Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/24/19 at 4:00 pm to the808bass
He’s also riding the bench at NC State and doesn’t look like a difference maker.
Posted on 2/24/19 at 4:13 pm to wubilli
Yeah. That’s kinda the point.
Posted on 2/24/19 at 4:24 pm to the808bass
He didn't really recruit him so much as jump on in a hurry what he had available to him that year.
If most if not all of the players he recruits have to turn into difference makers on tourney teams that's gonna eliminate a lot of coaches like say Brown, Self, Krzyzewski.
If the time limit for going from 8-46 SEC team to a consistent tourney team is 2 seasons that's probably going to eliminate any mere mortals.
If most if not all of the players he recruits have to turn into difference makers on tourney teams that's gonna eliminate a lot of coaches like say Brown, Self, Krzyzewski.
If the time limit for going from 8-46 SEC team to a consistent tourney team is 2 seasons that's probably going to eliminate any mere mortals.
This post was edited on 2/24/19 at 4:26 pm
Posted on 2/24/19 at 4:27 pm to the808bass
Ended up getting who they really want at guard from the 2017 spring in Mark Smith.
The bigger problem for this season is they got the Porters so went all in on them for last season. It worked they made the tournament, now they are back at year 1 level for rebuilding.
Making the tournament in year 1 gave Cuonzo the job security to do the rebuild the way that he believes is the right way.
The bigger problem for this season is they got the Porters so went all in on them for last season. It worked they made the tournament, now they are back at year 1 level for rebuilding.
Making the tournament in year 1 gave Cuonzo the job security to do the rebuild the way that he believes is the right way.
Posted on 2/24/19 at 5:10 pm to MIZ_COU
I didn’t expect a tourney team this year after Jontay went down. And we can keep repeating this back and forth. It’s been a bad year. And we’re looking at a bubble team as our ceiling next year.
We’re one or two unfortunate events from being three years out from the tournament.
We’re one or two unfortunate events from being three years out from the tournament.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 5:48 am to the808bass
quote:
I’m still on the Cuonzo train
I'm at the station trying to decide if the Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is the train I want to get on.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 9:48 am to reedus23
Nikko is a fabulous 3rd string big. If hes your 2nd big, you have no depth, and no depth means not a good season.
Agree on Suggs too, the dude couldn't crack the Bradley rotation. Is his story fun and cute, sure, but dont get used to wins.
Mizzou is one Big away from doing something special next year. Im not even sure getting some late HS recruit will cut it. They need a GT big, and they need one bad. If you can get a serviceable big, theres no reason to think a tourney isnt in the picture. Hell, if they had a serviceable big this year, Mizzous on the bubble.
Agree on Suggs too, the dude couldn't crack the Bradley rotation. Is his story fun and cute, sure, but dont get used to wins.
Mizzou is one Big away from doing something special next year. Im not even sure getting some late HS recruit will cut it. They need a GT big, and they need one bad. If you can get a serviceable big, theres no reason to think a tourney isnt in the picture. Hell, if they had a serviceable big this year, Mizzous on the bubble.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 10:51 am to mizslu314
If Cuonzo can't finish in the top 1/3rd of the SEC next year it will be time to move on.
3 or 4 wins in the SEC should never be understandable, acceptable or justifiable. We already went through this during the KA era. No need to accept it again.
3 or 4 wins in the SEC should never be understandable, acceptable or justifiable. We already went through this during the KA era. No need to accept it again.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 12:17 pm to notsince98
Can’t fire Cuonzo until after year 4.
It’s in his contract that by making the tournament in year 1, it’s almost impossible to fire him in the next 3 years.
If he can get his team to stay healthy they will finish in the top half of the league.
It’s in his contract that by making the tournament in year 1, it’s almost impossible to fire him in the next 3 years.
If he can get his team to stay healthy they will finish in the top half of the league.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 12:53 pm to wubilli
quote:
Can’t fire Cuonzo until after year 4.
It’s in his contract that by making the tournament in year 1, it’s almost impossible to fire him in the next 3 years.
If he can get his team to stay healthy they will finish in the top half of the league.
Top half isn't good enough for year 3. Year 3 should be title contender level based on his contract.
Top half would mean technically we are worse after year 3 than after Cuonzo's first year. Is that really acceptable?
This post was edited on 2/25/19 at 12:54 pm
Posted on 2/25/19 at 12:57 pm to notsince98
Well
Watcha gonna do bout it?
Watcha gonna do bout it?
Posted on 2/25/19 at 1:33 pm to notsince98
Looking at the rosters yes.
Cuonzo is finally doing a roster rebuild this season that Mizzou has needed since Mike Anderson left. If it means there’s 1-2 down years at the beginning to get to a prolonged run of success, we should all be ok with that.
Haith was too worried about job security to do it and KA wasn’t good enough a coach to do it.
Cuonzo is finally doing a roster rebuild this season that Mizzou has needed since Mike Anderson left. If it means there’s 1-2 down years at the beginning to get to a prolonged run of success, we should all be ok with that.
Haith was too worried about job security to do it and KA wasn’t good enough a coach to do it.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 1:34 pm to notsince98
Here's the thing. When Martin got the job, im sure the AD and co will tell you the goal was to get to the point where in year 3 or 4 the team is a tournament team. Mizzou was so bad, and the reputation was so nonexistence that no one could expect or predict a good team within a few years. No one was prepared for this to happen after the first year. The fact that he did what we expected in year 3 or 4 in just year one buys him a lot of time now.
This post was edited on 2/25/19 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 2/25/19 at 1:36 pm to mizslu314
quote:
The fact that he did what we expected in year 3 or 4 in just year one buys him a lot of time now.
This seems backwards to me. A coach shows you what they can do and then regress and that shows what they are capable of?
We should have backed up the truck to keep Frank Haith if that is the case.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 1:43 pm to notsince98
That thinking ignores the rosters the coach has to work with and the time it takes to rebuild the roster so that it’s ready for sustaining success.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 1:46 pm to notsince98
quote:
This seems backwards to me
When you give someone a hard task and they do it in half the time assumed, are you more impressed or discouraged.
now, since that person did what you want them to do, during your next task you have trust that they will accomplish the next job without such a short leash(hes earned that). Here's the kicker, what is the next goal? he has already accomplished the first job.
This post was edited on 2/25/19 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 2/25/19 at 2:39 pm to the808bass
Being a bubble team is not the ceiling, basketball teams change a lot each yr. That’s just not how it works. You don’t even know what our roster will fully look like next year. I know one thing and that’s that this freshman class has some players that are good and will get a lot better if they put in the work. All seem like good kids with good attitudes and that’s a good place to start.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 2:55 pm to mizslu314
quote:
When you give someone a hard task and they do it in half the time assumed, are you more impressed or discouraged.
now, since that person did what you want them to do, during your next task you have trust that they will accomplish the next job without such a short leash(hes earned that). Here's the kicker, what is the next goal? he has already accomplished the first job.
Yeah. Step 1 was successful despite underachieving once the roster was finalized. Step 2 has been a colossal failure. If they get credit for step 1 do they not get credit for step 2?
Step 3 goals should not have changed from the time since before step 1. You hire a coach to have you in a better position after year 3 than before they were hired. Will that be the case? If not, coach gets all of the blame, no excuses.
This is haith part deux unless Martin makes significant improvement next year.
Now having said that Martin's team should be much better next year. There is a lot of talent returning and being added. I am assuming this year to be an outlier but if it trends based off of this year we have a huge problem. Cuonzo has to realize he doesn't have anyone that can create in crunch time. This means they need to score more before crunch time arrives.
Posted on 2/25/19 at 3:02 pm to notsince98
quote:
Yeah. Step 1 was successful despite underachieving once the roster was finalized.
Are you saying he underachieved while taking a team from 8 wins to 20 wins, and reaching the tournament without MPJ? Am I following this right?
calling out Martin makes me think of this. Martin should have never made it to the tournament his first year, let alone 2nd and maybe even third. Him making it to the tournament in the eyes of a lot of mizzou fans actually made his job tougher. The Expectation some fans have out for him since he did that is unbeliever. And I actually feel bad for Coach Martin.
Which first three years would you rather see
1) 20-12 - tournament
2) 14-16
3)?
or
1)10-20
2)15-15
3)?
This post was edited on 2/25/19 at 3:08 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News