To date
- Thread starter Halldan
- Start date
You get the feeling Shaheen has addressed the offensive deficiencies we had last season; whether or not this team will be committed to defending like last year’s team will be the difference between whether we are more like Providence/Xavier from last season. I’m happy to feel cautiously optimstic about this year’s team.
Love that we got some good outside shooters at lower levels but Sha's crappy offensive system may hinder them.
You based what I said on 1 post/thread. When a poster is 99% negative for years that's trolling.
As you wish. And no, no one has to toe any line. Balance is welcomed from everyone. Something you would know nothing about.
I disagree with @shu67's overly negative take, but I do think he should be allowed to express it. Otherwise the overly positive non-realistic posters should be banned also. Especially while we have other posters here repeatedly calling others "stupid" and other ad hominem attacks with complete freedom.
I understand. I have asked for balanced posting for more years than I can remember. But this is a Seton Hall fan site and it's only natural that more readers are going to be positive than negative. But when a poster is an agitator whose sole purpose is to stir the pot that costs us more members than you know. I have no issue with any poster who leans toward the negative. But I do have an issue with posters who do nothing but troll the program.
@shu67 has been warned more times than I can remember and continues to ignore the warnings given to him. If that continues then how can JD or I moderate the board when we are constantly challenged and do nothing about it?
@shu67 has been warned more times than I can remember and continues to ignore the warnings given to him. If that continues then how can JD or I moderate the board when we are constantly challenged and do nothing about it?
Just saying, he's only expressing an opinion. Even if it is largely negative, I for one am not threatened by it. "Warned" against being negative? lol, we were picked next to last in the league. He should be skipping down the street?
It's good for balance having some negative posters and some positive ones. Hope you rethink the ban. It's a bit heavy handed for someone who is just negative but harmless. Barrett is way more negative than shu67 but I enjoy reading all of their opinions. We need more posters here in our community, not less.
His most "trolling" thing could be the weird Mbaye fixation lol, and even that added comedy to the board.
It's good for balance having some negative posters and some positive ones. Hope you rethink the ban. It's a bit heavy handed for someone who is just negative but harmless. Barrett is way more negative than shu67 but I enjoy reading all of their opinions. We need more posters here in our community, not less.
His most "trolling" thing could be the weird Mbaye fixation lol, and even that added comedy to the board.
I agree, he should have the right to be negative and in this new environment more than likely he will be right with his assessment. I don’t agree with most of his positions, but he should be able to share. I also don’t agree with most of the overly positive posters either. If he is banned, not a good look.
This offseason looks like another year-after “correction” with the common theme not allocating a significant portion to retain the best players.
Last offseason we we went with kids that had significant game experience and/or actual production, albeit at lower levels and who Sha thought would be real competitors that got after it defensively (plus Hines kind of dropping into our laps). To account for getting all those top 100 types without experience that didn’t work out.
This offseason it is shooting and getting bigger at the 4 spot.