- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Sonofthetruth
| Favorite team: | LSU |
| Location: | Walker |
| Biography: | 2001 LSU Grad |
| Interests: | All sports, Cybersecurity, Data Science |
| Occupation: | Coach, Father, Husband, Ex Marine |
| Number of Posts: | 1195 |
| Registered on: | 12/28/2015 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Jordan Brand Classic (HS all star game) tonight
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/17/26 at 9:34 pm to Misterkleenmillenium
Has to be because of the adidas deal.
re: LSU Women Basketball Recruiting Thread (2026 and Beyond)
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/17/26 at 8:33 pm to goldenmoment
Just for the record.. They should have called that travel on that last shot! It was clearly a travel!
re: Jada Richard
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/17/26 at 3:45 pm to lsutiger2
quote:
a really good recruiter
She’s not even that… She’s just a black face spending other peoples money!
re: 6'4" Me'arah O'Neal just entered the transfer portal. Coach Kim will be all over it.
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/15/26 at 8:58 pm to lsutiger2
Not sure where that rumor came from.
re: Only if Mulkey had a recruiter
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/14/26 at 10:20 am to Misterkleenmillenium
She has a brand deal with adidas. All 3 schools are adidas schools. Sc is making the switch.
re: LSU Women Basketball Recruiting Thread (2026 and Beyond)
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/13/26 at 5:14 pm to Septiger
What makes you think she goes to Carolina? Are they losing someone to the portal?
re: LSU Women Basketball Recruiting Thread (2026 and Beyond)
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/13/26 at 1:16 pm to MSGulfTiger
Fake news …
re: Jada Williams commits to LSU
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/13/26 at 8:08 am to timlan2057
There is no way Fatima Diakhate starts over Koval!
re: Jada Williams commits to LSU
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/12/26 at 5:50 pm to FnTigers
I wouldn’t say all that. But at least now we are back to where we were roster wise. We still need another guard and 2-3
Bigs
Bigs
re: Only if Mulkey had a recruiter
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/10/26 at 6:21 pm to Sonofthetruth
I had the wrong kid. It’s Kymora Johnson from Virginia that was in a visit to SC. There is some McMiller interest in LSU, not sure as to what’s going on there.
re: Jada to the portal
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/9/26 at 9:28 pm to doya2
I never said I believed it. It’s a way for some to cope I guess. Just throw out a crazy number for it to make sense.
re: Jada to the portal
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/9/26 at 7:55 pm to LSUGrad9295
I would never pay that for Jada, but I hope for her sake it’s true. Wow. That’s what’s being floated.
Jada to the portal
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/9/26 at 4:47 pm
Yep!
re: Only if Mulkey had a recruiter
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/8/26 at 9:57 pm to saintsfan22
McMiller may end up at SC. She’s a talent and they need guards. They may just be taking visits to get her value up. Just what agents do… they also do it to stir up shyt!
re: Bella Hines to the portal
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 4/7/26 at 9:58 pm to Septiger
Let’s be real, this actually makes perfect sense. Mr. Hines isn’t the head coach, so ultimately that decision isn’t his to control. Mulkey may have said Bella’s minutes would increase, but you can’t promise or prioritize a sophomore’s playing time when there’s clearly more proven talent ahead of her on the depth chart.
Could Bella have eventually earned that priority next season? Possibly, it would’ve depended on her development and performance. But with the current roster and competition, there were no guarantees. At the end of the day, her transferring is a logical move… we just won’t get to see how it might’ve played out if she stayed
Could Bella have eventually earned that priority next season? Possibly, it would’ve depended on her development and performance. But with the current roster and competition, there were no guarantees. At the end of the day, her transferring is a logical move… we just won’t get to see how it might’ve played out if she stayed
re: Mulkey makes a hire
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 3/31/26 at 11:52 am to Tigerbait357
Are they going to pair Gabe with Messer? Or is Simmons and LeBeauf still in play?
re: This board's obsession with defunding Women's basketball
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 3/25/26 at 2:16 pm to ThePoo
That argument sounds logical on the surface, but it falls apart once you understand how college athletics actually operate in 2026.
First, the biggest flaw: money isn’t freely interchangeable the way you’re framing it. Schools can’t just strip millions from women’s basketball and dump it into men’s basketball without consequences. Because of Title IX, athletic departments are legally required to provide proportional opportunities and resources for men and women. So that “just cut women’s spending in half” idea? Not really an option without opening the door to lawsuits and federal compliance issues.
Second, you’re treating women’s basketball like a pure loss with no upside…which is outdated thinking. The explosion of stars like Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese has already shifted TV ratings, sponsorships, and media rights. Networks like ESPN are investing more because the audience is growing fast. That means women’s basketball isn’t just an expense, it’s an emerging revenue asset.
Third, your “just spend more to win” model is only partially true. Yes, money helps, but it’s not a guaranteed return. Schools dump millions into men’s basketball every year and still miss tournaments. Meanwhile, smart mid-majors with strong culture and development still break through. If it were purely about spending, the same 10 teams would win every year and they don’t.
Fourth, the revenue-share era actually makes your argument weaker, not stronger. Schools now have to balance entire athletic ecosystems not just one program. Over-investing in one sport while weakening others can hurt:
• compliance (Title IX)
• conference alignment
• brand value across sports
• long-term media negotiations
Finally, the idea that “every dollar not spent on men’s basketball hurts the product” ignores reality: diversified success drives athletic departments now. Women’s basketball, softball, gymnastics, these are growing media properties. Schools that invest early are positioning themselves for future deals, not just current margins.
Bottom line:
It’s not “men vs women” and it’s definitely not “just move the money.” College sports in 2026 is about portfolio strategy, legal balance, and long-term media growth not just dumping cash into one roster and hoping it prints money!
First, the biggest flaw: money isn’t freely interchangeable the way you’re framing it. Schools can’t just strip millions from women’s basketball and dump it into men’s basketball without consequences. Because of Title IX, athletic departments are legally required to provide proportional opportunities and resources for men and women. So that “just cut women’s spending in half” idea? Not really an option without opening the door to lawsuits and federal compliance issues.
Second, you’re treating women’s basketball like a pure loss with no upside…which is outdated thinking. The explosion of stars like Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese has already shifted TV ratings, sponsorships, and media rights. Networks like ESPN are investing more because the audience is growing fast. That means women’s basketball isn’t just an expense, it’s an emerging revenue asset.
Third, your “just spend more to win” model is only partially true. Yes, money helps, but it’s not a guaranteed return. Schools dump millions into men’s basketball every year and still miss tournaments. Meanwhile, smart mid-majors with strong culture and development still break through. If it were purely about spending, the same 10 teams would win every year and they don’t.
Fourth, the revenue-share era actually makes your argument weaker, not stronger. Schools now have to balance entire athletic ecosystems not just one program. Over-investing in one sport while weakening others can hurt:
• compliance (Title IX)
• conference alignment
• brand value across sports
• long-term media negotiations
Finally, the idea that “every dollar not spent on men’s basketball hurts the product” ignores reality: diversified success drives athletic departments now. Women’s basketball, softball, gymnastics, these are growing media properties. Schools that invest early are positioning themselves for future deals, not just current margins.
Bottom line:
It’s not “men vs women” and it’s definitely not “just move the money.” College sports in 2026 is about portfolio strategy, legal balance, and long-term media growth not just dumping cash into one roster and hoping it prints money!
re: Mulkey Retirement News Dropping Soon
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 3/25/26 at 12:27 pm to Imtheman2
It’s a marketing expense! All of that is about to change tho! WBB is going to be profitable in the near future!
re: Mulkey Retirement News Dropping Soon
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 3/25/26 at 8:41 am to American Gangster
This better not be because of Wade!
re: Interesting comment from TT women’s coach post game:
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 3/24/26 at 11:20 am to doya2
Why do we keep doing this dumb shite! 12 will be back at LSU next year! How the Phuck would the coach from TT have any insight! People are just phuckin stupid!
re: Is WBB about to fall off?
Posted by Sonofthetruth on 3/18/26 at 12:19 pm to timlan2057
quote:
Top assistants from all over the country will be breaking down the door to fill these two openings.
Happening as we speak!!
Popular
0












