JPM who supposedly assured her that she would not change the system. Some of her detractors think she lied to Waner. Now I really doubt that. I think it is more likely that Waner misunderstood JPM and rather than tell her that she would run the same system she told her she would have no problem in the one she would run. What coach in their right mind would keep a system for the benefit of a few players. This was one of the reasons from the start that certain fans disliked JPM. They took their fan favorite Waner's word that she lied to her. Now her scoring average did drop from about 14 to 10 and then slightly less than ten in progressives seasons. JPM' scheme seems to focus more on balanced scoring. Other Duke fans had a different perspective of Waner and labeled her as a Prima Donna.

From what I gleaned from my time on the Devil site was that this was an issue that was already highly emotionally charged before JPM even arrived. There was already a small faction whose dislike of JPM already existed prior to her arrival because she was the hated AD's hire and not a part of coach G staff or a Duke alumni. Over time they through constant effort and focus turned more and more fans against her. The whole thing is similar to the Little Rascals episodes where Miss Crabtree is replaced by Miss McGillicutty except in this case JPM never won over some of the fans. Sports can be a great outlet for us to release or express both positive and negative bottled up emotions. The term fan isn't a shortened version of fanatic for no reason.

I hope to perhaps give a different perspective on some of the other issues you mentioned. I would rather do them in separate posts rather than all at once. There are just so many that putting them into one post is not really possible for me. I am not that good of a writer.

 

[Zorro]

McCallie's press conferences alone are reason enough to dislike her intensely. PHS used to occasionally throw her players under the bus, but McCallie does it consistently. Her breaking off the UConn series on the grounds that her all-americans could not compete with Geno's all-americans was another very good reason. She simply and totally lacks any trace of class.

 

[wes33]

McCallie's press conferences alone are reason enough to dislike her intensely. PHS used to occasionally throw her players under the bus, but McCallie does it consistently. Her breaking off the UConn series on the grounds that her all-americans could not compete with Geno's all-americans was another very good reason. She simply and totally lacks any trace of class.

Obviously this is not true in recruits living rooms. All she has to do is put
in systems that you can compete with and have a lot less injuries, then she
can pick her nose or whatever.

 

[sarals24]

Obviously this is not true in recruits living rooms. All she has to do is put
in systems that you can compete with and have a lot less injuries, then she
can pick her nose or whatever.

If all she has to do is put in systems you can compete with, why hasn't she done that? And why on earth would you shy away from playing UConn? Wouldn't you want to test yourself against the best?

 

[msf22b]

If all she has to do is put in systems you can compete with, why hasn't she done that? And why on earth would you shy away from playing UConn? Wouldn't you want to test yourself against the best?

Why would you shy away from playing UConn?
Easy.

Having taken honors classes in that subject for close to a decade
and having "learned" just about all there is to absorb from that curriculum,

She's just sick and tired of getting her ass beat time after time; without fail.
And sees no end in sight (And in that she displays perfect wisdom).

There are a slew of other coaches with straight A's in that course who have come to the same conclusion.

 

[sarals24]

Why would you shy away from playing UConn?
Easy.

Having taken honors classes in that subject for close to a decade
and having "learned" just about all there is to absorb from that curriculum,

She's just sick and tired of getting her ass beat time after time; without fail.
And sees no end in sight (And in that she displays perfect wisdom).

There are a slew of other coaches with straight A's in that course who have come to the same conclusion.

Yep. And I don't respect any coach who gets that many All Americans and refuses to play UConn. It's one thing for Holy Cross to take a break after a few years, but if I were a Duke fan, I'd be embarrassed if my coach refused to play the best team in the country because she was scared.

 

[wes33]

Obviously this is not true in recruits living rooms. All she has to do is put
in systems that you can compete with and have a lot less injuries, then she
can pick her nose or whatever.
If all she has to do is put in systems you can compete with, why hasn't she done that? And why on earth would you shy away from playing UConn? Wouldn't you want to test yourself against the best?

We run a very basic offense and she is in love with her match up zone defense.
It would take a lot of time and energy to install new systems and she has two
teenagers loves her golf , tennis, travels, plus its not going to happen less her
number one man Al Brown is up to it. Al has been out sick since last year and
will probably retire running his 90s systems. Very few teams have contracts
out of conference for more than six years so will try our luck down south for
awhile.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I've said before and I'll stick to it - playing UConn - particularly in the "uber-dominant" times - does not provide any great benefit for another team. There isn't that much to gain.

That said, as I've also maintained, there really isn't much downside either. A loss to UConn? No big deal, really.

All of that said, 2 things do come to mind. First, that Duke does have a right to be tired of getting pasted and want a break. And the quote about playing the best, while true, should be interpreted a little broader than literally "the best" - not everyone can play UConn, the advantage is to play teams that are better than you are, not just a bunch of teams you can get a gaudy record against.

None of this should be interpreted as supporting JPM, only that I think not wanting to play UConn is a very weak argument against her. Getting always pasted by UConn, the way she conducts her press conferences, NCAA exits, etc. are much more valid avenues.

 

[CocoHusky]

I think not wanting to play UConn is a very weak argument against her.

I disagree that this is a weak argument. I am reminded of a quote from a Redskins executive: "We are winning the off-season." Duke goes head to head agains UCONN and everyone else in recruiting and wins recruiting battles. Duke has signed 10% of ALL McDonalds AA since 2010. With these signings Duke should not be afraid to play anyone.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

My initial point was pointing out that that potential was not quite up to the level that they had envisioned. I used the NCAA play off record of the much better team that coach G had before JPM took over the next season. The image of our first love is always better than the actual reality.

The image is better than the reality? I think the reality speaks for itself (as I presented on the first page of this thread), comparing Gail Goestenkors' last seven years at Duke with Joanne P. McCallie's eight years at Duke (information from pages 162-173 of the 2014-15 Media Guide and the 2014-2015 Schedule/Results)

Overall record:
Goestenkors: 220-25 (89.79 percent)
McCallie: 225-53 (80.94 percent)

ACC record:
Goestenkors: 98-8 (92.45 percent)
McCallie: 100-22 (81.97 percent)

NCAA record:
Goestenkors: 23-7 (one NCAA runner-up, three Final Fours, five years at least making the Elite eight, all seven years at least making the Sweet 16)
McCallie: 18-8 (zero Final Fours, four Elite Eights, six years at least making the Sweet 16, two second round losses

Against Opponents Ranked #1 or #2:
Goestenkors: 5-7 (41.67 percent)
McCallie: 0-18 (00.00 percent)

Against Opponents Ranked in the Top 5:
Goestenkors: 14-14 (50.00 percent)
McCallie: 7-26 (21.21 percent)

Against Opponents Ranked in the Top 10:
Goestenkors: 25-14 (64.10 percent)
McCallie: 19-32 (37.25 percent)

Against All Ranked Opponents:
Goestenkors: 60-20 (80.00 percent)
McCallie: 58-43 (57.43 percent)

You were discussing the 2006-2007 team (last year of Goestenkors) versus the 2007-2008 team (first year of McCallie). What about the seven subsequent years under Coach P?

You presented an argument regarding one year under each coach, while I presented the actual numbers and records for Goestenkors' last seven years vs. McCallie's eight years. You said the image was better than the reality? The numbers and evidence demonstrate otherwise.