Mike Anderson

[Sharp Shooter]

how is that different than Darian Townes pouting and walking off to the locker room, only to start the next game under stan in the nonconference of '07? how is that different that the Rashard Sullivan fight, or stan screaming at pookie "hit me! hit me!" in practice?

the point is, there are ALWAYS "chemistry" issues on teams.  it's magnified WAAAAAAAAAY out of proportion because a) we have the internet where anyone can post whatever,  b) we are 2-14 so the issues that roll of players' backs when you're 10-6 fester when you're losing and looking for answers, c) no one really knows anything, but vague posts by supposed 'in the know' folks keep hinting at a shotgun approach, so no matter what asinine rumor is thrown out SOMETHING will be right because they predicted it somehow.

i mean, we've heard:
that ostrum is the problem,
that ostrum is a good recruiter, 
that pel is the problem,
that more rob evans is the answer,
that welsh is the problem,
that henry is the problem,
that fortson is the problem,
that welsh hates rotnei,
that pel hates henry,
that pel hates moore/clark,
that pel has to fire all his staff or get replaced by mike,
that pel has to fire one staff member to keep his job,
that forton hates welsh,
that the freshmen hate welsh,
that the freshmen hate washington,
that the other freshmen hate fortson........


there's a very good post on page 2 earlier in this thread by Hawgadvocate.  He's right.  So many people in the state get their "news" on hog basketball from HERE. From THIS forum.  and somehow, because there's absolutely crazy stuff flying around and folks are looking to explain away 2-14 records, every explanation possible is thrown to the wall.  i don't know all of what's true and what's not, but this whole thing about 'chemistry' IS indeed a problem--- but it's also way overblown. 

i challenge anyone anywhere to post or pm me a single incident that is "worse" than any chemistry issue/incident since the closing of the nolan era.  the fact is, we're losing, and we have the net, so lots of people think "oh my gosh! teams fighting after a loss? how outrageous!"

So why do you think we're 2-14? Is it our youth? After 14 sec games they couldn't hang with a depeleted Ole miss squad. Is our lack of depth the reason we can't compete in the second half of games? Pel could only find seven players to play in the second half of the Ole Piss game and that's including Cox. 

[donewithdale]

I got this mixed up in a post I made a couple months ago..Sullinger was family friend of Nolan's, and Igudola wanted to play for Nolan because he loved the style of play. Sullinger wasn't THAT highly regarded either. He couldn't hit an outside jumper to save his life.

No Nolan = no Sullinger or Igudola

Anderson hasn't been able to recruit very well at Missouri either. His classes at UAB weren't impressive. If not for him bringing the former and would-be Hogs DeMario Eddins and Wenbos Mukubu to UAB, he wouldn't have had the success he had.

I don't believe Eddins was getting into the UA even if Nolan or coach A would have been here.  I also love how Sullinger has gotten better since he played.  You are right in he was a very limited offensive player but had nice size and range for D.  And I know Igoudala has made a great pro, but he avg less than 10 ppg in college.  If Joe and Jannero didn't get us to a sweet 16, JJ Sullinger and 9 ppg wasn't going to do so.

[jkstock04]

how is that different than Darian Townes pouting and walking off to the locker room, only to start the next game under stan in the nonconference of '07? how is that different that the Rashard Sullivan fight, or stan screaming at pookie "hit me! hit me!" in practice?

the point is, there are ALWAYS "chemistry" issues on teams.  it's magnified WAAAAAAAAAY out of proportion because a) we have the internet where anyone can post whatever,  b) we are 2-14 so the issues that roll of players' backs when you're 10-6 fester when you're losing and looking for answers, c) no one really knows anything, but vague posts by supposed 'in the know' folks keep hinting at a shotgun approach, so no matter what asinine rumor is thrown out SOMETHING will be right because they predicted it somehow.

i mean, we've heard:
that ostrum is the problem,
that ostrum is a good recruiter, 
that pel is the problem,
that more rob evans is the answer,
that welsh is the problem,
that henry is the problem,
that fortson is the problem,
that welsh hates rotnei,
that pel hates henry,
that pel hates moore/clark,
that pel has to fire all his staff or get replaced by mike,
that pel has to fire one staff member to keep his job,
that forton hates welsh,
that the freshmen hate welsh,
that the freshmen hate washington,
that the other freshmen hate fortson........


there's a very good post on page 2 earlier in this thread by Hawgadvocate.  He's right.  So many people in the state get their "news" on hog basketball from HERE. From THIS forum.  and somehow, because there's absolutely crazy stuff flying around and folks are looking to explain away 2-14 records, every explanation possible is thrown to the wall.  i don't know all of what's true and what's not, but this whole thing about 'chemistry' IS indeed a problem--- but it's also way overblown. 

i challenge anyone anywhere to post or pm me a single incident that is "worse" than any chemistry issue/incident since the closing of the nolan era.  the fact is, we're losing, and we have the net, so lots of people think "oh my gosh! teams fighting after a loss? how outrageous!"

I agree with pretty much everything you said.  Townes was the same way with his attitude.  But what I posted wasn't a rumor, I saw it with my own two eyes.  And regardless of what Heath did back in the day...it still didn't make any sense that Welsh stayed in the game after that crap.  Two wrongs dont make a right...just cause thats the way Heath did things doesn't make it OK that thats the way this staff is doing things.

And ya if we were 8-8 right now the off the court issues/rumors woudn't be AS big of a deal.  It would be close to a non-issue because having a decent team would overshadow it.  Guess this is what being one of the worst teams in school history will do.

[donewithdale]

With the way things are going, what is an AD supposed to do?  Sit back in his chair, smile and say "keep up the good work!!"  When things are going as poorly as they are...the AD has to step in and do something...whatever that may be....to ensure that the program is headed in the right direction.

Fire the coach is what the AD is supposed to do if they don't trust that coach to put together a capable staff.  Forcing staff changes on coaches is just a desperate attempt to delay the inevitable.  Pel or any head coach deserves the respect and trust to manage their own staff or they shouldn't have their jobs. 

[mathhog]

So why do you think we're 2-14?

we've had some extremely bad breaks and close losses, sometimes unfair (the south carolina last play before OT comes into mind, but that's the sec protecting its bubble teams), sometimes unlucky (welsh AND washington missing a dang layup and putback in the last second against UT, sometimes stupid (getting a play to sanchez against lsu or having welsh shoot the 3 against ole miss); add in @ lsu and that's 5 games of the 14 losses we were EXTREMELY close in.  most years we'd catch a few breaks and win 2-3 of those, that's your 4-12, 5-11 -- right where "unanimously picked last in the west" should be, right?"

Is it our youth? After 14 sec games they couldn't hang with a depeleted Ole miss squad.

youth adds to our abysmal basketball IQ.  the freshmen are still playing like they are srs in high school scoring 40 pts a game.  heck, welsh still plays like that.

Is our lack of depth the reason we can't compete in the second half of games? Pel could only find seven players to play in the second half of the Ole Piss game and that's including Cox. 

i think depth is THE biggest problem, and not just depth but depth in certain areas.  pel's USA teams played man-to-man defense and scored a lot by sun belt standards.  we play zone defense, where we don't have to move too much except to lunge after a three point shooter.  know why we play zone?  we simply don't have enough warm bodies to play man-on-man for 40 minutes of basketball.   

but also, we lack big men.  we basically have washington's 5 fouls, and then we have no size.  sure, sanchez is wide, but he can't jump and still doesn't block out.  moore and clark have great upside, but are vincent hunter skinny -- can't exactly be shoving around the equivalent of a glen davis now can we?  to top it off, clarke and fortson are under 6 feet, and welsh isn't any taller than 6' (dont let the program heights fool you).  we're so dang short + playing zone = worst 3 guarding team ever.

so, ok, we have no depth... but it doesn't end there.  our wingman, henry, had a hurt knee, that still isn't 100%.  washington's back had major spasms through much of sec play.  so we're down to the 3-guard midget lineup, a no-rebounding sanchez, and 5 fouls of washington.   for subs, britt is a good defender and shooter (gets about 20 min of playing time a game iirc) but can't create a shot.  welsh, for all his faults, takes it to the basket to score.  our other subs include the aforementioned taller-but-skinny freshmen, and they can't crowd the lane.

so the big problem i think is depth + positional depth.  losing montrell AND beverly AND monk hurt tremendously.  we don't have 2 good guys deep at every position, in fact, most of the time our guys are playing OUT of position (washington is NOT a center, he's a power forward, yet he has to be our center).  it's a mess, but the addition of powell, farmer, and borden next year will be nice, because we'll have big bodies underneath.  will our guards still be midgets?  sure.  but we might not have to keep henry as a forward, we might be able to use him as a shooting guard, a la todd day, because we'll be deeper on the big ends.  got it?

that's just my humble take.  bad breaks, sure, and ole miss treats playing the hogs like the super bowl.  but mostly, its depth depth depth.  exhibit a was @ starkville..... we DID play man-to-man, we pressed, we run-and-gunned our way to a 51-36 halftime lead..... and then, we got tired, and lost by 15 points in teh second half.     "Depth" is the key, and the holes are being filled as we speak!

[dhornjr1]

If you guys want a Pearl-type coach at the U of A, I tell you to quit being a "fan" of the U of A right now.  Pearl is the most average/poor coach in the world.  He's a media darling and THAT'S IT.

I'm so glad that someine else sees this my way. I thought I was the only one.     

[Sharp Shooter]

we've had some extremely bad breaks and close losses, sometimes unfair (the south carolina last play before OT comes into mind, but that's the sec protecting its bubble teams), sometimes unlucky (welsh AND washington missing a dang layup and putback in the last second against UT, sometimes stupid (getting a play to sanchez against lsu or having welsh shoot the 3 against ole miss); add in @ lsu and that's 5 games of the 14 losses we were EXTREMELY close in.  most years we'd catch a few breaks and win 2-3 of those, that's your 4-12, 5-11 -- right where "unanimously picked last in the west" should be, right?"
youth adds to our abysmal basketball IQ.  the freshmen are still playing like they are srs in high school scoring 40 pts a game.  heck, welsh still plays like that.
i think depth is THE biggest problem, and not just depth but depth in certain areas.  pel's USA teams played man-to-man defense and scored a lot by sun belt standards.  we play zone defense, where we don't have to move too much except to lunge after a three point shooter.  know why we play zone?  we simply don't have enough warm bodies to play man-on-man for 40 minutes of basketball.   

but also, we lack big men.  we basically have washington's 5 fouls, and then we have no size.  sure, sanchez is wide, but he can't jump and still doesn't block out.  moore and clark have great upside, but are vincent hunter skinny -- can't exactly be shoving around the equivalent of a glen davis now can we?  to top it off, clarke and fortson are under 6 feet, and welsh isn't any taller than 6' (dont let the program heights fool you).  we're so dang short + playing zone = worst 3 guarding team ever.

so, ok, we have no depth... but it doesn't end there.  our wingman, henry, had a hurt knee, that still isn't 100%.  washington's back had major spasms through much of sec play.  so we're down to the 3-guard midget lineup, a no-rebounding sanchez, and 5 fouls of washington.   for subs, britt is a good defender and shooter (gets about 20 min of playing time a game iirc) but can't create a shot.  welsh, for all his faults, takes it to the basket to score.  our other subs include the aforementioned taller-but-skinny freshmen, and they can't crowd the lane.

so the big problem i think is depth + positional depth.  losing montrell AND beverly AND monk hurt tremendously.  we don't have 2 good guys deep at every position, in fact, most of the time our guys are playing OUT of position (washington is NOT a center, he's a power forward, yet he has to be our center).  it's a mess, but the addition of powell, farmer, and borden next year will be nice, because we'll have big bodies underneath.  will our guards still be midgets?  sure.  but we might not have to keep henry as a forward, we might be able to use him as a shooting guard, a la todd day, because we'll be deeper on the big ends.  got it?

that's just my humble take.  bad breaks, sure, and ole miss treats playing the hogs like the super bowl.  but mostly, its depth depth depth.  exhibit a was @ starkville..... we DID play man-to-man, we pressed, we run-and-gunned our way to a 51-36 halftime lead..... and then, we got tired, and lost by 15 points in teh second half.     "Depth" is the key, and the holes are being filled as we speak!

Who called the last second play to Sanchez? Who didn't call a timeout and put our best three point shooter on the floor to at the very least occupy a defender? The difference between winning and losing close games is coaching.  A good coach will find a way to win and catch breaks.  And when talking about depth those games when we had a led in the first half Henry, Clark, and Moore saw significant minutes but were nowhere to be found after intermisson.  Powell and Farmer won't be enough to fill in what we lose after this season.

[Sharp Shooter]

And whose fault is it that after 29 games we still have freshman playing like freshman? No improvement. 

[HawgAdvocate]

And whose fault is it that after 29 games we still have freshman playing like freshman? No improvement. 

Says the poster who makes that determination from the TV set.

[HawgAdvocate]

I don't believe Eddins was getting into the UA even if Nolan or coach A would have been here.  I also love how Sullinger has gotten better since he played.  You are right in he was a very limited offensive player but had nice size and range for D.  And I know Igoudala has made a great pro, but he avg less than 10 ppg in college.  If Joe and Jannero didn't get us to a sweet 16, JJ Sullinger and 9 ppg wasn't going to do so.

You're right. Eddins was not going to be academically eligible for the UofA.

[Sharp Shooter]

Says the poster who makes that determination from the TV set.

Well actually I live here in fayetteville and have been to every home Sec game. So try again.

[Sharp Shooter]

Don't get me wrong I love Pel to death and I think he deserves next year but I believe it will just delay the inevitable.  I just don't think he is ready to handle a big time program and the attitudes that will come along with it.  I would love for him to prove me wrong, I just don't see it happening after what I have seen this year.  You can't recruit players you know will have problems and then be a tough guy and push them to the end of the bench when they do what was expected.  We were out coached to many times this season for me to have in faith in Pel.  I assume the rest of yall have gone to bed so we will continue this discussion tomorrow.

[mathhog]

And whose fault is it that after 29 games we still have freshman playing like freshman? No improvement. 

i dont know.  you can bring a horse to water but you cant make him drink.

[Sharp Shooter]

i dont know.  you can bring a horse to water but you cant make him drink.

Well yes me or you couldn't but a good horse trainer could.

[Hogeyeblind]

Yes fans complained about in state recruiting.  We complained about missing out on the Quincy Lewises and an entire Parkview lineup that went D1.  We didn't ask for Jason Jennings or Gilbert.  You revise history well.

Dont forget Justin Hankins - we beat UA Monticello our for him

[Granny fan]

I suspect if Pel stays or goes, it will have more to do with what has gone on off the court than on.  But that's just my opinion.

[william.lane123]

Most on this thread want MA back here.  No way No how!! He would never come back to AR.  As far as asst. coach O!  clarke, fortson, henry wouldn't  be here, he recruited them.

[HawgAdvocate]

Well actually I live here in fayetteville and have been to every home Sec game. So try again.

Even then, you're more than likely not qualified to judge the entire team on their improvment as a team or on an individual level.

[PorkRyan]

Most on this thread want MA back here.  No way No how!! He would never come back to AR.  As far as asst. coach O!  clarke, fortson, henry wouldn't  be here, he recruited them.

according to JacksonHog, who knows more about the basketball scene than anyone on any Razorback board, Isaac Brown was responsible for Courtney Fortson due to his relationship with Courtney's AAU coach.

[UAfan]

If Mike Anderson can get it done at UAB and Mizzou, he can get it done here. 
Period.  Big 12 bball is ten times better than the SEC this year and he's got arguably the second to third best team in that league with a school who hasn't seen than kind of success ever.  I don't want to hear this crap that he can't recruit, all he needs are athletes and his teams would thrive in the SEC.

[Kevin]

for the"fans" that love mike anderson, go root for the tigers.

this isn't the 90's anymore, quit looking backwards to try and go forward.

[TeedupHigh]

WE HAVE A COACH!  Was the tiggers in love with mikey his first two years?  Spoiled little brat's!  If we don't win fire the coach, that will get it done.

[RazorHawg16]

Mike Anderson won't be leaving MO. to come back to Arkansas, because we don't have a opening.

[jkstock04]

for the"fans" that love mike anderson, go root for the tigers.

this isn't the 90's anymore, quit looking backwards to try and go forward.

What is there to look forward to?  The way Bud Walton welcomed the '94 team was very telling.  When talking about the basketball team that is the only positive...looking back at what used to be.  If I'm looking forward I'm seeing maybe 5 conference wins next year and still no bid to the NCAA tourny.

[Sanctified Swine]

you see Mike would replace John and then...... Nolan would replace Rob Evans as the wise sage next to him

[HawgAdvocate]

If Mike Anderson can get it done at UAB and Mizzou, he can get it done here. 
Period.  Big 12 bball is ten times better than the SEC this year and he's got arguably the second to third best team in that league with a school who hasn't seen than kind of success ever.  I don't want to hear this crap that he can't recruit, all he needs are athletes and his teams would thrive in the SEC.

Get it done huh? We'll see what happens when Carroll and Lyons leave and he's left to go for a 2nd winning season in four years.

[sshawg]

Even then, you're more than likely not qualified to judge the entire team on their improvement as a team or on an individual level.

And what makes you "more" qualified to judge . Cause you've got lots of free  time & set next to a computer & make lots of posts. For anyone that's watched <weither it live or TV> its been pretty easy to see there has been little or no improvement with anyone other than Clarke & Henry.  Now who's fault that is is open to interpretation.  But we all have an openion, even if we just watch from the TV.  Thanks

[HawgAdvocate]

And what makes you "more" qualified to judge . Cause you've got lots of free  time & set next to a computer & make lots of posts. For anyone that's watched <weither it live or TV> its been pretty easy to see there has been little or no improvement with anyone other than Clarke & Henry.  Now who's fault that is is open to interpretation.  But we all have an openion, even if we just watch from the TV.  Thanks

I'm not judging. Never said I was qualified. Have I attempted to say whether they've improved or not? But none of us are in practice. None of us have access to the coach/player chats.

I did play growing up, and I know that you don't go to practice every day and not improve.

[lovetthog1]

At least with Mike we would have an exciting style of basketball that sales tickets. Not the circus we have now. You better believe we will play defense and we will know not hope there is an upside. Plus we can get rid of Mr. I love Kentucky basketball wannabe.

[hawgsav1]

In 08, didn't they have major suspensions due to a bar fight or something?

They lost most of their leading scorers due to suspensions and bar fights.  Stefhon Hannah was their leading scorer from a year ago.  So far, Mike's recruits haven't been of the highest caliber, yet they are talented and he's developed the hell out of them.  He's a solid coach.

[HawgAdvocate]

At least with Mike we would have an exciting style of basketball that sales tickets. Not the circus we have now. You better believe we will play defense and we will know not hope there is an upside. Plus we can get rid of Mr. I love Kentucky basketball wannabe.

In January, Mizzouri basketball was selling tickets at half-capacity of their new arena. Mike was considered to be on the hotseat early on in the year. He's having a heck of a season, but he doesn't have much talent on the horizen to replace what he's losing.

[RazorHawg16]

In January, Mizzouri basketball was selling tickets at half-capacity of their new arena. Mike was considered to be on the hotseat early on in the year. He's having a heck of a season, but he doesn't have much talent on the horizen to replace what he's losing.

Mike will keep them going for as long as he is there. He is a solid coach. He will reload next year.

[HawgAdvocate]

Mike will keep them going for as long as he is there. He is a solid coach. He will reload next year.

Hopefully, for his sake, he can get something from all the 3* players he's brought in. Cause that's all he's had while at Missouri, including this year's class.

[RazorHawg16]

Hopefully, for his sake, he can get something from all the 3* players he's brought in. Cause that's all he's had while at Missouri, including this year's class.

He is a good evaluater of talent.

[donewithdale]

If Mike Anderson can get it done at UAB and Mizzou, he can get it done here. 
Period.  Big 12 bball is ten times better than the SEC this year and he's got arguably the second to third best team in that league with a school who hasn't seen than kind of success ever.  I don't want to hear this crap that he can't recruit, all he needs are athletes and his teams would thrive in the SEC.

You just make stuff up.  Mizzou has actually seen more success.  Norm Stewart won 8 Conference Championships.  They've been to 22 NCAAT's, 6 Sw 16's and 4 E8's.  He isn't coaching Nebraska or Colorado. 

I guess you think UAB had no history before Mike too.  UAB didn't play D1 basketball until 1978 but had 10 NCAAT, 2 SW 16's and 1 E8  before Mike became coach. 

[donewithdale]

At least with Mike we would have an exciting style of basketball that sales tickets. Not the circus we have now. You better believe we will play defense and we will know not hope there is an upside. Plus we can get rid of Mr. I love Kentucky basketball wannabe.

What style do you think Pel wants to play once he has close to a full roster?  Think the hack and attack/fastest 40 minutes in basketball could be successful with a half roster?

Top 5 mins per game for Ark players this season:

32.8
31.3
30.0
29.9
23.1

Top 5 for Mizzou:
27.4
25.7
23.4
22.4
20.0

4 Hogs played more minutes than anyone on Mizzou

Its nonsense like this where posters just make up crap to fit their agenda that drags down the forum and gets annoying.  Its not because some want a coaching change or that most of us are concerned with the program.

[mizzouman]

They lost most of their leading scorers due to suspensions and bar fights.  Stefhon Hannah was their leading scorer from a year ago.  So far, Mike's recruits haven't been of the highest caliber, yet they are talented and he's developed the hell out of them.  He's a solid coach.

I like how you lump one player into Mike's recruits as if to say a lot of his players are not of high caliber.

[The Hogfather]

I like how you lump one player into Mike's recruits as if to say a lot of his players are not of high caliber.

He has yet to bring in a 4-star player to Missouri.

[HogKongPhooey]

I'm not judging. Never said I was qualified. Have I attempted to say whether they've improved or not? But none of us are in practice. None of us have access to the coach/player chats.

I did play growing up, and I know that you don't go to practice every day and not improve.

What practices are you talking about?  Players don't improve just by showing up.

[rzrbackrob]

Mike Anderson by history is a fine coach and average recruiter. If the administration and fanbase want to replace Pel after one season with his own players and having won a NCAA tourney game for the first time in recent history with last years chronic underachievers, then so be it. We could certainly do worse than Mike Anderson, but if we're going to go there I would hope we could do a whole lot better.

I have no idea what is going on behind the scenes, I just know what this years results were: Higher than expected out of conference results, and lower than expected conference results. Sounds like a young, inconsistent team to me. Bunch of kids playing high school ball last year couldn't put together two halves against more mature SEC teams. The longer season got to their legs and they faded down the stretch. I see this all the time with rookies in the NBA. Then some of the players handle on the court and off the court adversity in an immature manner.

[ruarealhogfan]

He has yet to bring in a 4-star player to Missouri.

You are correct, last 3 years all 3 star players.  It shows the ignorance of some on here.   The 3 leading scorers on the team are....Seniors, that's right & just NOW in his 3rd year at Missouri they have a pretty good team (btw the Big 12 is not very good either) Anyway the score is Pelphrey 5(FIVE) - 4* players that are either freshman or incoming freshman & Mike Anderson 0(ZERO) but he does have the seniors (seniors, which if you only read some of the opinions on here are overrated?). So I'm sure Mike will definitely be leaving Missouri after this season, I just hope Long is not foolish enough to be the one to take him!

[hawgsav1]

In January, Mizzouri basketball was selling tickets at half-capacity of their new arena. Mike was considered to be on the hotseat early on in the year. He's having a heck of a season, but he doesn't have much talent on the horizen to replace what he's losing.

They're still not selling out completely.

[hawgsav1]

You just make stuff up.  Mizzou has actually seen more success.  Norm Stewart won 8 Conference Championships.  They've been to 22 NCAAT's, 6 Sw 16's and 4 E8's.  He isn't coaching Nebraska or Colorado. 

I guess you think UAB had no history before Mike too.  UAB didn't play D1 basketball until 1978 but had 10 NCAAT, 2 SW 16's and 1 E8  before Mike became coach. 

UAB has success under Gene Bartow, but under Bartow's son Murray Bartow, they just plain stunk.

[donewithdale]

UAB has success under Gene Bartow, but under Bartow's son Murray Bartow, they just plain stunk.

Well I don't know that 'plain stunk' would be accurate as they went to 2 NIT's, 1 NCAAT and won 20 games twice in his first 3 of 6 seasons.  But his last 3 were just above .500 to just below. 

[hawgsav1]

I like how you lump one player into Mike's recruits as if to say a lot of his players are not of high caliber.

How am I lumping one player into Mike's recruits?  I said that they're mostly 3*s, which is not exactly blue-chip level.  I said that Stefhon Hannah screwed up, which is true. Many people don't rate his recruits that highly, he manages to get a lot out of them.  It's a compliment to what Mizzou has done.

Also, take a look at Rivals basketball rankings.  Not a single recruit that I can see was rated above a 3* recruit.  It doesn't mean that they don't have talent at Mizzou, but they don't have any blue chippers.  You don't need blue chippers to win, and MA is proof of that.

[hawgsav1]

Well I don't know that 'plain stunk' would be accurate as they went to 2 NIT's, 1 NCAAT and won 20 games twice in his first 3 of 6 seasons.  But his last 3 were just above .500 to just below. 

Good point.  I had not looked at his first 3 seasons.  Nevertheless, I don't say that UAB stinks, but they did not seem to be doing that well before Mike Anderson took over.  However, I think we all must agree that Mike Anderson did very well at UAB. 

[lovetthog1]

What style do you think Pel wants to play once he has close to a full roster?  Think the hack and attack/fastest 40 minutes in basketball could be successful with a half roster?

Top 5 mins per game for Ark players this season:

32.8
31.3
30.0
29.9
23.1

Top 5 for Mizzou:
27.4
25.7
23.4
22.4
20.0

4 Hogs played more minutes than anyone on Mizzou

Its nonsense like this where posters just make up crap to fit their agenda that drags down the forum and gets annoying.  Its not because some want a coaching change or that most of us are concerned with the program.

Sir you are the one posting crap. I suppose being pompus and assuming you know more about basketball than others gets you through the day. But let me tell you something. Mike Anderson is a better coach than Pel. I have stated a number times in this forum that Nolan and Mike brought more to the table than "attack and hack" as you call. Or fun and run as others call it. If you had an arguement other than insults I would be happy to listen to it. Style is just one positive to firing Pel and hiring Anderson. A quality coach is the other plus. But I guess since I didn't type out an entire book of explanations you couldnt figure it out. Which led to your need to be condescending. I know more about basketball than you havent forgotten sir.

[lovetthog1]

have forgotten.. And how many minutes per game each player played isnt an arguement for better coaching its just an empty stat. We know about the depth situation its the coaching situation that concerns me.

[HawgAdvocate]

What practices are you talking about?  Players don't improve just by showing up.

Yeah ok, Pel and the other coaches pop popcorn and have the guys watch movies for hours on end.

Jeez.

[HawgAdvocate]

Also, take a look at Rivals basketball rankings.  Not a single recruit that I can see was rated above a 3* recruit.  It doesn't mean that they don't have talent at Mizzou, but they don't have any blue chippers.  You don't need blue chippers to win, and MA is proof of that.

He's had one winning season in three years. Let's see him do it again without his two seniors.

He's a good coach, but he's not what these fans want. They want anything other than Pel more than they want Mike Anderson.  Mike seems the easiest reach for many at the moment, which isn't really fair. He won't bring in the studs that many on here clamor for.