Started By
Message
re: UGA Season Long Basketball Thread (18-15, 7-11); Georgia to decline NIT bid
Posted on 2/14/18 at 8:51 am to bigdawg7780
Posted on 2/14/18 at 8:51 am to bigdawg7780
At this point, I think people will come if you make it at least entertaining. Watching our basketball team right now makes me want to claw my fricking eyes out. It's boring, and worse than that, we still suck at executing a stale, old offense. Let your athletes make some fricking plays, push the ball up the court, and don't play like you're stuck in the 1950's.
0
Posted on 2/14/18 at 9:37 am to GurleyGirl
quote:
Agree but I would add that our AD will invest more in basketball when our fans and boosters, etc. show that they have interest in basketball aka will support basketball. Translation: we are not a basketball school
This is BS. Why in the world would fans spend time and money going to see a boring product and a losing team? Why would fans in Atlanta drive over for a 9pm tipoff on a Tuesday to watch this garbage? The fans will support a winner and it's been proven time and time again. We were largely mediocre under Jirsa and he only lasted 2 years before we went out and spent the money to get a legit coach in Harrick, a guy who was a proven winner and won it all at UCLA jsut a few years prior. You must not have been aroudn then becuase UGA basketball was ELECTRIC, the steg was constantly packed to the rafters and loud as hell. It wasn't like that under Jirsa..it got like that bcause people want to support a winning product. And spare me the BS about harrick "cheating", giving easy tests and paying a phone bill is small peanuts compared to the shite going on everywhere else today not to mention the decades of cheating by UNC.
Unlike football, which could take YEARS to fundamentally change, basketball can be fixed in one year with what we have in place. The steg renovations are lovely, we have a fairly solid roster, there is an abundance of talent in our state, and we have a hungry fanbase desperate to support a team. The right coach could turn us around esxtremely quickly.
quote:
Translation: we are not a basketball school.
this is a crock. Florida, OU, ND, Texas, OSU, etc have all won big time in the last decade in basketball. Bama, SC, and AU in our own conference are lapping circles aroudn us, all because they hired the right coach. If you think the fans need to support more THEN we get a good coach, you'll be waiting until you're dead because it won't ever happen. Get a good coach, then the fans and money will pour in. That's what's mind boggling about our administration. If you spend money now in the short term, it'll come by 5 fold in the future.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 9:42 am to bigdawg7780
quote:
bullshite excuse you win the people will come.
You don't release a mediocre product as a business and say well if more people bought my mediocre bullshite I'd make it better, you make it better through investment for the people to follow.
Yeah... this nonsense gets old. The fans have put capacity crowds in Stegeman for mid-week games plenty... the product is just not very good. With some of the best players in UGA history, Fox has routinely found a way to make it uninteresting to watch still. That was fine when he was winning 20 games a season and seemed to be building/improving... fans were starting to buy in. We still had capacity crowds for games this year... Stegeman has been rocking for some games.
We had good crowds under Harrick because the product on the court was not just good but it was also entertaining.
The other thing to keep in mind is our venue is still one of the smallest from a capacity standpoint in the league at a little over 10,500 seats. We averaged ~70% capacity or so over the season in 2016 and 68% in 2017.
Comparatively, South Carolina who was a Final Four team last year averaged 74% attendance... Granted, they have a huge arena, so from a raw totals standpoint, they nearly doubled our attendance, but even if we'd been at 100% attendance, we still would only have moved up from 71st overall/12th SEC to 36th overall and 7th in the SEC. At a more reasonable 85%, we'd move up to 51st overall and 9th in the SEC.
Using attendance to determine investment in the basketball program is a surefire way to remain mediocre... We aren't going to tear down Stegeman or rebuild a new arena any time soon as far as any of us can tell (because our AD doesn't want to share revenues with a downtown venue and we're not going to drop massive dollars on a new venue ourselves), so at best, basketball revenues from ticket sales could improve by about 3k people per game * 15 2018 home games * however much a basketball ticket goes for on average... I know you could get season tickets for $15-20/game, so let's just use 20 bucks.
Some quick math there tells me that if we managed to have 100% capacity crowds all season long for home games (nearly impossible), the AD brings in an additional 900k. If you start thinking about what's a reasonable expectation, you can basically cut that number in half. This does of course ignore donations, but without a high quality product on the floor, I can't imagine that season ticket donations for basketball are that high? (The minimum donation for renewable season tickets was $150...)
Attendance typically follows success... not the other way around.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 9:47 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Unlike football, which could take YEARS to fundamentally change, basketball can be fixed in one year with what we have in place. The steg renovations are lovely, we have a fairly solid roster, there is an abundance of talent in our state, and we have a hungry fanbase desperate to support a team. The right coach could turn us around esxtremely quickly.
Even if we're pessimistic, with the right coach, a 2 year rebuild to be a tournament caliber team is not remotely unreasonable - hell without some abysmal in game decision making and Fox's typical substitution patterns, we could have been a tournament team this year. 5 guys on the court, not a big roster... it just doesn't take long to make an impact.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 10:03 am to fibonaccisquared
quote:
That was fine when he was winning 20 games a season
Now THIS is another completely overblown meausring stick that fox and mcgarity LOVE to trumpet abotu how good we are. "20 wins 3 straight years for the first time in school history!!!". Well...with the addition of these in-season tournaments, plus a game or 2 in the SECT, you're talking about playing mid-30s games. During that 3 year stretch of winning 20 games, his actual win percentage was:
59%
64%
59%
This is what our AD wants to use to placate our fanbase as being one of the best stretches in school history. One season winning more than 60% of the games. Fox's win percentage starting when it was "his team" (after feltons' guys had gone) is about 55% (not includign this season, which will surely drop that). Barely winning half of your games shouldn't be grounds for a 9 year stay.
And there are negative nancies that seem to be content wiht that by sayign "well we have a terrible history, this is about as good as we'll be able to do". That's such a loser mentality. If UF felt that way about football they'd still have zero titles and have a history equivalent to ole miss. At some point, if you wanna be a big boy program you have to make big boy decisions. We've done it before by getting Harrick, we simply need to pay whatever the hell it takes to get a winner in here. There is NOTHING holding UGA basketball back besides an uninterested admin, hopefully he's realized enough ire of late to actually do something.
And don't even get me started on baseball, which is an even worse situation than basketball.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 10:19 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Now THIS is another completely overblown meausring stick that fox and mcgarity LOVE to trumpet abotu how good we are. "20 wins 3 straight years for the first time in school history!!!". Well...with the addition of these in-season tournaments, plus a game or 2 in the SECT, you're talking about playing mid-30s games. During that 3 year stretch of winning 20 games, his actual win percentage was:
59%
64%
59%
Don't disagree with you in the least, but it is fair to say that at least the first *two* seasons of 20 wins felt like improvement/building... the last one was much more similar to the 2015 football season... possibly the saddest looking 20 win (10 win in football) season ever.
quote:
This is what our AD wants to use to placate our fanbase as being one of the best stretches in school history. One season winning more than 60% of the games. Fox's win percentage starting when it was "his team" (after feltons' guys had gone) is about 55% (not includign this season, which will surely drop that). Barely winning half of your games shouldn't be grounds for a 9 year stay.
This is where you and I have agreed for a while. I appreciate that Fox brought some stability and growth to UGA post Felton... but he's about 2 years past his welcome IMO.
I read the headline from the Macon News yesterday and even knowing the information ahead of time, it still made me a little queasy:
quote:
Two teams used the same search firm to hire a coach in 2009. One is ranked No. 1. The other hired Mark Fox LINK
quote:
And there are negative nancies that seem to be content wiht that by sayign "well we have a terrible history, this is about as good as we'll be able to do". That's such a loser mentality. If UF felt that way about football they'd still have zero titles and have a history equivalent to ole miss. At some point, if you wanna be a big boy program you have to make big boy decisions. We've done it before by getting Harrick, we simply need to pay whatever the hell it takes to get a winner in here. There is NOTHING holding UGA basketball back besides an uninterested admin, hopefully he's realized enough ire of late to actually do something.
I think for a long time, we've definitely been held back by simply being unwilling to get super "in the muck" with what CBB recruiting had become. I'm not going to claim we're a squeaky clean program, but I also don't think we're willing to go to UNC lengths to win at Basketball either. With that said, there is definitely nothing holding UGA back from being a top 3 team in conference and a nearly perennial tournament team other than seemingly a willingness to go get "the" guy and pay him appropriately. Add on top that with the recent "scandals", it may end up leveling the playing field significantly on that front, this is the time you pull the trigger and you go big... From a recruiting standpoint, proximity is incredible... I don't buy that "elite basketball players want to be the stars on campus so they won't go to a football school", because Auburn and Alabama are recruiting well right now, UF has consistently done it... there are plenty of examples that disprove that line of thinking. Get the right guy, they'll get the right players, and the revenues will likely follow. Hell, with most good hires, attendance increases in year one anyways because of the renewed energy around the program.
quote:
And don't even get me started on baseball, which is an even worse situation than basketball.
I literally don't want to watch this year... I just want the season to be over and tell me how bad we sucked afterwards. It won't stop me from watching... but I don't wanna.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 10:24 am to bigdawg7780
Look, I'm just trying to look at the situation objectively. Yes, it's a classic chicken/egg situation aka if you build it they will come. But the obvious question for our admins: If we spend whatever it takes to build an elite basketball program, will it be profitable for our university? Apparently the answer to that question has been No up to this point.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 10:50 am to fibonaccisquared
Do you blame the salesman for the shitty product?
Posted on 2/14/18 at 11:41 am to WG_Dawg
If Georgia is ever going to be a decent basketball program, it needs to take a good long look in the mirror and evaluate what the most likely way for that to happen is. Fox is not going to be able to do that and make necessary changes at this point, so he should go. That's just a small step though. Beyond that:
1) This whole "lock down the elite talent in metro ATL" shite is a pipe dream that is never going to happen. The very best players aren't going to choose UGA over UNC, UK, Duke, etc. consistently enough for UGA to maintain a steady, good product. This isn't football. Basketball players don't tend to favor the home state team particularly.
2) Related to #1, the next time a non-traditional power builds a nationally competitive (i.e. consistent top 20 or so) basketball program based on the recruitment of future NBA players will be the first time that has happened in the modern era, to my knowledge. UGA should not base their model around recruiting those players. You can recruit them and hope to get one every once in a while, but that can't be your base.
3) UGA needs to create an identity as a program. It doesn't matter what that is, but it's easier for a non-power for that identity to be defensive imo. 40 minutes of hell, pack line, 2-3, whatever. The reason that I think it's easier to build your program around a defensive style is that you can recruit to that style in the absence of being able to recruit the very best dynamic offensive players. See Virginia.
4) Winning in any style is more entertaining than losing in any style.
5) Player development is a key, arguably the key. Strength programs can be just as valuable in basketball as they are in football if deployed correctly. Redshirting players should not be rare. Find raw, long athletes with some basketball skill and bulk them up into what you need to win at a high level. Again, see Virginia.
I keep bringing UVa up as an example not because we necessarily need to copy their style, but because there are a lot of aspects of their growth as a program that can be copied, especially with the high number of athletes that UGA can recruit.
Decide on how UGA is going to play in tandem with a qualified coach.
Find players who fit that identity.
Put resources into developing those players.
There isn't some magic fairy dust that's going to make UGA a solid program. It's all fundamentals.
1) This whole "lock down the elite talent in metro ATL" shite is a pipe dream that is never going to happen. The very best players aren't going to choose UGA over UNC, UK, Duke, etc. consistently enough for UGA to maintain a steady, good product. This isn't football. Basketball players don't tend to favor the home state team particularly.
2) Related to #1, the next time a non-traditional power builds a nationally competitive (i.e. consistent top 20 or so) basketball program based on the recruitment of future NBA players will be the first time that has happened in the modern era, to my knowledge. UGA should not base their model around recruiting those players. You can recruit them and hope to get one every once in a while, but that can't be your base.
3) UGA needs to create an identity as a program. It doesn't matter what that is, but it's easier for a non-power for that identity to be defensive imo. 40 minutes of hell, pack line, 2-3, whatever. The reason that I think it's easier to build your program around a defensive style is that you can recruit to that style in the absence of being able to recruit the very best dynamic offensive players. See Virginia.
4) Winning in any style is more entertaining than losing in any style.
5) Player development is a key, arguably the key. Strength programs can be just as valuable in basketball as they are in football if deployed correctly. Redshirting players should not be rare. Find raw, long athletes with some basketball skill and bulk them up into what you need to win at a high level. Again, see Virginia.
I keep bringing UVa up as an example not because we necessarily need to copy their style, but because there are a lot of aspects of their growth as a program that can be copied, especially with the high number of athletes that UGA can recruit.
Decide on how UGA is going to play in tandem with a qualified coach.
Find players who fit that identity.
Put resources into developing those players.
There isn't some magic fairy dust that's going to make UGA a solid program. It's all fundamentals.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:06 pm to Crowknowsbest
The issue with that, is if you don’t win, you end up like Georgia or Texas, with no one going to the games because it’s a boring brand of basketball to watch. Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather win and watch a game that isn’t as exciting, but you also don’t have to be as inefficient on the offensive end as we are. I think we are one of the worst 2 power 5 times in half court offense efficiency (Texas being the other) and it just makes the games really difficult to watch when you’re losing.
Even a few years ago when we were doing a little bit better Stegeman was getting pretty packed. As much as I crap on our basketball fan base, I do think if we hire the right guy, it will being at least a little bit more excitement. Fox had that when he got here, but it’s worn off. He’s not going to football games with his chest painted up anymore (as far as I’m aware), and he’s losing too many games that seem impossible to lose with 5 minute dry spells where we don’t score or presses we can’t break. That stuff can just wear on a fan base.
Even a few years ago when we were doing a little bit better Stegeman was getting pretty packed. As much as I crap on our basketball fan base, I do think if we hire the right guy, it will being at least a little bit more excitement. Fox had that when he got here, but it’s worn off. He’s not going to football games with his chest painted up anymore (as far as I’m aware), and he’s losing too many games that seem impossible to lose with 5 minute dry spells where we don’t score or presses we can’t break. That stuff can just wear on a fan base.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:15 pm to Barstools
quote:
Do you blame the salesman for the shitty product?
Bad analogy is bad...
Fox is essentially the Chef. The product on the floor is the food he serves.
He controls the ingredients (recruiting), he determines the recipe/ratio (coaching decisions/roster management), etc.
He may not control the appearance of the restaurant, but he's 100% responsible for the quality of the food coming out of the kitchen. And I think it's fair to say I would not only blame a chef for bad food, but also the restaurant owner/manager for retaining a chef that isn't delivering a competitive product in the marketplace.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:19 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Fox is essentially the Chef. The product on the floor is the food he serves.
He controls the ingredients (recruiting), he determines the recipe/ratio (coaching decisions/roster management), etc.
He may not control the appearance of the restaurant, but he's 100% responsible for the quality of the food coming out of the kitchen. And I think it's fair to say I would not only blame a chef for bad food, but also the restaurant owner/manager for retaining a chef that isn't delivering a competitive product in the marketplace.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:21 pm to Dawgsontop34
I'm not advocating being inefficient offensively.
Programs with a plan worry about wins. Winning puts a lot more fans in the seats than chucking up quick shots in the name of "excitement."
It's time for UGA to start making sound basketball decisions. I'm not sure that's ever really happened. frick the "if we get the right coach" bullshite. It isn't random. Put some thought into how the program can win, and select a coach with a style to fit that vision and the capability to put the vision into motion.
Programs with a plan worry about wins. Winning puts a lot more fans in the seats than chucking up quick shots in the name of "excitement."
It's time for UGA to start making sound basketball decisions. I'm not sure that's ever really happened. frick the "if we get the right coach" bullshite. It isn't random. Put some thought into how the program can win, and select a coach with a style to fit that vision and the capability to put the vision into motion.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:43 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Programs with a plan worry about wins. Winning puts a lot more fans in the seats than chucking up quick shots in the name of "excitement."
Preach
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:45 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
Fox is essentially the Chef. The product on the floor is the food he serves.
He controls the ingredients (recruiting), he determines the recipe/ratio (coaching decisions/roster management), etc.
He may not control the appearance of the restaurant, but he's 100% responsible for the quality of the food coming out of the kitchen. And I think it's fair to say I would not only blame a chef for bad food, but also the restaurant owner/manager for retaining a chef that isn't delivering a competitive product in the marketplace.
Good analogy and so the question remains: If management invests heavily in hiring an expensive, excellent chef and fixes up the restaurant with expensive decor, will the restaurant make a profit?
Posted on 2/14/18 at 12:48 pm to fibonaccisquared
The difference is he has to sell the program to the recruits. How do you sell a school that has bad facilities and an athletic department and fanbase that overall doesn't care. We can bring in a new coach that may be able to produce a few more wins, but that doesn't fix the underlying issues surrounding our program.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 1:03 pm to GurleyGirl
quote:
If management invests heavily in hiring an expensive, excellent chef and fixes up the restaurant with expensive decor, will the restaurant make a profit?
The financial investment itself is less important than having a good plan.
If you have a good plan of action, you can get everyone pulling in the same direction and invest your resources more wisely for maximum impact.
This post was edited on 2/14/18 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 2/14/18 at 1:14 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Put some thought into how the program can win, and select a coach with a style to fit that vision
I don't necessarily agree with that. It doesn't matter if we play a UVA style that is slooooow and boring or an old school arkansas 40 minutes of hell where we run out of the gym. Style to me is irrelevant. Getting a good coach that can recruit will do wonders, we haven't had that combination in a long arse time, not since tubby anyway. Felton was a somewhat decent recruiter but couldnt' coach a lick. Harrick was a friggin brilliant coach but below par recruiter.
Basketball is so different than football in that 1 guy can make so much different, I mean ther'es only 5 dudes on teh floor. Typically we have 1 stud and a bunch of average to awful people around him. A coach that can put 3 good to great guys on the floor and actually know how to coach them to maximize their talents would be glorious.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 1:18 pm to Crowknowsbest
quote:
I'm not advocating being inefficient offensively.
Programs with a plan worry about wins. Winning puts a lot more fans in the seats than chucking up quick shots in the name of "excitement."
It's time for UGA to start making sound basketball decisions. I'm not sure that's ever really happened. frick the "if we get the right coach" bullshite. It isn't random. Put some thought into how the program can win, and select a coach with a style to fit that vision and the capability to put the vision into motion.
I didn't think you were. And wins are much more important than anything else. Completely agree with that. I was really just saying things look the worst (especially for the casual fan), when you're losing, and you're inept offensively. We need to look into every potential option, and make the right hire that brings excitement to the program. Hopefully that person keeps Hagans and King, but in reality we need consistency in the long run, not one "one-and-done" guy. That doesn't do a whole lot of good.
Recruiting is more important in basketball than any other sport IMO, and we need someone who can provide some sort of longevity here with that. Obviously kids are still going to go to UNC, Duke, UK, KU, etc. but Miss State, Auburn, and Bama are proving that if you hire the right guy you can get kids to come to programs that aren't basketball oriented.
Posted on 2/14/18 at 1:20 pm to GurleyGirl
quote:
so the question remains: If management invests heavily in hiring an expensive, excellent chef and fixes up the restaurant with expensive decor, will the restaurant make a profit?
In fib's analogy your "decor" would be the steg or our facilities or whatever, none of that is really the priority of the chef. The chef's job is to make food. Period. So in this example if we hire a sought out, experienced, critically acclimaned expensive chef that knows how to use the right ingredients and put good food on the table...then yes people will talk about how great the restaurant is and want to eat there.
quote:
will the restaurant make a profit?
Basketball isn't profitable for MOST schools. Like, a ton of them. Here is an excerpt I found from an article that's a few years old:
quote:
Only 123 of the men's programs at Division 1 schools are profitable, and they're mostly from big money conferences. But the other 223 teams either broke even or lost money.
We're not expecting mbb to be like football and gain massive profits. But as we are NOW, we're basically needing football to help carry all our other sports on its back. It's simply common sense that having basketball make a major step forward in revenue would only help everyone else. Also worth noting is that a lot of the schools that actually turn a profit do so on the back of TV sales adn merchandise. News flash: nobody GAS about locking UGa into a prime time TV slot and nobody is out there buying mike edwards jerseys. Getting a good coach to bring renewed excitement and a better product not only brings more ticket sales thorugh the door and in donations, it brings all that ancillary revenue in as well.
Page 44 of 71
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News