ADVERTISEMENT

Nomination

spider23

Spider's Club
May 31, 2002
17,257
12,876
113
Dedmon Center USA
ruhoops.proboards.com
Can we nominate board mods? No offense to Fan1 and '05. From reading there postings, they seem like really nice and likable guys who are committed to Richmond sports and doing their very best to run a good board. That said, I feel like we are over protective of the pro Mooney posters vs the anti Mooney posters. I'll admit, some of VT's posts annoy me. Most likely it is my age.

In support of giving a voice to youth and the pro change contingent, I nominate VT as a third wheel for board moderation. Here Here. Dilly Dilly.

Can I get a second?????
 
I'm not one to self nominate but I like the way you're thinking. I have done great ideas as to why I should be higher up on this board if y'all are willing to listen to me.
 
I would prefer he run against Tim Kaine for US Senate, but I'd settle for board mod. Sure.
 
 
Can we nominate board mods? No offense to Fan1 and '05. From reading there postings, they seem like really nice and likable guys who are committed to Richmond sports and doing their very best to run a good board. That said, I feel like we are over protective of the pro Mooney posters vs the anti Mooney posters. I'll admit, some of VT's posts annoy me. Most likely it is my age.

In support of giving a voice to youth and the pro change contingent, I nominate VT as a third wheel for board moderation. Here Here. Dilly Dilly.

Can I get a second?????

Next time you play the Jordan Speith birdie drinking game, have a buddy to keep you off the boards.
 
I'll be honest, I just want what is good for Richmond basketball. I remember my first football game freshman year. Wearing a Richmond basketball t-shirt, this older guy with a perm stops me and tell me he likes my shirt and chats for a few minutes. Very personable guy, could scout, coach, recruit, kick ass when he had to, passionate beyond belief about the game. Now people are acceptable of Mr. country club slug no personality. This I cannot stand. Please, let us have change.
 
I believe the Mooney detractors deserve representation as one of the moderators. I think I bring a younger pointof view and the future of Spider fans. I deserve to be a moderator.
 
I believe we all want what is good for Richmond basketball, even those in the anti group. Trashing these boards is not good for Richmond basketball, and definitely not good for these boards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KWeaver
Wow, not sure how you would define trashing. I know you are upset, so are many others. Myself included.
 
I was just responding to your comment on "trashing" the board. I honestly don't think anyone is trashing the board. this is a basketball message board, not sure complaining about the mediocre coaches long tenure is "trashing" the board?
 
I may be projecting my thoughts onto the mods here, but this is what I see:

Some posters are creating an atmosphere on the board that is toxic. It seems to be driving people away (perhaps the mods have actual numbers on this), and it is not because people are posting negative things about Mooney. It is the extreme frequency and aggressiveness of the posts that is ruining the board. Hostility is hurting the board, not anti-Mooney talk, and the fact that many posters seem to not understand that is troubling.

If you personally feel like your voice is being censored, go back and read your deleted posts (I am not sure if this is actually possible). I am certain that if the posts were rephrased in a way that was not so hostile they would not have been deleted. The essential content of the post is not the reason it was removed, the tone was. The sum of the frequent, hostile posts is a toxic atmosphere which hurts the board and the mods don't want that.

When I go on the board now I feel like I am entering a Mad Max-esque wasteland. The rampant hostility is unpleasant, and the repetitiveness of posts complaining about Mooney is unbearable. I need to struggle through this hostile information desert to find something actually interesting or useful, and it is getting harder and harder by the day. This sentiment seems like it is becoming more common.

Also, some posters need to understand that just because someone posts something positive about the program, or tries to discuss something that does not directly reflect negatively on Mooney, this does not necessarily indicate satisfaction with the program or support for Mooney. It doesn't mean that they want Mooney to coach here for life. It doesn't even mean they want Mooney to coach here next year. It means that some people actually want to discuss things about the program besides firing Mooney! Hard to believe, I know! Nothing posted on this board will ever have any impact on Mooney's employment, and turning every single thing into a discussion about why Mooney needs to go is annoying. Twisting every little thing into the most negative version possible just to make Mooney look as bad as possible is tiresome. Posters, FMM, understand that this board is not an instrument that can or will contribute to Mooney being fired. Mooney is the coach next year, let us move on to new topics.

The moderators on this board want a healthy board, and they want a useful board. Their actions are not an attempt to silence anti-Mooney posters, their actions are an attempt to save this board from toxicity causing a downward spiral into a ghost town. Asking for an anti-Mooney moderator because you don't feel represented shows a misunderstanding as to why posts have been removed (and anti-Mooney posts are not the only posts to have been removed recently!!!). The moderators may very well not even be pro-Mooney! There should never be an open license for hostility on this board, it will be the end of the board.

Sorry for the novel. I apologize to the mods if I have misrepresented their positions. This is the way I see things.
 
Last edited:
Certainly don't want vt as a moderator but do believe they have been unfairly censoring his posts. Yes he is antagonist but he also has been right more often than some of our more Pollyanna posters. Sorry ulla.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSpider
I do not think anyone that is consistently negative about our program should be anywhere close to board moderator.
 
I may be projecting my thoughts onto the mods here, but this is what I see:

Some posters are creating an atmosphere on the board that is toxic. It seems to be driving people away (perhaps the mods have actual numbers on this), and it is not because people are posting negative things about Mooney. It is the extreme frequency and aggressiveness of the posts that is ruining the board. Hostility is hurting the board, not anti-Mooney talk, and the fact that many posters seem to not understand that is troubling.

If you personally feel like your voice is being censored, go back and read your deleted posts (I am not sure if this is actually possible). I am certain that if the posts were rephrased in a way that was not so hostile they would not have been deleted. The essential content of the post is not the reason it was removed, the tone was. The sum of the frequent, hostile posts is a toxic atmosphere which hurts the board and the mods don't want that.

When I go on the board now I feel like I am entering a Mad Max-esque wasteland. The rampant hostility is unpleasant, and the repetitiveness of posts complaining about Mooney is unbearable. I need to struggle through this hostile information desert to find something actually interesting or useful, and it is getting harder and harder by the day. This sentiment seems like it is becoming more common.

Also, some posters need to understand that just because someone posts something positive about the program, or tries to discuss something that does not directly reflect negatively on Mooney, this does not necessarily indicate satisfaction with the program or support for Mooney. It doesn't mean that they want Mooney to coach here for life. It doesn't even mean they want Mooney to coach here next year. It means that some people actually want to discuss things about the program besides firing Mooney! Hard to believe, I know! Nothing posted on this board will ever have any impact on Mooney's employment, and turning every single thing into a discussion about why Mooney needs to go is annoying. Twisting every little thing into the most negative version possible just to make Mooney look as bad as possible is tiresome. Posters, FMM, understand that this board is not an instrument that can or will contribute to Mooney being fired. Mooney is the coach next year, let us move on to new topics.

The moderators on this board want a healthy board, and they want a useful board. Their actions are not an attempt to silence anti-Mooney posters, their actions are an attempt to save this board from toxicity causing a downward spiral into a ghost town. Asking for an anti-Mooney moderator because you don't feel represented shows a misunderstanding as to why posts have been removed (and anti-Mooney posts are not the only posts to have been removed recently!!!). The moderators may very well not even be pro-Mooney! There should never be an open license for hostility on this board, it will be the end of the board.

Sorry for the novel. I apologize to the mods if I have misrepresented their positions. This is the way I see things.


This may be the post of the year.
 
I will tell you what can turn this board around big time. Mooney can go and win a recruiting battle for once. We need a guard eligible this year to replace Fore, and another guy that can play beside Golden inside. I mean I have to read this toxic, blatant one sided article from Woody and the RTD. At least on here we can have a discussion instead of blatant propaganda. I tried the positive reinforcement, it does not work with Mooney.
 
Shut it down and give both sides some relief. Relief from the toxic propaganda that has infiltrated the board. Shut it down, because if you want to silence one side you have to silence the other.
 
Well put, 2011:

"Also, some posters need to understand that just because someone posts something positive about the program, or tries to discuss something that does not directly reflect negatively on Mooney, this does not necessarily indicate satisfaction with the program or support for Mooney. It doesn't mean that they want Mooney to coach here for life. It doesn't even mean they want Mooney to coach here next year. It means that some people actually want to discuss things about the program besides firing Mooney! Hard to believe, I know! Nothing posted on this board will ever have any impact on Mooney's employment, and turning every single thing into a discussion about why Mooney needs to go is annoying. Twisting every little thing into the most negative version possible just to make Mooney look as bad as possible is tiresome. Posters, FMM, understand that this board is not an instrument that can or will contribute to Mooney being fired. Mooney is the coach next year, let us move on to new topics."
 
I agree that winning a recruiting battle for Kwans spot and a legit big man, would
give some positive vibes back to this board. I have been for a coaching change
for both programs, but the last half of this season sparked hope. I can actually
look forward to next season, if we create valid depth for our starters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KWeaver and Ulla1
Mods do a great job. There is no censorship unless you say something that crosses the line of decorum. I'm sure and I know the mods have lots of thoughts and opinions of their own that they keep to off the board because they are mods.
 
Thanks Carolina, I am not asking for a lot I don't think. I just want some a replacement for Fore and a Hans Brase type. With the studs on the roster now, should be an easy sell to show how adding two good players could make this an NCAA team.
you realize Brase scored 50 points this year, right?
 
he chose Iowa St presumably for the bigger stage. he scored 50 points for a team that won 13 games. I'm betting he expected more.

we don't know that he would have done any more here. he probably would have been Grant's backup playing 4 mpg. a nice insurance policy, but not a big factor.
 
he chose Iowa St presumably for the bigger stage. he scored 50 points for a team that won 13 games. I'm betting he expected more.

we don't know that he would have done any more here. he probably would have been Grant's backup playing 4 mpg. a nice insurance policy, but not a big factor.
I think that's not quite right. He would have played more of a PF role for us which we clearly don't/didn't have. So I think if the guy could play, he would have had a chance to be productive.

What's missing is would he have picked up on the "system" which globally seems to trip up anybody who hasn't been in it for a year or two. I won't comment on why that's the case, it just seems to be recurring.
 
pretty sure the Princeton guy would pick up the system. it's not rocket science.

but I'm not as sure as you that he would play the 4. you're sitting who? our best 5 would still play. no way a guy averaging 2 ppg at 13 win ISU would be in our best 5. he'd be a backup, probably backing up Grant.
 
pretty sure the Princeton guy would pick up the system. it's not rocket science.

but I'm not as sure as you that he would play the 4. you're sitting who? our best 5 would still play. no way a guy averaging 2 ppg at 13 win ISU would be in our best 5. he'd be a backup, probably backing up Grant.
Maybe he would have backed up Solly at the 4?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gospidersgo
pretty sure the Princeton guy would pick up the system. it's not rocket science.

but I'm not as sure as you that he would play the 4. you're sitting who? our best 5 would still play. no way a guy averaging 2 ppg at 13 win ISU would be in our best 5. he'd be a backup, probably backing up Grant.
So you say that, but show me any first year player who has picked this system up faster than in a half a season? I've not seen anyone do it yet, including guys like TJ who are clearly smart bball types.

And as far as what he'd play, he played a 4 at Princeton and presumably at ISU. Agree that our best 5 would still play.

I'm not some Hans Brase believer, but this notion that because he didn't produce at ISU means he wouldn't have produced here is full of holes. Different system, competition, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger
I'm saying it's certainly no sure thing that Hans would have earned substantial time here. Solly only started when Khwan was out. I think Hans' role would be similarly limited. it's not like ISU was loaded with talent, keeping him down.
 
So you say that, but show me any first year player who has picked this system up faster than in a half a season? I've not seen anyone do it yet, including guys like TJ who are clearly smart bball types.

And as far as what he'd play, he played a 4 at Princeton and presumably at ISU. Agree that our best 5 would still play.

I'm not some Hans Brase believer, but this notion that because he didn't produce at ISU means he wouldn't have produced here is full of holes. Different system, competition, etc.

Most players that have transferred to or from Richmond have had their most productive D1 season at Richmond. Mooney is not a good recruiter, but he seems to be able to get a lot out of the players he does bring in. I think he would have gotten more out of Brase than Iowa State did.
 
we'll never know. I just know he was coming back from a major injury and had been out a full year. he was a health risk. and he didn't shake off the rust. he shot 29% from the floor and 25% from 3. that gets you a seat on the bench pretty quickly, no matter where you are.

we always assume our recruiting "misses" would be great here, but he didn't show anything for us to still believe that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: plydogg
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT