Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 36
  1. #1

    Thank goodness Patrick Patterson went to UK


  2. #2
    I didn't play the video as I read what was written below and that grossed me out enough to NOT want to watch the video.

    Maybe PP was having a Seinfeld moment.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill
    EEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWW!

    Love, Ima

  4. #4
    I am assuming this is the nose picking thing. If I had to trade nose-picking-and-eating for 12 rebounds and 8 points a game in the point, I'd make that trade. Missing Patterson still stinks.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (Buckhead)
    Nice pick Patrick!

    Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. BOOGERS!


    -EarlJam

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlJam View Post
    [SIZE="3"]Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. BOOGERS!


    -EarlJam
    Would you like ketchup with that?

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Ash View Post
    I am assuming this is the nose picking thing. If I had to trade nose-picking-and-eating for 12 rebounds and 8 points a game in the point, I'd make that trade. Missing Patterson still stinks.
    Well, you might want to think about the possibility that this is supposed to be funny. However, his assists would be down for sure; who would ever want to catch the ball?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (Buckhead)
    Quote Originally Posted by 3rd Dukie View Post
    Well, you might want to think about the possibility that this is supposed to be funny. However, his assists would be down for sure; who would ever want to catch the ball?
    Based on the evidence I've seen, I certainly would NOT shake his hand after seeing him exit from the restroom.

    Question: If Kentucky came to Cameron this year, would it be fair game to make fun of his booger pickin'? Or would that be considered over the line?

    I think it would be fair game because we all know he's likely a great kid. He just picks and eats his boogers and all.

    -EarlJam

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rougemont Nebulae
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Ash View Post
    I am assuming this is the nose picking thing. If I had to trade nose-picking-and-eating for 12 rebounds and 8 points a game in the point, I'd make that trade. Missing Patterson still stinks.
    Exactly, it's about the game. So what if the ball's a little slippery.

    POTW!

    If it's good enough for the Pres...http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Nose-picking

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    St Augustine, FL

    I beg to differ

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Ash View Post
    I am assuming this is the nose picking thing. If I had to trade nose-picking-and-eating for 12 rebounds and 8 points a game in the point, I'd make that trade. Missing Patterson still stinks.
    I'm glad we don't have PP. I really like the team we have, it looks like the chemistry is great and they are having fun. We have plenty of great players.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by Fish80 View Post
    I'm glad we don't have PP. I really like the team we have, it looks like the chemistry is great and they are having fun. We have plenty of great players.
    Especially when he said he didn't "click" with the players. In my opinion, this Duke team has better chemstry than any other I can remember, even during my 4 years on campus. It's a joy to watch..

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Western North Carolina

    Not Buying

    1. I do not believe for one minute that PP committed to UK because he didn't "click" with Duke's players. Given his late season visit, and the bad taste in everyone's mouth at the way the season ended, I doubt he got a good read on that sort of thing. Especially on a recruiting visit. This was easier than saying "I will have to fight for minutes at Duke. KY is a wasteland talent wise. I will be, easily, the best player, and will barely have to work for minutes." That is why KY got his services.

    2. For whatever percieved flaws or shortcommings K has (and he does have some, no coach is perfect. Maybe Wooden), inspiring the troops is not one of those problems. Some coaches win by devising a superior game plan. K wins by inspiring great kids to come to Duke. Once they are here he convinces them they can do anything. He once spoke to a class of mine, and by the end I was convinced that me and 4 other students from the class could win the NC. I really doubt that PP would have adversely affected chemistry. K would've hammered out that problem by early November, if not before the season actually started.

    [I know that some will point to last year as an example of "no chemistry" and they are right. But, reports of that didn't really surface until the late season slide happened. When a team is winning, there are rarely "chemistry concerns". Only losers have chemistry problems. I accept that chemistry could lead to losing. But, if a few more threes had fallen last year, and Duke had won a few more games and gone to the sweet 16, talk of Chemistry issues would have been quieter. For all this year's talk of chemistry, talk to me when we lose. Playing a few minutes and/or getting few shots in a solid win is one thing. Barely getting any burn in a loss leads to some hurt feelings. It all stems from competitiveness, but losing is hard on not just us fans.]

    3. Who really doesn't want PP? He was good enough to give Hans some comp. His main strength seems to be rebounding and low post scoring, our two main weaknesses. As good as we are now, we would be better with him. With him on the team, I think NOBODY questions Duke's inside strength. Right now, we would prbably be the second or third ranked team, and Duke would be talked about as one of the most dangerous teams in the nation, and a favorite for the FF. As it stands now, we have a good chance to make the FF. But, the surprise would be IF we made the FF. With PP, the surprise would be if we DIDN'T make the FF. I wasn't a believer in PP during his recruiting frenzy, but I am now. Not that he is a superstar or anything, but he would have been perfect at Duke because we didn't need him to do anything but rebound and score arround the basket.

    Patrick Yates

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (Buckhead)
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Yates View Post
    1. I do not believe for one minute that PP committed to UK because he didn't "click" with Duke's players. Given his late season visit, and the bad taste in everyone's mouth at the way the season ended, I doubt he got a good read on that sort of thing. Especially on a recruiting visit. This was easier than saying "I will have to fight for minutes at Duke. KY is a wasteland talent wise. I will be, easily, the best player, and will barely have to work for minutes." That is why KY got his services.

    2. For whatever percieved flaws or shortcommings K has (and he does have some, no coach is perfect. Maybe Wooden), inspiring the troops is not one of those problems. Some coaches win by devising a superior game plan. K wins by inspiring great kids to come to Duke. Once they are here he convinces them they can do anything. He once spoke to a class of mine, and by the end I was convinced that me and 4 other students from the class could win the NC. I really doubt that PP would have adversely affected chemistry. K would've hammered out that problem by early November, if not before the season actually started.

    [I know that some will point to last year as an example of "no chemistry" and they are right. But, reports of that didn't really surface until the late season slide happened. When a team is winning, there are rarely "chemistry concerns". Only losers have chemistry problems. I accept that chemistry could lead to losing. But, if a few more threes had fallen last year, and Duke had won a few more games and gone to the sweet 16, talk of Chemistry issues would have been quieter. For all this year's talk of chemistry, talk to me when we lose. Playing a few minutes and/or getting few shots in a solid win is one thing. Barely getting any burn in a loss leads to some hurt feelings. It all stems from competitiveness, but losing is hard on not just us fans.]

    3. Who really doesn't want PP? He was good enough to give Hans some comp. His main strength seems to be rebounding and low post scoring, our two main weaknesses. As good as we are now, we would be better with him. With him on the team, I think NOBODY questions Duke's inside strength. Right now, we would prbably be the second or third ranked team, and Duke would be talked about as one of the most dangerous teams in the nation, and a favorite for the FF. As it stands now, we have a good chance to make the FF. But, the surprise would be IF we made the FF. With PP, the surprise would be if we DIDN'T make the FF. I wasn't a believer in PP during his recruiting frenzy, but I am now. Not that he is a superstar or anything, but he would have been perfect at Duke because we didn't need him to do anything but rebound and score arround the basket.

    Patrick Yates
    You're just saying all that because your first name is Patrick. Admit it.

    Actually, great post. Booger picking and snot chomping aside, he would have been a great addition. But enough. I love our team this year.

    -EarlJam

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlJam View Post
    You're just saying all that because your first name is Patrick. Admit it.

    Actually, great post. Booger picking and snot chomping aside, he would have been a great addition. But enough. I love our team this year.

    -EarlJam
    You do have a way with words; yikes that made me laugh!

  15. #15
    Would you like to super size that sir?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City

    Wooden Perfect?

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Yates View Post
    no coach is perfect. Maybe Wooden
    Why is Wooden a perfect coach? His boosters bought the best players in the country and he got a buy (oops, a typo, I meant bye) each year into the final four.

    Legendary? Yes. Innovative? Certainly. Perfect? Not close.

    The UCLA teams were absolutely loaded with talent, and there have been reports that there were payments to the players which got them to come. It is not generally disputed that the player were paid, the dispute is whether
    Wooden knew about the payments. The PAC 10 sucked, so he got an automatic NCAA bid and the first 2 rounds were against the west (16 team field) where there was little challenge to the final four.

    Wooden was a great coach, but not the best ever.

  17. #17
    I have heard his favorite play is the Pick and roll

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Western North Carolina

    Close to Perfect

    Quote Originally Posted by BD80 View Post
    Why is Wooden a perfect coach? His boosters bought the best players in the country and he got a buy (oops, a typo, I meant bye) each year into the final four.

    Legendary? Yes. Innovative? Certainly. Perfect? Not close.

    The UCLA teams were absolutely loaded with talent, and there have been reports that there were payments to the players which got them to come. It is not generally disputed that the player were paid, the dispute is whether
    Wooden knew about the payments. The PAC 10 sucked, so he got an automatic NCAA bid and the first 2 rounds were against the west (16 team field) where there was little challenge to the final four.

    Wooden was a great coach, but not the best ever.
    Fisrt of all, I had never heard of these allegations.

    And, if the kids were paid, well, a lot of other schools were doing it, or at least had the option to. And the Pac-10 may have been bad. Part of that was because UCLA was so dominant that kids were scared of going into the conf to challenge (not really) UCLA. UCLA still dominated.

    It was news when Wooden lost, even a single game. That is dominance. No one is perfect (though he IS close), but Wooden is undeniably the greatest college hoops coach ever. The only other name that could be raised is Rupp, but even diehard UK fans have to bow to UCLA. NO other coach can even enter the argument.

    And if you want to talk about play for pay in college: Corey Maggette. You can add any number of shady street agents steering kids to certain programs. Until proven by some judicial body, allegations are only that.

    Patrick Yates

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Yates View Post
    And if you want to talk about play for pay in college: Corey Maggette. You can add any number of shady street agents steering kids to certain programs. Until proven by some judicial body, allegations are only that.
    Magette was paid to play in college? Do you have a cite for that? Even as an allegation?

  20. #20
    As for UCLA being crooked during Wooden's tenure, Google "John Wooden Sam Gilbert" for a taste.

    An example, from here.

    "I hate to say anything that may hurt UCLA, but I can't be quiet when I see what the NCAA is doing (to other coaches) only because (they have) a reputation for giving a second chance to many black athletes other coaches have branded as troublemakers. The NCAA is working night and day trying to get (them), but no one from the NCAA ever questioned me during my four years at UCLA."

    That quote comes from none other than Bill Walton, maybe the greatest Bruin of them all, in a 1978 book "Bill Walton: On the Road with the Portland Trail Blazers," which went on to detail how Sam Gilbert, a Los Angeles contractor the feds allege made millions laundering drug money, bought a decade worth of recruits for UCLA.

    "It's hard for me to have a proper perspective on financial matters, since I've always had whatever I wanted since I enrolled at UCLA," Walton said.

Similar Threads

  1. Reading the Tea Leaves on Patrick Patterson
    By Uncle Drew in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 564
    Last Post: 05-21-2007, 12:15 PM
  2. Patrick Patterson, Huntington Win - K watches
    By watzone in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-20-2007, 04:41 PM
  3. Patrick Patterson.
    By lavell12 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-16-2007, 12:45 PM
  4. Paging Patrick Patterson
    By dbowen in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-15-2007, 11:14 PM
  5. Patrick Patterson
    By DukeBlood in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-08-2007, 10:53 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •