[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 123456[7]8910 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Thursday, July 17, 12:19:47pm
Author: SPC Alum
Subject: Question for Peacock

One would have hoped that he went higher, but he will perform in relative obscurity in mid state NY and will not necessarily see the development he needs due to lesser competition and also due to skill limitations will play behind an experienced 6'10" kid. All in all the status at Binghamton is far different than his original desires and what he was telling anybody who would listen.

This is your comment. My question to you is do you think Sutton would have developed in Jersey City? What did Todd do his last two years? According to you not much huh?
Loyal is right. results are what matters. On the court but more especially recruiting.It is a cutthroat business at times but you have to really sell not just your campus but yourself. Dont forget that players talk amongst themselves as do AAU and high school coaches. What went on at SPC the last two years with all the defections and housecleaning has gotten around. One must be careful when one wants to get rid of players. Whether or not its justified! I'm just voicing my opinion please dont think I have an agenda.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


[> Re: Question for Peacock -- Peacock, Thursday, July 17, 12:58:42pm [1]

As you well know, the program is dirty at Binghamton. You also know the load Sowell was and I doubt you would have handled him or developed him either.

Now also if you read my post, I agree with the results which I have voiced displeasure with, but the issue here was Sutton. Would he develop here more so than at Binghamton. Yes I do and if you don't, voice your reason why. If he did not, then that would have been a another nail in Dunne's coffin. In fact if he contributed to a rise at SPC, he would garner press which would help him, for even the unknowns of JC get noticed when successful. Now you may have an opinion, I would like to know how this quote from NYHOOPS 6/20 from Anderson sits with you,

"The Kangaroos assistant coach Elmer Anderson stated the senior chose to play with the St. Peter's Peacocks in New Jersey because it was close to home and because he would get playing time as a freshman." Now Binghamton is a nightmare drive for his parents. He liked the campus which he visited right after he visited us and even announced his commitment 6/20 in NYHOOPS (11 days after his SPC visit, although he committed the day of his visit) to SPC after the visit to Binghamton. What happened after that, that changed his mind. Doesn't fit in with your logic. Fits more with the advisor pushing him and his parents that way. Hell he did well at the Elite and could have gotten higher pursuits. Why the commitment. My main point is Dunne has a lot to be held responsible for, but not the fiasco of Sutton. And not anything to do with the defections of the last two years. Much like the murder of a Brooklyn kid at Binghamton did not detered him either.

[ Edit | View ]

[> Re: Question for Peacock -- oldtimer#1, Thursday, July 17, 01:33:13pm [1]

Just to add, a major reason stated by both Conley and Sutton for initially choosing SPC was based on talking to and relating to current players. Conley was especially vocal in this. As Alum correctly stated "players talk among themselves" If then the logic of Alum is to be followed the current players should have bad mouthed the staff and discouraged the above players from coming here right off the bat. Apparently, the feedback from current players was positive. Conley was directly quoted as such and Sutton verbaled on his visit, after speaking with our players but before "others" got involved.

[ Edit | View ]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.