Started By
Message
re: Alright, I'm done. Anderson needs to go.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 10:18 pm to ocelot4ark
Posted on 1/29/14 at 10:18 pm to ocelot4ark
quote:
We are not getting consistently open shots, for one. And I'd challenge anyone that said that. We're shooting 38% in conf play.
They are missing shots, doesn't mean they were not open looks, how many layups have they missed in conf play? Too many.
quote:
Shot selection? Agree with you. Just don't pin it entirely on the players.
Who the frick is taking the shots?
quote:
Final time - I want you to acknowledge that we don't consistently set solid screens throughout a possession. Disregard shot selection. Are we making the best screens we can possibly strive for? Would our offense work better if we were? If not, why screen at all? Why is it part of the offense?
At times, yes and no, it has been just as inconsistent as the players setting them in conference play, it isn't the root cause of the problem. Slow ball movement is the larger problem, not reversing the ball is 2nd.
quote:
You think with 2 seconds on the clock down by 2 that the only thing Coach K would do is say, "run the offense, guys?"
Wow.
Is that what I said? No, it is not.
I'm talking about the games in their entirety, a series of bad shots with 15:00 to go in the first half has just as much to do with the outcome as the last shot in the game, better shot selection early could greatly change the situation at the end of the game.
quote:
You are completely retarded. Telling yourself something doesn't make it so - evidenced by your inability to point to the specific elements of the offense, defense, or press that I don't understand. Your counterpoint to my arguments is, "But we are top 15 scoring." As if that is remotely representative of offensive efficiency playing teams with a pulse (especially on the road).
I want to see set plays, what's this motion offense you speak of?, here let me give you an example of a NBA coach, or here is the all time leader in wins in NCAA basketball who has been at the same program for 30 years, lets compare to that guy, let me play checkers while you play chess.
quote:
What play called at the end of the game? We don't have plays, remember?
Where did I say that? I didn't.
quote:
And how, exactly, is it better to play a guy showing a propensity for taking bad shots than playing a guy that might be less talented but WON'T take bad shots? A bad shot is a bad shot because it doesn't go in the fricking basket. A player who takes bad shots is negating his supposed strength.
Who do you want to have the ball in their hands at the end of a close game you are looking to win or tie? Madden or Haydar/Wade/Scott?
Let's take the ball out of the team's leading scoring in SEC play and put in a guy who averages 2 points and is 6' tall.
quote:
Of course, I don't think Madden should become a bench player just because he takes a bad shot now and then. I just don't think you ignore his (or anyone else's) bad shots without addressing them. Take a bad shot? Pull the player out of the game, explain why you're taking him out, let him get some rest and then bring him back into the game. You don't discourage players from taking bad shots by not having any repercussions, however slight.
That has been done.
1
Posted on 1/29/14 at 10:48 pm to DaleDenton
I'm done.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 11:28 pm to ocelot4ark
quote:well, if that aint a kick... in the...
I'm done.
This post was edited on 1/29/14 at 11:29 pm
Posted on 1/29/14 at 11:46 pm to Porker Face
Nm
This post was edited on 1/30/14 at 12:45 am
Posted on 1/30/14 at 3:25 am to ocelot4ark
quote:
I'm done.
I'm exhausted from keeping up with this thread.
This post was edited on 1/30/14 at 3:26 am
Posted on 1/30/14 at 8:08 am to Pigfeet
I'm not reading all of that. I think it premature to fire MA before he has been here 5 years, so many fans wanted MA (I am not one of them) that he needs to be given enough time to show whether he can be successful here or not.
After the 5 years is up, we had better see improvement on the court. If not, it's time to hire a good coach.
It comes down to wins and losses. Everything else is propaganda.
After the 5 years is up, we had better see improvement on the court. If not, it's time to hire a good coach.
It comes down to wins and losses. Everything else is propaganda.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 8:32 am to SLC
Why are you so level headed? 
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:04 am to SLC
quote:
I'm not reading all of that. I think it premature to fire MA before he has been here 5 years, so many fans wanted MA (I am not one of them) that he needs to be given enough time to show whether he can be successful here or not.
That's one of the main reasons I was extremely leery of hiring Anderson in the first place. Our fan base was so obsessed with recreating the glory days of Nolan wanted to bring in Anderson because it gave them that old feeling. USC football has a similar thing going on right now.
I'm also always hesitant to bring in a guy with deep ties and roots in the state because it's harder to get people to both judge them objectively and be willing to cut ties when they should be cut, and it's why Nutt was able to stick around for 10 years and it's probably why Long wanted nothing to with Malzahn.
This post was edited on 1/30/14 at 9:06 am
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:12 am to Feral
quote:
That's one of the main reasons I was extremely leery of hiring Anderson in the first place. Our fan base was so obsessed with recreating the glory days of Nolan wanted to bring in Anderson because it gave them that old feeling. USC football has a similar thing going on right now.
Mike isn't Nolan.
quote:
I'm also always hesitant to bring in a guy with deep ties and roots in the state because it's harder to get people to both judge them objectively and be willing to cut ties when they should be cut, and it's why Nutt was able to stick around for 10 years and it's probably why Long wanted nothing to with Malzahn.
Mike in no way compares to Nutt, Nutt was able to stick around because he forged alliances with influential boosters and BOT members. Mike isn't doing that, the University received a letter from the NCAA warning them about the booster control of the athletic department not that long ago.
There are people who have had a dislike for Anderson because of Nolan's actions, no one blamed Nutt for being on Crowe's staff.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:24 am to Feral
quote:
. Our fan base was so obsessed with recreating the glory days
It was also a clever way to get some spark back in the program, fast. And I think interest has picked up a lot, even with our struggles. Should mike not be able to do here what he's done elsewhere, we're still gonna be in a better positon than when mike came in.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:26 am to DaleDenton
i look at it as if he hadn't hired anderson and he was doing semi-well somewhere else we'd be hearing the same thing we hear about every other coach who's ever stepped foot in the state yet never been hired as a head coach here. why do you hate your own so much? why not hire him? yadda yadda yadda yadda yadda.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:36 am to piggilicious
quote:
i look at it as if he hadn't hired anderson and he was doing semi-well somewhere else we'd be hearing the same thing we hear about every other coach who's ever stepped foot in the state yet never been hired as a head coach here. why do you hate your own so much? why not hire him? yadda yadda yadda yadda yadda.
Yes. Its a fan base problem. Just look at all the "x coach" would have came, but wasn't offered job in football and basketball. Jimmie Johnson, Charlie Strong, Gus Malazahn, Butch Davis, etc. You never heard about these guys, cept Gus because of his cult following, because they were wronged in not getting offered the job until they landed a big time job somewhere else.
In basketball you have Bill Self, Gregg Marshall, Buzz Killington, etc. All were waiting to get the job but weren't offered out of the "program's stupidity".
The other problem is how the fan base wants the coach to do things you know he doesn't do when hired or while here. With Ford it was pass the ball, Nutt pass the ball, Petrino win big games, Bert pass the ball.
On the basketball side you had Heath who ran set plays, focused on the low post game, but everyone bitched about the tempo and how his teams were slow.
With Mike you have people wanting him to run set plays, focus on the low post game, and slow the pace down to a more methodical tempo.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:37 am to DaleDenton
quote:
Mike isn't Nolan.
I wasn't arguing that. In fact, I was arguing the opposite in that our fan base just assumes(d) that Mike is Nolan incarnate because he played for and coached under him.
quote:
Mike in no way compares to Nutt, Nutt was able to stick around because he forged alliances with influential boosters and BOT members. Mike isn't doing that, the University received a letter from the NCAA warning them about the booster control of the athletic department not that long ago.
There are people who have had a dislike for Anderson because of Nolan's actions, no one blamed Nutt for being on Crowe's staff.
Again, didn't say Mike was like Nutt. I'm talking about how I'd rather have an outsider who our fan base can look at objectively (like Bielema) over someone with history here (like Malzahn) who tends to be harder to get rid of if everything goes south.
If Anderson hasn't made the tourney after year 5, I'm still not convinced we'd fire him; however if his name was Mike Smith and he'd made his bones as an assistant at Villanova, he'd be out on his arse.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:45 am to DaleDenton
quote:
The other problem is how the fan base wants the coach to do things you know he doesn't do when hired or while here. With Ford it was pass the ball, Nutt pass the ball, Petrino win big games, Bert pass the ball.
True, and (warning -- extreme generalization ahead) it's mostly due to the fact that on the whole, our fan base tends to be among the least educated, and I'd argue that translates to a lack of knowledge of the intricacies and schematics of sports like football and basketball.
I mean, just look at Bama fans. They griped for years about being too run-heavy, only to turn around and scream about Nussmeier being too pass-happy.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:45 am to Feral
quote:
If Anderson hasn't made the tourney after year 5, I'm still not convinced we'd fire him; however if his name was Mike Smith and he'd made his bones as an assistant at Villanova, he'd be out on his arse.
The Mike Smith argument is only valid if Mike Smith did not have a similar resume coming in. Up and Comers get a short leash, as they should, prior success in the tourney and program building will buy a new coach more time vs an up and comer.
If Frank worked with Dana Altman to bring in what he needed to shore up the APR problem, he would still be the HC and the program would not have had the problems it has since 2008. Pel was the worst possible hire that could have been made because of his track record, he took over a USA program that was in a similar shape as Arkansas with the APR, he did the same thing there that he did here, compounded the situation and left the program with a loss of scholarship with the APR.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:50 am to DaleDenton
quote:
The Mike Smith argument is only valid if Mike Smith did not have a similar resume coming in. Up and Comers get a short leash, as they should, prior success in the tourney and program building will buy a new coach more time vs an up and comer.
If Bielema is struggling to make a bowl in year 5, is he to be given a long leash because of his success at Wisconsin? Again, I'm not calling for Anderson to be fired at all, I'm just reiterating my original hesitation with hiring him.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:50 am to Feral
quote:
True, and (warning -- extreme generalization ahead) it's mostly due to the fact that on the whole, our fan base tends to be among the least educated, and I'd argue that translates to a lack of knowledge of the intricacies and schematics of sports like football and basketball.
I mean, just look at Bama fans. They griped for years about being too run-heavy, only to turn around and scream about Nussmeier being too pass-happy.
Yeah, most have this notion that there is only one way to play the game if you want to win, they seem to be more lenient in strategy and philosophy for football than basketball, from what I've observed on the internets.
I don't care what people say, style of play does matter to a fan base. Arkansas bitched about Heath, UCLA bitched about Howland, UK bitched about BCG. Fan bases will only tolerate slow basketball that is painful to watch if they are winning.
Same with football, if Bert had the same record but had a 4,000 yard passer, the message boards would be talking about how promising the future looks because the team was relying on freshmen and sophomores.
Posted on 1/30/14 at 9:57 am to Feral
quote:
If Bielema is struggling to make a bowl in year 5, is he to be given a long leash because of his success at Wisconsin? Again, I'm not calling for Anderson to be fired at all, I'm just reiterating my original hesitation with hiring him.
Stuggling to make a bowl or missing a bowl?
Its hard to compare the situations because CBB can flip his roster quicker by being allowed to sign a full offensive and defensive string (25 players), by year three he will have a core group of his recruits who have received his development. The numbers of 85 recruits allows more leeway with the APR.
In basketball, Mike has had to keep guys he probably would not have due to the APR, one guy flunking out can do far more damage to the program than in football. The other issue is he was forced to keep all the guys who Pel signed in his first class, 5 total or 39% of the team in one class. None of those guys had offers from him while at Mizzou, Madden was the only one I can recall him having interest in, Young he had no interest in. All of this basically set the timeline back one year, year 3 and he has only 2 recruiting classes on campus and has added 2 transfers to make up for that first class.
You have to examine the situations of each program, as every situation after a coaching change will be different. That is what Jeff Long is paid to do, but the fan base can continue to scream 3 years is enough for basketball, 4 for football like every situation is exactly the same...
Posted on 1/30/14 at 10:55 am to DaleDenton
quote:
Same with football, if Bert had the same record but had a 4,000 yard passer, the message boards would be talking about how promising the future looks because the team was relying on freshmen and sophomores.
True, and this was pretty much the case in 2008 with Petrino. We were three miracles away from winning just two games because Nutt's godawful empty cupboard forced us to be so reliant on freshmen but OOH WOW LOOK AT THE PASSING YARDS.
This post was edited on 1/30/14 at 10:59 am
Posted on 1/30/14 at 11:00 am to DaleDenton
I don't want a specific archetype of a basketball team. I want one that can match up and play whatever style is needed to win games.
This what got Nolan into the fire. He recruited specifi. To his system more so than bringing in the best basketball players. He tried to out athlete everyone, when we ran into athletic teams that could also play and had good coaching and discipline we were toast.
Now we can only have success playing one certain way, good teams are flexible and figure out how to beat all kinds of teams.
This what got Nolan into the fire. He recruited specifi. To his system more so than bringing in the best basketball players. He tried to out athlete everyone, when we ran into athletic teams that could also play and had good coaching and discipline we were toast.
Now we can only have success playing one certain way, good teams are flexible and figure out how to beat all kinds of teams.
Page 10 of 11
Latest Arkansas News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News