The big picture of this basketball program is.....

[rude1]

not that we stumbled and lost. Even good teams have that bad night and lose to lesser, though they usually don't get drummed like the Hogs did. What bothers me the most is that nationally most people will see that score and still think Mo. hasn't really proven themselves and beaten anyone. That's how lowly regarded this program is nationally five years later under Heath's direction. I know there's a lot of basketball left to be played this year, but I certainly don't see the type of ability or system that's going to lead this program back to being one of the most highly regarded programs in the country. I think at this point we are  "Has Beens". I am not saying we should be back to being one of the elites, but how long does it take to get a program back to being a nationally ranked and respected program? At this point  we are neither.

[HawgAdvocate]

How long did it take UCLA? How long did it take Louisville? How long did it take Florida? How long has it taken Michigan? How long did it take Texas? How long did it take Villanova? How long has it taken Georgetown? How about Houston? N.C. State sure isn't rocking the top 25.

As much as many of you want to win now, you're going to have to face that fact that patience is your only ally. Screaming for change is what set us back 2 years.

Most of you aren't being realistic in your demands. We've got a huge recruiting class coming up in a year that we can't afford to screw around with, not to mention a brand new top shelf recruiting coordinator. But more importantly, we've got a team on the floor who is 5-1, just outside the top 25, knocking on the door, and less than a month into the season.

Less than a month. 5-1...top 25 in sight...major improvements in rebounding, FT %, 3pt %, & defense..and people are screaming for change.

I think many of you are just bored and have nothing better to do than hate on what you don't understand.

[silvertip]

not that we stumbled and lost. Even good teams have that bad night and lose to lesser, though they usually don't get drummed like the Hogs did. What bothers me the most is that nationally most people will see that score and still think Mo. hasn't really proven themselves and beaten anyone. That's how lowly regarded this program is nationally five years later under Heath's direction. I know there's a lot of basketball left to be played this year, but I certainly don't see the type of ability or system that's going to lead this program back to being one of the most highly regarded programs in the country. I think at this point we are  "Has Beens". I am not saying we should be back to being one of the elites, but how long does it take to get a program back to being a nationally ranked and respected program? At this point  we are neither.

It takes a big mind, a big vision, a big perspective, to see the big picture. Just sayin'.

[pgmhawg]

get em! hawgAd!

[rude1]

How long did it take UCLA? How long did it take Louisville? How long did it take Florida? How long has it taken Michigan? How long did it take Texas? How long did it take Villanova? How long has it taken Georgetown? How about Houston? N.C. State sure isn't rocking the top 25.

As much as many of you want to win now, you're going to have to face that fact that patience is your only ally. Screaming for change is what set us back 2 years.

Most of you aren't being realistic in your demands. We've got a huge recruiting class coming up in a year that we can't afford to screw around with, not to mention a brand new top shelf recruiting coordinator. But more importantly, we've got a team on the floor who is 5-1, just outside the top 25, knocking on the door, and less than a month into the season.

Less than a month. 5-1...top 25 in sight...major improvements in rebounding, FT %, 3pt %, & defense..and people are screaming for change.

I think many of you are just bored and have nothing better to do than hate on what you don't understand.

With what you said in mind, what those programs have in common is the guts not to sit and wait for things to get better, but to accept nothing less than revitalization of the program in a timely manner, or its on to give the next guy a try. Ask Mike Shula. Big time programs aren't going to give a guy 5 years in any sport to get you back to being at least a nationally ranked program. Arkansas has to be the best job in the SEC, only here is the expectation so low that people are willing to give a guy 5 to 10 years to do something with a program because we are afraid of CHANGE. Hell even Ole Piss thought enough of their program to run Cutcliff after a losing a season despite the fact he had won before.....

[jamie72921]

How long did it take UCLA? How long did it take Louisville? How long did it take Florida? How long has it taken Michigan? How long did it take Texas? How long did it take Villanova? How long has it taken Georgetown? How about Houston? N.C. State sure isn't rocking the top 25.

As much as many of you want to win now, you're going to have to face that fact that patience is your only ally. Screaming for change is what set us back 2 years.

Most of you aren't being realistic in your demands. We've got a huge recruiting class coming up in a year that we can't afford to screw around with, not to mention a brand new top shelf recruiting coordinator. But more importantly, we've got a team on the floor who is 5-1, just outside the top 25, knocking on the door, and less than a month into the season.

Less than a month. 5-1...top 25 in sight...major improvements in rebounding, FT %, 3pt %, & defense..and people are screaming for change.

I think many of you are just bored and have nothing better to do than hate on what you don't understand.

Have some of you been in a coma? When Richardson took over, we were never considered more than a secondary basketball school that sometimes had a good team.

We weren't even in the top 20 at the end of Sutton's last season, losing to the SMU's and TCU's.

Scott Rose, Keving, Rehl, Mike Ratliffe, Stephon Moore, and Andrew Lang were your starters in his first year.

Only 5 years later, we had been to the NCAAs 3 times and returned to the final four for the first time in over a decade.

That is how long it really takes. Look at your own school for your answer.

In basketball the cream rises quickly because frosh can have a huge impact. (Huery, Mayberry, Day,Miller,Thurman, Corliss, Joe Johnson)

If the cream is here, it will show itself this season or not at all.

[Hawgon]

Right now, we are Georgetown or Villanova...once feared and respected programs that are simply not a factor on the national scene in any manner whatsoever.

[HawgAdvocate]

With what you said in mind, what those programs have in common is the guts not to sit and wait for things to get better, but to accept nothing less than revitalization of the program in a timely manner, or its on to give the next guy a try. Ask Mike Shula. Big time programs aren't going to give a guy 5 years in any sport to get you back to being at least a nationally ranked program. Arkansas has to be the best job in the SEC, only here is the expectation so low that people are willing to give a guy 5 to 10 years to do something with a program because we are afraid of CHANGE. Hell even Ole Piss thought enough of their program to run Cutcliff after a losing a season despite the fact he had won before.....

Well, Michigan is sticking with Tommy Amacker, and they're starting to come around as a top dog team. Sure, UCLA got tired of waiting on Lavin and made the move to pick Braun from Pitt. But UCLA has always been Braun's dream job.

Pitino has been an instant classic in Louisville since he couldnt actually go back to Kentucky.

Time will tell if Kansas St. will win with Huggins. 

Kentucky won a title with Tubby, but with Pitino's players. They've been good, but not really great over the years, and are going through their longest Final Four drought in their cherished history.

Houston tried with Clyde Drexlar, and failed.

N.C. State has been up and down.

Georgetown has made a couple switches, but hasn't been all that great.

I guess that until we see actual, mutli-year regression on the horizen, how can anyone want to change coaches?? These other schools only made changes after they could actaully look back at the stagnant progress.

We haven't hit that wall yet. After seeing what Heath has done following those horrid first two seasons, he should be commended. Those two years were no where close to being his fault. This is his first year without someone else's kids.

Football can't be compared with basketball for a lot of teams. It makes so much more money, and the need to keep fans buying tickets and coming to games is much more imperative in football for the majority of school. Not to many schools rely on basketabll to fund the department.

[jamie72921]

With what you said in mind, what those programs have in common is the guts not to sit and wait for things to get better, but to accept nothing less than revitalization of the program in a timely manner, or its on to give the next guy a try. Ask Mike Shula. Big time programs aren't going to give a guy 5 years in any sport to get you back to being at least a nationally ranked program. Arkansas has to be the best job in the SEC, only here is the expectation so low that people are willing to give a guy 5 to 10 years to do something with a program because we are afraid of CHANGE. Hell even Ole Piss thought enough of their program to run Cutcliff after a losing a season despite the fact he had won before.....

Well, Michigan is sticking with Tommy Amacker, and they're starting to come around as a top dog team. Sure, UCLA got tired of waiting on Lavin and made the move to pick Braun from Pitt. But UCLA has always been Braun's dream job.

Pitino has been an instant classic in Louisville since he couldnt actually go back to Kentucky.

Time will tell if Kansas St. will win with Huggins. 

Kentucky won a title with Tubby, but with Pitino's players. They've been good, but not really great over the years, and are going through their longest Final Four drought in their cherished history.

Houston tried with Clyde Drexlar, and failed.

N.C. State has been up and down.

Georgetown has made a couple switches, but hasn't been all that great.

I guess that until we see actual, mutli-year regression on the horizen, how can anyone want to change coaches?? These other schools only made changes after they could actaully look back at the stagnant progress.

We haven't hit that wall yet. After seeing what Heath has done following those horrid first two seasons, he should be commended. Those two years were no where close to being his fault. This is his first year without someone else's kids.

Football can't be compared with basketball for a lot of teams. It makes so much more money, and the need to keep fans buying tickets and coming to games is much more imperative in football for the majority of school. Not to many schools rely on basketabll to fund the department.

How can you ignore the hogs own history on this subject?

5 years is more than enough in basketball.

[HawgAdvocate]

Have some of you been in a coma? When Richardson took over, we were never considered more than a secondary basketball school that sometimes had a good team.

We weren't even in the top 20 at the end of Sutton's last season, losing to the SMU's and TCU's.

Scott Rose, Keving, Rehl, Mike Ratliffe, Stephon Moore, and Andrew Lang were your starters in his first year.

Only 5 years later, we had been to the NCAAs 3 times and returned to the final four for the first time in over a decade.

That is how long it really takes. Look at your own school for your answer.

In basketball the cream rises quickly because frosh can have a huge impact. (Huery, Mayberry, Day,Miller,Thurman, Corliss, Joe Johnson)

If the cream is here, it will show itself this season or not at all.

What are you talking about? So because it took Richardson 3 years, that's automaticlly the standard across the board? That's asinine. Mayberry, Day, and Miller didn't turn it around till they were sophomores. That's when we hit the scene. A lot of kids don't come around till they are sophomores and have a year of college ball under their belt.

You're comparing apples to oranges when you talk about 1985 and 2006. A lot of things change in 20 years. Look at the coaches and the teams in the area. Billy Tubbs then, Kelvin Sampson and Jeff Capel now. Larry Finch then, John Calipari now. Huge difference in recruiting. Huge difference in national attention.

So what exactly am I in a coma about? Besides, I'm still waiting for you to tell me why I was wrong in the other thread about the keys to the Missouri game.

[HawgAdvocate]

How can you ignore the hogs own history on this subject?

5 years is more than enough in basketball.

Ignore what? What am I ignoring? This is year five now. We've been through four. Don't add a year when we're in the early stages of year 5. You're gonna try and tell me that you hold Heath accountable for the first two years?

That tells me you don't even want to give heath a chance to build on last year's NCAA tourney team.

[fourthcrusade]

PROGRESS:
9 wins - 12 - 18 - 22
6thwest - 4th west - T2ndwest
no postseason - NITeligible - NCAAT
62ppg - 69ppg - 72ppg - 74ppg
8/16wins@bud - 10/16 - 13/16 - 15/16@bud!
3/8secwins@bud - 4/8 - 5/8 - 7/8sec@bud!
0-1SECTourney lose by 30 - 0-1 SECT lose by 10 -  1-1 SECT lose by 3


I am constantly amazed at how utterly foolish so many fans are.  That is called progress.  This the is real world.  
THIS is the big picture!

[neblon]

With what you said in mind, what those programs have in common is the guts not to sit and wait for things to get better, but to accept nothing less than revitalization of the program in a timely manner, or its on to give the next guy a try. Ask Mike Shula. Big time programs aren't going to give a guy 5 years in any sport to get you back to being at least a nationally ranked program. Arkansas has to be the best job in the SEC, only here is the expectation so low that people are willing to give a guy 5 to 10 years to do something with a program because we are afraid of CHANGE. Hell even Ole Piss thought enough of their program to run Cutcliff after a losing a season despite the fact he had won before.....

Well, Michigan is sticking with Tommy Amacker, and they're starting to come around as a top dog team. Sure, UCLA got tired of waiting on Lavin and made the move to pick Braun from Pitt. But UCLA has always been Braun's dream job.

Pitino has been an instant classic in Louisville since he couldnt actually go back to Kentucky.

Time will tell if Kansas St. will win with Huggins. 

Kentucky won a title with Tubby, but with Pitino's players. They've been good, but not really great over the years, and are going through their longest Final Four drought in their cherished history.

Houston tried with Clyde Drexlar, and failed.

N.C. State has been up and down.

Georgetown has made a couple switches, but hasn't been all that great.

I guess that until we see actual, mutli-year regression on the horizen, how can anyone want to change coaches?? These other schools only made changes after they could actaully look back at the stagnant progress.

We haven't hit that wall yet. After seeing what Heath has done following those horrid first two seasons, he should be commended. Those two years were no where close to being his fault. This is his first year without someone else's kids.

Football can't be compared with basketball for a lot of teams. It makes so much more money, and the need to keep fans buying tickets and coming to games is much more imperative in football for the majority of school. Not to many schools rely on basketabll to fund the department.

Who is this Braun from Pitt who took his dream job at UCLA?
Ben Howland is from Pitt and took the UCLA job but who is Braun?

[HawgAdvocate]

My bad..for some reason I was thinkin the name Ben Braun. He coaches Cal.

[rude1]

With what you said in mind, what those programs have in common is the guts not to sit and wait for things to get better, but to accept nothing less than revitalization of the program in a timely manner, or its on to give the next guy a try. Ask Mike Shula. Big time programs aren't going to give a guy 5 years in any sport to get you back to being at least a nationally ranked program. Arkansas has to be the best job in the SEC, only here is the expectation so low that people are willing to give a guy 5 to 10 years to do something with a program because we are afraid of CHANGE. Hell even Ole Piss thought enough of their program to run Cutcliff after a losing a season despite the fact he had won before.....

Well, Michigan is sticking with Tommy Amacker, and they're starting to come around as a top dog team. Sure, UCLA got tired of waiting on Lavin and made the move to pick Braun from Pitt. But UCLA has always been Braun's dream job.

Pitino has been an instant classic in Louisville since he couldnt actually go back to Kentucky.

Time will tell if Kansas St. will win with Huggins. 

Kentucky won a title with Tubby, but with Pitino's players. They've been good, but not really great over the years, and are going through their longest Final Four drought in their cherished history.

Houston tried with Clyde Drexlar, and failed.

N.C. State has been up and down.

Georgetown has made a couple switches, but hasn't been all that great.

I guess that until we see actual, mutli-year regression on the horizen, how can anyone want to change coaches?? These other schools only made changes after they could actaully look back at the stagnant progress.

We haven't hit that wall yet. After seeing what Heath has done following those horrid first two seasons, he should be commended. Those two years were no where close to being his fault. This is his first year without someone else's kids.

Football can't be compared with basketball for a lot of teams. It makes so much more money, and the need to keep fans buying tickets and coming to games is much more imperative in football for the majority of school. Not to many schools rely on basketabll to fund the department.

I disagree, when you see your program is REBUILDING after not having gone anyplace, you should ask yourself, "what are we rebuilding from"? I understand the original rebuilding he had to do, but we are now in a situation of rebuilding when this program has had mediocre success in the last four years. I say that alone shows that this program is stagnate. I am not saying Fire Heath now as some are saying, but I am saying that the rebuilding excuse should no longer be accepted from him, and that he must win this year. Contend in the west, make a run in sec tourney, get team a decent seeding in big dance and win a game, or else shown the highway. No more waiting till "NEXT YEAR".

[rude1]

Have some of you been in a coma? When Richardson took over, we were never considered more than a secondary basketball school that sometimes had a good team.

We weren't even in the top 20 at the end of Sutton's last season, losing to the SMU's and TCU's.

Scott Rose, Keving, Rehl, Mike Ratliffe, Stephon Moore, and Andrew Lang were your starters in his first year.

Only 5 years later, we had been to the NCAAs 3 times and returned to the final four for the first time in over a decade.

That is how long it really takes. Look at your own school for your answer.

In basketball the cream rises quickly because frosh can have a huge impact. (Huery, Mayberry, Day,Miller,Thurman, Corliss, Joe Johnson)

If the cream is here, it will show itself this season or not at all.

What are you talking about? So because it took Richardson 3 years, that's automaticlly the standard across the board? That's asinine. Mayberry, Day, and Miller didn't turn it around till they were sophomores. That's when we hit the scene. A lot of kids don't come around till they are sophomores and have a year of college ball under their belt.

You're comparing apples to oranges when you talk about 1985 and 2006. A lot of things change in 20 years. Look at the coaches and the teams in the area. Billy Tubbs then, Kelvin Sampson and Jeff Capel now. Larry Finch then, John Calipari now. Huge difference in recruiting. Huge difference in national attention.

So what exactly am I in a coma about? Besides, I'm still waiting for you to tell me why I was wrong in the other thread about the keys to the Missouri game.

Someone forgot to tell Mike Anderson that when he took over a struggling UAB program and in a couple of years, has it competing in Conference USA and playing giant killer in the big dance. Meanwhile, we are at home patiently waiting on our guy to build us up to the point where we can get in the dance and beaten by the likes of Bucknell....

[HawgAdvocate]

I can understand that.

I guess that I look at the number of wins we've gotten since Heath has come on board. We were terrible in the first two years, made great strides in year 3 until we faded at the end, and year 4 was the year we finally made it back to the tournament. We rebuilt as best we could after Nolan left. We had kids who couldn't play at UALR or ASU. But just imagine how Heath's first two teams would matchup against his last two.

It's got to be obvious how he took them and made something from nothing. I agree that it sucks to lose your top 3 scorers, and be forced to rebuild..but it's gone from bad to good..now hopefully we can go from good to great.

[John Futrall]

Right now, we are Georgetown or Villanova...once feared and respected programs that are simply not a factor on the national scene in any manner whatsoever.

Is this a thread about the beginning of the basketball season, or the beginning of the football season...

Football seems to have turned out pretty well after that 1st lost

[HawgAdvocate]

Someone forgot to tell Mike Anderson that when he took over a struggling UAB program and in a couple of years, has it competing in Conference USA and playing giant killer in the big dance. Meanwhile, we are at home patiently waiting on our guy to build us up to the point where we can get in the dance and beaten by the likes of Bucknell....

I'm sure Heath would have loved to play in Conference USA instead of the SEC. Basketball is all about matchups. When you spend a whole season playing half-court ball, and here comes this small, fast team that no one in your conference plays like, it's going to be a bit of shock.

Many folks are pointing to past game tapes that might have helped educate the Hogs befoer last night. That's BS though. How many of you could watch a tape, and go out and beat a press you haven't seen in a long time, if ever? it takes experience. And our guards havent worked together long enough to have that experience.

It's a copout answer.

[Hawgon]

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams.  Oh sure, the talent has been upgraded and because of that, we have won more games every year.  But, Stan's teams now are making the same kinds of mistakes and are still neglecting the little fundamental things that helps teams win games.  Nolan's teams neglected some of the fundamentals but made up for it with their style of play.  Stan's style of play demands sound fundamentals in order to truly succeed.  Yet, we never see any improvement in fundamentals or basketball knowledge.  Stan's teams will never be better than 22 - 24 wins and first or second round of the tournament, and those are the good years.

[rude1]

Someone forgot to tell Mike Anderson that when he took over a struggling UAB program and in a couple of years, has it competing in Conference USA and playing giant killer in the big dance. Meanwhile, we are at home patiently waiting on our guy to build us up to the point where we can get in the dance and beaten by the likes of Bucknell....

I'm sure Heath would have loved to play in Conference USA instead of the SEC. Basketball is all about matchups. When you spend a whole season playing half-court ball, and here comes this small, fast team that no one in your conference plays like, it's going to be a bit of shock.

Many folks are pointing to past game tapes that might have helped stop educate the Hogs. That's BS though. How many of you could watch a tape, and go out and beat a press you haven't seen in a long time, if ever?

It's a copout answer.

Sounds good, but as I warned some guys at work before this game. This team had already had a 24 turnover game against someone who wasn't playing full court pressure. This team simply doesn't pass the basketball well, and now that the word is out, only look for everyone else to pressure them on the ball. Three point shooting is streaky at best and the point guard is a turnover looking for a place to happen. Steven Hill is a liability who should only be in the game to spell Townes or Thomas, those block shots can be done without and he doesn't rebound at all for a guy his size. When I break this team down, I simply don't see the talent and definitely not the coaching to make a run to get into the national rankings at any point this season. I hope that I am wrong, but from what I have observed thus far, this is how I see it.

[silvertip]

How long did it take UCLA? How long did it take Louisville? How long did it take Florida? How long has it taken Michigan? How long did it take Texas? How long did it take Villanova? How long has it taken Georgetown? How about Houston? N.C. State sure isn't rocking the top 25.

As much as many of you want to win now, you're going to have to face that fact that patience is your only ally. Screaming for change is what set us back 2 years.

Most of you aren't being realistic in your demands. We've got a huge recruiting class coming up in a year that we can't afford to screw around with, not to mention a brand new top shelf recruiting coordinator. But more importantly, we've got a team on the floor who is 5-1, just outside the top 25, knocking on the door, and less than a month into the season.

Less than a month. 5-1...top 25 in sight...major improvements in rebounding, FT %, 3pt %, & defense..and people are screaming for change.

I think many of you are just bored and have nothing better to do than hate on what you don't understand.

Have some of you been in a coma? When Richardson took over, we were never considered more than a secondary basketball school that sometimes had a good team.

We weren't even in the top 20 at the end of Sutton's last season, losing to the SMU's and TCU's.

Scott Rose, Keving, Rehl, Mike Ratliffe, Stephon Moore, and Andrew Lang were your starters in his first year.

Only 5 years later, we had been to the NCAAs 3 times and returned to the final four for the first time in over a decade.

That is how long it really takes. Look at your own school for your answer.

In basketball the cream rises quickly because frosh can have a huge impact. (Huery, Mayberry, Day,Miller,Thurman, Corliss, Joe Johnson)

If the cream is here, it will show itself this season or not at all.

You are clueless about the state of the Arkansas BB program before Nolan arrived. Sutton had taken the Hawgs to the NCAAT NINE straight years, never finishing worse than 2 in the SWC in any of those years. Never a losing season in his Hawg tenure.

Sutton, compared to Nolan, had a BETTER conf & overall record, MORE All Americans & MORE NBA draft choices in 11 years than Nolan had in 17.

Your first sentence, that we were "never more than a secondary BB school that sometimes had a good team" before Nolan arrived---just shows how totally clueless you are.

SUTTON built the BB program that was a national power & Barnhill Arena one of the premier home courts in the country. I suggest you look at the year-by-year Hawg BB history at arsnonline.com as a starting place to cure your ignorance.

[silvertip]

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams...  

Sentences like this tell me immediately that the poster is determined to grind his axe, regardless of the facts.

"...in five years.."  Assuning 30 games this year, you have now seen 4.2 years. You have NO idea how this season will turn out----but you've seen "absolutely no improvement" in FIVE YEARS.
I bet you were one of the ones who, after the 2nd SEC game last year, were telling us how Stan wouldn't make the NCAAT AFTER FOUR YEARS.

There is an excellent post in this thread---reply #11 by fourthcrusade---that lays out undeniable FACTS about dramatic, year by year improvement as expressed in W-L records. The fact that YOU can see "absolutely no improvement" only proves that you don't know what it takes to win BB games.

[Hawgon]

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams...  

Sentences like this tell me immediately that the poster is determined to grind his axe, regardless of the facts.

"...in five years.."  Assuning 30 games this year, you have now seen 4.2 years. You have NO idea how this season will turn out----but you've seen "absolutely no improvement" in FIVE YEARS.
I bet you were one of the ones who, after the 2nd SEC game last year, were telling us how Stan wouldn't make the NCAAT AFTER FOUR YEARS.

There is an excellent post in this thread---reply #11 by fourthcrusade---that lays out undeniable FACTS about dramatic, year by year improvement as expressed in W-L records. The fact that YOU can see "absolutely no improvement" only proves that you don't know what it takes to win BB games.

Name one aspect of fundamental basketball that Stan's teams do well.  Go ahead, try it.  All of our 'improvement' over the last few years was attributable to an increase in talent and the maturation of Ronnie Brewer.

[fourthcrusade]

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams...  

Sentences like this tell me immediately that the poster is determined to grind his axe, regardless of the facts.

"...in five years.."  Assuning 30 games this year, you have now seen 4.2 years. You have NO idea how this season will turn out----but you've seen "absolutely no improvement" in FIVE YEARS.
I bet you were one of the ones who, after the 2nd SEC game last year, were telling us how Stan wouldn't make the NCAAT AFTER FOUR YEARS.

There is an excellent post in this thread---reply #11 by fourthcrusade---that lays out undeniable FACTS about dramatic, year by year improvement as expressed in W-L records. The fact that YOU can see "absolutely no improvement" only proves that you don't know what it takes to win BB games.

Name one aspect of fundamental basketball that Stan's teams do well.  Go ahead, try it.  All of our 'improvement' over the last few years was attributable to an increase in talent and the maturation of Ronnie Brewer.

Offensive rebounding

Defensive rebounding

Free throw shooting as a TEAM.

Wow, thats pretty dang fundamental!   

[Hawgon]

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams...  

Sentences like this tell me immediately that the poster is determined to grind his axe, regardless of the facts.

"...in five years.."  Assuning 30 games this year, you have now seen 4.2 years. You have NO idea how this season will turn out----but you've seen "absolutely no improvement" in FIVE YEARS.
I bet you were one of the ones who, after the 2nd SEC game last year, were telling us how Stan wouldn't make the NCAAT AFTER FOUR YEARS.

There is an excellent post in this thread---reply #11 by fourthcrusade---that lays out undeniable FACTS about dramatic, year by year improvement as expressed in W-L records. The fact that YOU can see "absolutely no improvement" only proves that you don't know what it takes to win BB games.

Name one aspect of fundamental basketball that Stan's teams do well.  Go ahead, try it.  All of our 'improvement' over the last few years was attributable to an increase in talent and the maturation of Ronnie Brewer.

Offensive rebounding

Defensive rebounding

Free throw shooting as a TEAM.

Wow, thats pretty dang fundamental!  

As Silvertip was so gracious to point out, we can't make any judgements about this year yet.  Therefore, I wouldn't include free throw shooting as that they have always pretty much sucked at that.  Rebounding has been a moderate strong point although, not as much as one should expect from a team with such a large front court.  The rebounding edge also seems to disappear when we play quality opponents.

[HawgAdvocate]

Name one aspect of fundamental basketball that Stan's teams do well.  Go ahead, try it.  All of our 'improvement' over the last few years was attributable to an increase in talent and the maturation of Ronnie Brewer.

All of the improvement is due to the kids that come in, and none of the credit goes to Stan huh? That's ludacrous. You have obviously only watched one game this year, that being last night. Guess what? Ronnie Brewer isn't here. We won the Old Spice Classic without Ronnie, beating 3 NCAA tourney teams, two of which are preseason favorites to win their conference.

But according to you, coaching doesn't exist. I guess that would mean the teams we played against aren't being coached either.

That being said, our team does many things very well. And because we didn't execute on the road last night, doesn't mean we do nothing right. You don't know how to think objectively if you can't see that.

1. Our transistion defense is pretty good. We don't give up easy baskets on the other end.
2. We know how to rotate on defense very well. Cutters and screeners don't run free unchecked.
3. We don't give up easy shots in the paint. Every shot is contested down low.
4. Despite the Missouri game, we have made a good showing of ball movement. Our big men know to kick it out, freeing our guards for open threes.
5. Our free throw shooting has improved by leaps and bounds.
6. Our offensive shot selection has improved to a very positive field goal %.
7. Our defense knows how to apply and maintain intensity without drawing unnecessary blocking our touch fouls.

That's seven, simplified reasons right off the bat. Transition offense needs some work when pressed, but when it's not pressed with intensity, we settle in and run a good motion offense that gives everyone a look and keeps someone moving with the ball throughout the posession.

[hog caller]

we won't imerge into stardom this year because we are still a very young team.

[HawgAdvocate]

As Silvertip was so gracious to point out, we can't make any judgements about this year yet.  Therefore, I wouldn't include free throw shooting as that they have always pretty much sucked at that.  Rebounding has been a moderate strong point although, not as much as one should expect from a team with such a large front court.  The rebounding edge also seems to disappear when we play quality opponents.

Sure thing bud, if it stumps your point, then you obviously shouldn't count it. I mean, if we havent done well at it as a team over the past 4 or 5 seasons, that means we'll never be good at it, despite having a bunch of new players who have no connection to the percentages of years past.

Rebounding isn't always about the biggest guy getting he most boards. Jason Kidd is an awesome rebounder because he beats his man to the ball. Dennis Rodman was never the biggest guy, yet he's on of the greatest of all time. If everyone is blocking out as they should, then size won't matter if the ball flies more than 3 feet from the rim. Townes and Beverley led the team in rebounding during preseason practice. Does it mtter who has the most boards? No. Just as long as they out rebound their opponent. We don't snow bird, so we end up having 5 guys on the defensive glass.

The edge disappears against quality opponents? Just admit you don't know and you're making this up. Please. Southern Illinois was the best team we faced. We outrebounded them by 6. West Virginia not a quality opponenet? We out boarded them by 20! T-W-E-N-T-Y!!! We outboarded Marist by 6 as well.

So where did that edge disappear against a quality opponent? You think Missouri is rated higher than the 3 teams I just listed?

[Hawgon]

Actually, I have watched every televised game and I was moderately impressed with team before last night.  This group is better than the last and it does look slightly better coached.  However, one can simply not excuse the performance last night.  They did nothing correctly and this early in the season, it remains to be seen as to whether the real team was the one that played last night or the one that played in Florida.  The simple fact is, Stan hasn't gotten it done at Arkansas so far.  It is also true that his teams have been very flawed in the fundamentals and execution.  That is disturbing.  Lack of talent is one thing.  Lack of execution is another altogether.

[Hawgon]

As Silvertip was so gracious to point out, we can't make any judgements about this year yet.  Therefore, I wouldn't include free throw shooting as that they have always pretty much sucked at that.  Rebounding has been a moderate strong point although, not as much as one should expect from a team with such a large front court.  The rebounding edge also seems to disappear when we play quality opponents.

Sure thing bud, if it stumps your point, then you obviously shouldn't count it. I mean, if we havent done well at it as a team over the past 4 or 5 seasons, that means we'll never be good at it, despite having a bunch of new players who have no connection to the percentages of years past.

Rebounding isn't always about the biggest guy getting he most boards. Jason Kidd is an awesome rebounder because he beats his man to the ball. Dennis Rodman was never the biggest guy, yet he's on of the greatest of all time. If everyone is blocking out as they should, then size won't matter if the ball flies more than 3 feet from the rim. Townes and Beverley led the team in rebounding during preseason practice. Does it mtter who has the most boards? No. Just as long as they out rebound their opponent. We don't snow bird, so we end up having 5 guys on the defensive glass.

The edge disappears against quality opponents? Just admit you don't know and you're making this up. Please. Southern Illinois was the best team we faced. We outrebounded them by 6. West Virginia not a quality opponenet? We out boarded them by 20! T-W-E-N-T-Y!!! We outboarded Marist by 6 as well.

So where did that edge disappear against a quality opponent? You think Missouri is rated higher than the 3 teams I just listed?

As was mentioned Jethro, we are going more by past years than this year.  Frankly, it remains to be seen as to whether any of the teams we have beaten this year are 'quality' teams.

[ErieHog]

Leading the conference in turnovers committed per game is fundamental?
Being 9th in the conference in rebounding is fundamental?

The other banner stat you quoted for good fundamental basketball is Free Throw shooting, where Heath's Hogs rank all the way up at 6th.

The sad truth remains that we've finished 12th of 12 teams in fundamental type stats, far more often than we've finished in the Top 3 in any of them.

The truth of his 'rebounding' approach is that his teams have won the rebounding battle 61 times entering this season, matching his number of wins; the 57 times Heath's Hogs have been outrebounded matches the number of losses he's had too.   That doesn't say much for a 'rebounding' coach, that his team loses the rebounding contest nearly as often as it wins it.

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams... 

Sentences like this tell me immediately that the poster is determined to grind his axe, regardless of the facts.

"...in five years.."  Assuning 30 games this year, you have now seen 4.2 years. You have NO idea how this season will turn out----but you've seen "absolutely no improvement" in FIVE YEARS.
I bet you were one of the ones who, after the 2nd SEC game last year, were telling us how Stan wouldn't make the NCAAT AFTER FOUR YEARS.

There is an excellent post in this thread---reply #11 by fourthcrusade---that lays out undeniable FACTS about dramatic, year by year improvement as expressed in W-L records. The fact that YOU can see "absolutely no improvement" only proves that you don't know what it takes to win BB games.

Name one aspect of fundamental basketball that Stan's teams do well.  Go ahead, try it.  All of our 'improvement' over the last few years was attributable to an increase in talent and the maturation of Ronnie Brewer.

Offensive rebounding

Defensive rebounding

Free throw shooting as a TEAM.

Wow, thats pretty dang fundamental!   

[HawgAdvocate]

Well, considering we've played well in five games, and not well in one game...I'd say the odds trump your negative hopes. You've got a 16% chance that the Hogs are the team in Columbia. So if it's that low, why would you waste your time and energy doubting?

They did play pretty good defense. Missouri just wasn't missing last night. I think it's funny though that you guys don't want to acknowledge the the numerous intangibles that were working against the Hogs last night.

"Stan hasn't gotten it done at Arkansas so far.

Ok, so what is "getting it done" then? Does he have to win an SEC West title outright within 4 years of being here? LSU has been stacked over the past few years. Bama has been prety good as well.

Heath has basiclly had two years to make some noise. The other two were what Nolan left behind, which wasn't much at all. Ya can't blame that on Stan. But you do, and that's sad.

[Hawgon]

You're right.  Who am I to judge a coach on his win/loss record and number of NCAA appearances?  I am one judgmental bastard.

[HawgAdvocate]

As was mentioned Jethro, we are going more by past years than this year.  Frankly, it remains to be seen as to whether any of the teams we have beaten this year are 'quality' teams.

Why go by the past? We're in the present and you jumping off the bandwagon based on one game from this season. You say our teams have shown no improvement. How can you say that if you're not paying attention to the present?

Southern Illinois has it's top 8 players back from last year's tourney team. Please explain to me how in the world they could go from a NCAA tourney team to a non-quality opponent within the first month of the season. Cause our RPI and SoS don't agree with you at all.

[HawgAdvocate]

You're right.  Who am I to judge a coach on his win/loss record and number of NCAA appearances?  I am one judgmental bastard.

The quote from Fourthcrusade says it all:

PROGRESS:
9 wins - 12 - 18 - 22

6thwest - 4th west - T2ndwest

no postseason - NITeligible - NCAAT

62ppg - 69ppg - 72ppg - 74ppg

8/16wins@bud - 10/16 - 13/16 - 15/16@bud!

3/8secwins@bud - 4/8 - 5/8 - 7/8sec@bud!

0-1SECTourney lose by 30 - 0-1 SECT lose by 10 -  1-1 SECT lose by 3

I am constantly amazed at how utterly foolish so many fans are.  That is called progress.  This the is real world. 
THIS is the big picture!

[Hawgon]

Why go by the past? We're in the present and you jumping off the bandwagon based on one game from this season. You say our teams have shown no improvement. How can you say that if you're not paying attention to the present?

Because the future has not happened yet and presently, they aren't playing a game.  I was never on the bandwagon to jump off of it.  I didn't say they had shown no improvement but rather, that they had shown no improvement in their understanding and execution of the fundamentals.  Once again, presently they aren't playing.  I can only go off of past performance.

[HawgAdvocate]

You don't play SEC basketball if you don't know fundamentals. You don't beat 3 quality teams in 3 days if you don't know fundamentals.

Do you think Jay Bilas and Andy Katz are full of $hit? Cause that's pretty much what you're saying. Before last night. they'd been hyping our great play in Orlando.

Very bold words from a guy who won't take the present into consideration. I won't even go into the future with you. I'm afraid to enlighten you to the idea of what our backcourt can do once they get more PT playing together.

[Hawgon]

You don't play SEC basketball if you don't know fundamentals. You don't beat 3 quality teams in 3 days if you don't know fundamentals.

You're kidding right?  I mean that is a joke right?  Go out and ask fifty SEC basketball players to shoot a left handed layup and see how they do it. 

[fourthcrusade]

You're right.  Who am I to judge a coach on his win/loss record and number of NCAA appearances?  I am one judgmental bastard.

ok, well, using your method Stan has 1 elite 8

Mike anderson has 0.

yikes, even YOUR method of 'putting down stan' backfires!

[Hawgon]

You're right.  Who am I to judge a coach on his win/loss record and number of NCAA appearances?  I am one judgmental bastard.

ok, well, using your method Stan has 1 elite 8

Mike anderson has 0.

yikes, even YOUR method of 'putting down stan' backfires!

Who ever said anything about Mike Anderson.  I sure didn't.

[fourthcrusade]

You're right.  Who am I to judge a coach on his win/loss record and number of NCAA appearances?  I am one judgmental bastard.

ok, well, using your method Stan has 1 elite 8

Mike anderson has 0.

yikes, even YOUR method of 'putting down stan' backfires!

Who ever said anything about Mike Anderson.  I sure didn't.

my mistake: i thought over the last 30 hours i had seen hundreds of posts touting mike over stan.

guess i was plumb wrong!  tee hee!

[silvertip]

The main point for me is that in five years I have seen absolutely no improvement in the actual play on the court and basketball knowledge of Stan's teams...  

Sentences like this tell me immediately that the poster is determined to grind his axe, regardless of the facts.

"...in five years.."  Assuning 30 games this year, you have now seen 4.2 years. You have NO idea how this season will turn out----but you've seen "absolutely no improvement" in FIVE YEARS.
I bet you were one of the ones who, after the 2nd SEC game last year, were telling us how Stan wouldn't make the NCAAT AFTER FOUR YEARS.

There is an excellent post in this thread---reply #11 by fourthcrusade---that lays out undeniable FACTS about dramatic, year by year improvement as expressed in W-L records. The fact that YOU can see "absolutely no improvement" only proves that you don't know what it takes to win BB games.

Name one aspect of fundamental basketball that Stan's teams do well.  Go ahead, try it.  All of our 'improvement' over the last few years was attributable to an increase in talent and the maturation of Ronnie Brewer.

Well Hawgon, at least you're not running & hiding like so many Nutthuggers when they're challenged. But you are presenting a "moving target."

First, you said that you have seen "absolutely no improvement in play on the court or basketball knowledge"...in FIVE YEARS.
Ignoring, how you seperate those things from an improved W-L record---well, if W-L record is not the measuring stick, then tell us how YOU measure "improved play" and "basketball knowledge." Are you a ballet fan?

And of course, Ronnie's improvement was "maturation"---not, of course, actual "play on the court" or "basketball knowledge."  Oh, I see, I guess his voice changed?

I think your tap-dancing, Hawgon. NOW, you want to challenge me to "name one ASPECT OF FUNDAMENTAL BASKETBALL" that Heath's teams do well?? Well, I'm not going to play bait & switch with you. YOU TELL ME, what you consider "ASPECTS of FUNDAMENTAL BASKETBALL" and tell me what your measuring stick is.

THEN, how about us YOU TELL US how Stan's teams compare to your criteria. I don't think you can do it. But it hasn't kept you from forming your strong opinions, has it?

I can tell you HOW I measure performance, in terms such as FG%, FT%, 3PT%, steals, TO margin, RB margin, etc etc. AND having checked the FACTS before I start rendering judgements, I CAN tell that that Heath's teams AND individual players have improved in most of those areas year after year.

WHICH NO DOUBT is how they manage to win more games every year. So come on, coach, tell us how you arrived at your opinion of Heath's teams & their "on court play", "basketball knowledge," skill in findamental aspects" blah, blah blah

I think I'll just be satisfied with winning games.

[HawgAdvocate]

You're kidding right?  I mean that is a joke right?  Go out and ask fifty SEC basketball players to shoot a left handed layup and see how they do it. 

Shooting lefthanded layups isn't a fundamental skill, that is, unless you're lefthanded. is shooting a left handed jumper a fundamental skill? Dribbling with both hands, but not shooting lefty.

Just like winning an SEC championship isn't a fundamental requirement in the first 4 years of any coach's standard expectations.

Comprende?