Now THAT is what I Expect to See out of Razorback Basketball!

[niels_boar]

Some of you people can not handle criticism of the basketball team. Hogsanity and Wilson explained their positions.

I will give you all the benefit of the doubt and say that you are smart enough to understand what they are conveying, but you just don't want to except it, because you are just dying to have complain about someone you think is negative.

I understand what they are saying and have explained in detail why I disagree.  Houston's depth problem has been in the backcourt, which had nothing to do with Davis.  They suck inside with or without Davis. 

In Houston's only other competitive game against Vermont they played 8 players.  Davis was 4 of 13, 7 boards, 3 assist, 2 TOs, and 4 PFs.  Meyer and Knowles were both better.  Vermont starts one player over 6-6 and plays none taller than 6-8.  Houston has been a donut team this season.

Would Davis have had a monster game?  Maybe, who knows.  It's as likely that with a smaller and more foul-prone forward that they would have been no better on D, which is why we won.  There is no guarantee that he was a difference maker.

[niels_boar]

I have been and still am. I do expect an NCAA Tournament bid this year.

To me, there are two types of posters who are totally useless to a message board: those who are relentlessly positive, and those who are relentlessly negative.

Only in this forum could I start a positive thread about basketball, defend another poster's right to be objective and disagree with me, and then get my balls busted for it.

Oh, come on, Wilson.  You started saying that you were ready for a new coach last February.  You disrespectfully called him Little Nolan just last week. So, don't pretend that your bias is to start positive basketball threads, but, Even You can concede that there were extenuating circumstances to a win.

Considering the negative drivel that constantly populates this board on basketball, I don't think it's  waste of time to look for the positive when the basketball team gets a friggin' double-digit win against a quality opponent.  By all means let's look for the negative to be objective.  I'm sure that's going to hold up in reverse the next time that we lose a game.

[WilsonHog]

Oh, come on, Wilson.  You started saying that you were ready for a new coach last February.  You disrespectfully called him Little Nolan just last week. So, don't pretend that your bias is to start positive basketball threads, but, Even You can concede that there were extenuating circumstances to a win.

Considering the negative drivel that constantly populates this board on basketball, I don't think it's  waste of time to look for the positive when the basketball team gets a friggin' double-digit win against a quality opponent.  By all means let's look for the negative to be objective.  I'm sure that's going to hold up in reverse the next time that we lose a game.

I don't think so either. That's why I started the thread.

[hogsanity]

Oh, come on, Wilson.  You started saying that you were ready for a new coach last February. 

YOu have been a member since August, yet you know what Wilson said last Feb? Hmmmm.

Wilson was/is one of the biggest defenders Mike has had here. Trust me, he and I butted heads often over it.

But supporting Mike or not has NOTHING to do with pointing out one of the key players for Houston missed all but 3 minutes last night. Does not matter if you think he is a good player or not, THEY count on him for a lot of minutes and some scoring and rebounding.

[HoopS]

What should be a good thing has become another argument.  What a shame. Predictable.  A shame nonetheless.

[elksnort]

Is everyone for the Razorbacks here? Yes or No
What is everyone's expectations for this year's team?
Is there enough talent THIS YEAR to make the NCAAT?
Is the coaching staff's acumen good enough to lead this team to a NCAAT?
These questions should be wondered by all of us.

[Little Lady Back]

I'll weigh in.  Criticism is warranted.  Even needed at times.  But, it's the same thing from the same people after EVERY game.  The kicker for me is these same people offer every excuse in the book for the football team, defend it staunchly and then say it's "apples and oranges".  Lol

Nailed it!!

[HoopS]

Is everyone for the Razorbacks here? Yes or No  CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF. YES
What is everyone's expectations for this year's team? NCAAT
Is there enough talent THIS YEAR to make the NCAAT? YES
Is the coaching staff's acumen good enough to lead this team to a NCAAT? YES
These questions should be wondered by all of us.

[hogsanity]

What should be a good thing has become another argument.  What a shame. Predictable.  A shame nonetheless.

Predictable because a few here still can not stand to have ANY criticism of Mike, and when none is present they perceive it in something. The hilarious part of this thread is that there was no bigger backer of Mike for years than Wilson.

[lefty08]

Predictable because a few here still can not stand to have ANY criticism of Mike, and when none is present they perceive it in something. The hilarious part of this thread is that there was no bigger backer of Mike for years than Wilson.

Wilson is no supporter of Mike any longer, where have you been?

I'm afraid my comment to Biggus started this crap. My comment had more to do with the negative garbage he posts all over this board. We rarely agree but have been civil for the most part. I admit I'm mostly positive as he is negative. Wilson, on the other hand, flops around like a fish out of water. All 3 of us bring something valuable to this board. I own what I am, just would be nice for the other 2 to own what they are.

[hogsanity]

Wilson is no supporter of Mike any longer, where have you been?

He has been though for 5 years, and wanted him back here long before he got here.

Where have I been? Well lets see I was banned for months for posting negative things about Mike Anderson, then I was reffing football and did not have a lot of time to post. So maybe I missed whenever Wilson supposedly went full on negative about Mike, and sure is not that way now. Or maybe, just maybe, he is not 100% all " yea Mike " all the time and so now has been labeled a Mike hater.

[HawgnCorona]

Vs. Texas on a neutral site will be important as well.

Yeah but  Fexas lost to UTA at HOME last week 72-61 so you should feel good about our chances at a neutral site...

[HoopS]

I have no issue whatsoever with Wilson. Never have and probably never will.

It is also fine to bring up the injury last night.

Look. I'm just a die hard fan. I love my team. I own the losses and enjoy the wins. We've lost plenty of games when we've gotten a player banged up or got a bunch of ticky tack calls that the other team didn't. All part of the game. It is just funny that what is a Razorback support board tends to love to find every negative possible about our own team and overlook good things. Just doesn't come off as a "fan" board for Arkansas to me. Maybe that's what a good fan should do -  pick their own team to pieces and salute the opponent. I've seen other team boards more complimentary of us than our own at times.

Anyway. We won. I'm done posting in this thread. I thank Wilson for his post last night and agreed with the OP.

[elksnort]

Thanks HooPs for you reason.

[WilsonHog]

Wilson is no supporter of Mike any longer, where have you been?

I'm afraid my comment to Biggus started this crap. My comment had more to do with the negative garbage he posts all over this board. We rarely agree but have been civil for the most part. I admit I'm mostly positive as he is negative. Wilson, on the other hand, flops around like a fish out of water. All 3 of us bring something valuable to this board. I own what I am, just would be nice for the other 2 to own what they are.

Bull. What I said as recently as last weekend was this:

"2011-12 and 2012-13: In his first two seasons, we went 18-14 and 19-13, respectively. No postseason, but improvement from year one to year two, so at the end of the second year I still supported him as much (100%) as I did the day he was hired. 

2013-14: 22-12 and NIT bid. No problems with him at all. Still 100%.

2014-15: 27-9 and NCAA bid. Extremely pleased. Still 100%.

2015-16: 16-16. Not happy due to no postseason play. Well, some would say, you must factor in the departure of Bobby and Michael. No, I don't; Mike does. Still, overall I am pleased with Mike as our coach.

[b]2016-17: One of three things will happen. If we make the NCAAs, I'm back at 100% support. If the NIT..., yeah, okay, I'm willing to give him another year to make the NCAA Tournament. If we don't see the postseason at all, time for a new head coach."[/i][/b]
_______________________

I am not one of those "I will support our coach 100% until he is not our coach" people. I never have been with any Razorback coach. That strikes me as allowing loyalty to cloud my ability or willingness to think objectively.

Now let me dismiss another argument frequently thrown about that has no basis in reality (at least with me).

I do not have the same standards for football as I do basketball; I have HIGHER  standards for basketball. That has absolutely nothing to with the color of the coach's skin. What it has to do with is the relative success I have seen both programs experience over the last 40 years. Based on that, I believe that we are a 7-8 win football program in the SEC. If a coach can do that most years, maybe have a 9-10 win season once every five years, then I'm good with him so long as he runs a clean program. I expect our basketball coach to at least come close to what Eddie Sutton and Nolan did over a 25-year period, regardless of whether our coach is black, white, red, or green.

[HognitiveDissonance]

I'll weigh in.  Criticism is warranted.  Even needed at times.  But, it's the same thing from the same people after EVERY game.  The kicker for me is these same people offer every excuse in the book for the football team, defend it staunchly and then say it's "apples and oranges".  Lol

I'll weigh in because a huge pet peeve of mine is people bringing up football in a basketball forum...or vice versa.

Just to clarify, are you marking those people whom you classify as relentless negative about MA and the basketball team, then tracking same people's posts in MMQB to see their general trend of commentary over there? (relentlessly positive or relentlessly negative)

Or, are you referring to commentary in MMQB in general terms?

If it's the former, I'll defer to your 'research' as I've never tracked anyone's comments in that level of detail, by sport, or subject matter.

If it's the latter, then I would say you're way offbase, because there is a huge amount of negative commentary in MMQB at times.

[lefty08]

Bull. What I said as recently as last weekend was this:

"2011-12 and 2012-13: In his first two seasons, we went 18-14 and 19-13, respectively. No postseason, but improvement from year one to year two, so at the end of the second year I still supported him as much (100%) as I did the day he was hired. 

2013-14: 22-12 and NIT bid. No problems with him at all. Still 100%.

2014-15: 27-9 and NCAA bid. Extremely pleased. Still 100%.

2015-16: 16-16. Not happy due to no postseason play. Well, some would say, you must factor in the departure of Bobby and Michael. No, I don't; Mike does. Still, overall I am pleased with Mike as our coach.

[b]2016-17: One of three things will happen. If we make the NCAAs, I'm back at 100% support. If the NIT..., yeah, okay, I'm willing to give him another year to make the NCAA Tournament. If we don't see the postseason at all, time for a new head coach."[/i][/b]
_______________________

I am not one of those "I will support our coach 100% until he is not our coach" people. I never have been with any Razorback coach. That strikes me as allowing loyalty to cloud my ability or willingness to think objectively.

Now let me dismiss another argument frequently thrown about that has no basis in reality (at least with me).

I do not have the same standards for football as I do basketball; I have HIGHER  standards for basketball. That has absolutely nothing to with the color of the coach's skin. What it has to do with is the relative success I have seen both programs experience over the last 40 years. Based on that, I believe that we are a 7-8 win football program in the SEC. If a coach can do that most years, maybe have a 9-10 win season once every five years, then I'm good with him so long as he runs a clean program. I expect our basketball coach to at least come close to what Eddie Sutton and Nolan did over a 25-year period, regardless of whether our coach is black, white, red, or green.

Ok Wilson,  apology accepted

[Swinesong1]

Your standards are your standards.  I just wanna make sure I understand one thing tho.  You're saying that the football team finishing 3-5 and 4-4 in SEC play four out of five years is fine with you? 

[elksnort]

As stated before, it is easier for the Razorbacks to have B to A rated basketball program than for football. Our state apparently produces enough basketball talent to maintain a B to A rated program. Obviously, football requires many more players. And I dont care who coaches what as far as this is concerned.
This is why I think the basketball program has drawn less interest over the years. Now, does getting into the NCAAT more difficult than winning 7-8 games per year in football? I would say so, but the SEC football is much better than SEC basketball.
I just think that we should RARELY miss the NCAAT and probably just as rarely win 10 -11 games in football.

[Swinesong1]

I'm sorry.  My question was actually addressed to Wilson.  If he expects 7 to 8 wins a football season that means we are at best a .500 team in SEC play.  Yet, he expects Sutton n Nolan like results from Anderson.

[HiggiePiggy]

I'm sorry.  My question was actually addressed to Wilson.  If he expects 7 to 8 wins a football season that means we are at best a .500 team in SEC play.  Yet, he expects Sutton n Nolan like results from Anderson.

Basketball recruiting is far different than football recruiting. Also SEC in basketball is far weaker than what the SEC in football is.  I expect to see a tournament team in basketball. In football I don't ever expect to see a national championship.  Basketball there is chance of one if you make the playoff.

[Swinesong1]

Basketball recruiting is far different than football recruiting. Also SEC in basketball is far weaker than what the SEC in football is.  I expect to see a tournament team in basketball. In football I don't ever expect to see a national championship.  Basketball there is chance of one if you make the playoff.

So 4-4 or worse in SEC play is fine?

[Atlhogfan1]

So 4-4 or worse in SEC play is fine?

Is ONLY one Sw 16 appearance in 8 seasons?

Is one NCAA Tournament in 5 seasons?

[WilsonHog]

I'm sorry.  My question was actually addressed to Wilson.  If he expects 7 to 8 wins a football season that means we are at best a .500 team in SEC play.  Yet, he expects Sutton n Nolan like results from Anderson.

I expect 7-8 wins a season and a clean program from whoever our football coach is, until it has been consistently proven we can do better.

I expect Sutton or Nolan-like results from whoever our basketball coach is because it HAS consistently been proven we can do that (now...if the next five to 10 years is like the last five to 10 years, I will probably change my mind about that).

If Mike retired at the end of this season and I was in charge of hiring our new coach, I would hand them a spreadsheet of what Eddie and Nolan accomplished and tell them that was the standard. "You'll get us close to that or you will be fired."

You know what the truth of it is, Swine? Toward the end I actively campaigned for the firing of first Heath and then Pelphrey because they did not meet the standard I described above. I have not done so with Mike, and even said that I would be fine with NIT this year; I would have NEVER said that with Heath or Pelphrey over the same length of time. Why? Because I LIKE Mike Anderson; I want him to do well here. Hell, I would like nothing better than for him to retire on his own terms at UA after however many more years he wants to work, having rebuilt our program to some semblance of where Eddie and Nolan had it.

[Swinesong1]

Is ONLY one Sw 16 appearance in 8 seasons?

Is one NCAA Tournament in 5 seasons?

I've addressed your attributing someone else's words to me.  Why do you insist? 

[Swinesong1]

I expect 7-8 wins a season and a clean program from whoever our football coach is, until it has been consistently proven we can do better.

I expect Sutton or Nolan-like results from whoever our basketball coach is because it HAS consistently been proven we can do that (now...if the next five to 10 years is like the last five to 10 years, I will probably change my mind about that).

If Mike retired at the end of this season and I was in charge of hiring our new coach, I would hand them a spreadsheet of what Eddie and Nolan accomplished and tell them that was the standard. "You'll get us close to that or you will be fired."

You know what the truth of it is, Swine? Toward the end I actively campaigned for the firing of first Heath and then Pelphrey because they did not meet the standard I described above. I have not done so with Mike, and even said that I would be fine with NIT this year; I would have NEVER said that with Heath or Pelphrey over the same length of time. Why? Because I LIKE Mike Anderson; I want him to do well here. Hell, I would like nothing better than for him to retire on his own terms at UA after however many more years he wants to work, having rebuilt our program to some semblance of where Eddie and Nolan had it.

Wilson, the hoops program hasn't been consistently good since before the turn of the century! 

[WilsonHog]

Wilson, the hoops program hasn't been consistently good since before the turn of the century!

I fully understand that, but the football program hasn't been consistently good since about 1990. I don't believe it ever will in the SEC. I hope I don't begin to feel that way about basketball, but I guess I might.

[Atlhogfan1]

I've addressed your attributing someone else's words to me.  Why do you insist?

The Sw16 is all yours. But I get being nervous about it now. 

[Atlhogfan1]

Wilson, the hoops program hasn't been consistently good since before the turn of the century!

Yet in 2012 you said a F4 and 6 NCAATs in 8 seasons wasn't an unreasonable expectation - your words.  Why the change in attitude?

[WilsonHog]

Yet in 2012 you said a F4 and 6 NCAATs in 8 seasons wasn't an unreasonable expectation - your words.  Why the change in attitude?

Because if someone is going to be successful here (again), I would like for it to be Mike. As I said above, in terms of my degree of support I have given him more leeway to get it going than I did Heath or Pel. I WANT it to work with Mike here.

[Swinesong1]

I fully understand that, but the football program hasn't been consistently good since about 1990. I don't believe it ever will in the SEC. I hope I don't begin to feel that way about basketball, but I guess I might.

This is all friendly dialogue so I'm just curious.  If neither have been relevant for at least a century, why are you ok with one staying that way and not the other?  Why hold one program's feet to the fire while being content  with the other being mediocre (.500) at best?

[Swinesong1]

Yet in 2012 you said a F4 and 6 NCAATs in 8 seasons wasn't an unreasonable expectation - your words.  Why the change in attitude?

I really think you're dense so this will be my last time acknowledging you.  I said another poster's expectations were reasonable! You even posted the full conversation.   I haven't said what my expectations are or were.

[WilsonHog]

This is all friendly dialogue so I'm just curious.  If neither have been relevant for at least a century, why are you ok with one staying that way and not the other?  Why hold one program's feet to the fire while being content  with the other being mediocre (.500) at best?

I think it has to do with the degree of success. For example, if you asked me when we have experienced the type of success in football that we did in basketball from about 1977 to around 2000, I would point to maybe four, five at the most, football seasons since 1977.

I think from a fan's perception, we are still a "football school," in terms of where the greatest loyalty lies. If you asked me based on the history of each of the major sports, I would say we are a "basketball school." I might even say we are more of a "baseball school" now than we are football. 

Part of it may also be this: if I were asked to put together a top 20 list of my best Razorback memories as a fan, most would be basketball-related. That probably creates a bias.

[Swinesong1]

I think it has to do with the degree of success. For example, if you asked me when we have experienced the type of success in football that we did in basketball from about 1977 to around 2000, I would point to maybe four, five at the most, football seasons since 1977.

I think from a fan's perception, we are still a "football school," in terms of where the greatest loyalty lies. If you asked me based on the history of each of the major sports, I would say we are a "basketball school." I might even say we are more of a "baseball school" now than we are football. 

Part of it may also be this: if I were asked to put together a top 20 list of my best Razorback memories as a fan, most would be basketball-related. That probably creates a bias.

Now I understand very clearly.  That makes a lot of sense.  Thanks for indulging me.  Fond memories will shape our future expectations.

[WilsonHog]

Now I understand very clearly.  That makes a lot of sense.  Thanks for indulging me.  Fond memories will shape our future expectations.

Good conversation.

[azhog10]

Who knows how big?

Imagine playing a road game without Moses Kingsley (who is our 3rd leading scorer and leading rebounder).

No offense, and I get your point. But Moses hasn't been a difference maker in really any game. I watched this one just a few minutes ago on replay. WHile he played better, He still struggled passing the ball, handling the double team, and his defense cost us a few buckets. Yes, he had a couple blocks that saved a few as well. But he was not a difference maker and neither is Davis. I've watched Houston, and their guards make them go. PERIOD!

[Swinesong1]

Good conversation.

👍🏾

[farfromgroovins]

I think it has to do with the degree of success. For example, if you asked me when we have experienced the type of success in football that we did in basketball from about 1977 to around 2000, I would point to maybe four, five at the most, football seasons since 1977.

I think from a fan's perception, we are still a "football school," in terms of where the greatest loyalty lies. If you asked me based on the history of each of the major sports, I would say we are a "basketball school." I might even say we are more of a "baseball school" now than we are football. 

Part of it may also be this: if I were asked to put together a top 20 list of my best Razorback memories as a fan, most would be basketball-related. That probably creates a bias.

Wouldn't that mean we are a track school?   

[HiggiePiggy]

I think it has to do with the degree of success. For example, if you asked me when we have experienced the type of success in football that we did in basketball from about 1977 to around 2000, I would point to maybe four, five at the most, football seasons since 1977.

I think from a fan's perception, we are still a "football school," in terms of where the greatest loyalty lies. If you asked me based on the history of each of the major sports, I would say we are a "basketball school." I might even say we are more of a "baseball school" now than we are football. 

Part of it may also be this: if I were asked to put together a top 20 list of my best Razorback memories as a fan, most would be basketball-related. That probably creates a bias.

Actually let's get real.  We aren't any of the big 3 sports, but we sure do know how to run!!!!!  We are a Track school and too bad that isn't a top 3 sport. 

[hogsanity]

Actually let's get real.  We aren't any of the big 3 sports, but we sure do know how to run!!!!!  We are a Track school and too bad that isn't a top 3 sport. 

We have had some recent success in baseball. DVH has been to 3 college world series here. That pretty darn good.

[HognitiveDissonance]

This is all friendly dialogue so I'm just curious.  If neither have been relevant for at least a century, why are you ok with one staying that way and not the other?  Why hold one program's feet to the fire while being content  with the other being mediocre (.500) at best?

Much of this is repeated for the 100th time from other threads.
The best way to answer this may be to use another school. How can Kansas be a national power in basketball, but not in football? As an outsider, do you have the same expectations for Kansas basketball as Kansas football? Of course not.
This is not all due to Kansas having a long tradition in basketball.
Kansas simply doesn't have the resources to be a consistent power in football. They have wealthy alumni, rabid fans, can build whatever facilities they want, yet they'll never be a force in football. If so, they would have done so by now.
And that's all due to mathematics.
Kansas can recruit and build a successful basketball program, but they're simply unable to recruit nearly enough quality football players to build a contending team. They can hire Nick Saban or Urban Meyer and probably become competitive in the Big 12, but they'll still probably never win the Big 12, and certainly not a national title.
This is all so easy to understand.

Now, our football program is much better off and has more potential than Kansas. But still, extrapolate same points and apply them to Arkansas basketball/football. Ark simply doesn't have the recruiting resources to recruit enough 4 and 5 star players to consistently butt heads with the Bamas, LSUs, Floridas, etc of this conference. Ark signs some really good players every year, but they need probably three times as many to compete for the SEC and national titles. Ark basketball suffers from some of the same disadvantages, namely a state of less than 3 million people, but on the other hand, they only have 13 schollies and can only play five guys at a time. Combine that with less competition in the sport from the SEC, and the opportunity is there. Based on this, I have always kept higher expectations for basketball. I didn't say it was easy, but it is easier, relatively speaking.

I can't for the life of me believe that anyone could have similar expectations for both football and basketball. You either have to be really dumb, or willfully ignorant.

[Swinesong1]

Much of this is repeated for the 100th time from other threads.
The best way to answer this may be to use another school. How can Kansas be a national power in basketball, but not in football? As an outsider, do you have the same expectations for Kansas basketball as Kansas football? Of course not.
This is not all due to Kansas having a long tradition in basketball.
Kansas simply doesn't have the resources to be a consistent power in football. They have wealthy alumni, rabid fans, can build whatever facilities they want, yet they'll never be a force in football. If so, they would have done so by now.
And that's all due to mathematics.
Kansas can recruit and build a successful basketball program, but they're simply unable to recruit nearly enough quality football players to build a contending team. They can hire Nick Saban or Urban Meyer and probably become competitive in the Big 12, but they'll still probably never win the Big 12, and certainly not a national title.
This is all so easy to understand.

Now, our football program is much better off and has more potential than Kansas. But still, extrapolate same points and apply them to Arkansas basketball/football. Ark simply doesn't have the recruiting resources to recruit enough 4 and 5 star players to consistently butt heads with the Bamas, LSUs, Floridas, etc of this conference. Ark signs some really good players every year, but they need probably three times as many to compete for the SEC and national titles. Ark basketball suffers from some of the same disadvantages, namely a state of less than 3 million people, but on the other hand, they only have 13 schollies and can only play five guys at a time. Combine that with less competition in the sport from the SEC, and the opportunity is there. Based on this, I have always kept higher expectations for basketball. I didn't say it was easy, but it is easier, relatively speaking.

I can't for the life of me believe that anyone could have similar expectations for both football and basketball. You either have to be really dumb, or willfully ignorant.

There's always that one who loves to turn an amiacable conversation into nastiness.  First of all, the question wasn't addressed to you.  Secondly, why pay the football staff an ungodly amount of money if you don't expect them to be any better than .500 in SEC play?  Lastly, I think it's ignorant and dumb of you to compare a football program that has zero success to AR.  But, live in your enlightened fantasy world.  Good day. 

[Hawg Red]

No offense, and I get your point. But Moses hasn't been a difference maker in really any game. I watched this one just a few minutes ago on replay. WHile he played better, He still struggled passing the ball, handling the double team, and his defense cost us a few buckets. Yes, he had a couple blocks that saved a few as well. But he was not a difference maker and neither is Davis. I've watched Houston, and their guards make them go. PERIOD!

You won't find many fans that agree with your assessment that Moses is not a difference-maker. Difference-makers are felt even when they don't play well. Moses has very much been a difference-maker this season. It's just mostly been because he hasn't been that good most games. Fans would feel a lot better about the team right now if Moses had been playing better earlier in the season thus resulting in the team looking better. He's a difference-maker.

If Moses Kingsley only played 3 minutes in a road loss, you best believe that would be the first thing out of most Hog fan's mouths. Anytime a team is down a starter, it's a big factor. Doesn't matter if that team relies more on guards than forwards. It still hurts them. No one is saying Davis is their best player.

[jjdlc]

Bull. What I said as recently as last weekend was this:

"2011-12 and 2012-13: In his first two seasons, we went 18-14 and 19-13, respectively. No postseason, but improvement from year one to year two, so at the end of the second year I still supported him as much (100%) as I did the day he was hired. 

2013-14: 22-12 and NIT bid. No problems with him at all. Still 100%.

2014-15: 27-9 and NCAA bid. Extremely pleased. Still 100%.

2015-16: 16-16. Not happy due to no postseason play. Well, some would say, you must factor in the departure of Bobby and Michael. No, I don't; Mike does. Still, overall I am pleased with Mike as our coach.

[b]2016-17: One of three things will happen. If we make the NCAAs, I'm back at 100% support. If the NIT..., yeah, okay, I'm willing to give him another year to make the NCAA Tournament. If we don't see the postseason at all, time for a new head coach."[/i][/b]
_______________________

I am not one of those "I will support our coach 100% until he is not our coach" people. I never have been with any Razorback coach. That strikes me as allowing loyalty to cloud my ability or willingness to think objectively.

Now let me dismiss another argument frequently thrown about that has no basis in reality (at least with me).

I do not have the same standards for football as I do basketball; I have HIGHER  standards for basketball. That has absolutely nothing to with the color of the coach's skin. What it has to do with is the relative success I have seen both programs experience over the last 40 years. Based on that, I believe that we are a 7-8 win football program in the SEC. If a coach can do that most years, maybe have a 9-10 win season once every five years, then I'm good with him so long as he runs a clean program. I expect our basketball coach to at least come close to what Eddie Sutton and Nolan did over a 25-year period, regardless of whether our coach is black, white, red, or green.

This largely sums up my feelings, I've been generally pleased with what CMA has done here except for last season.  I'm not so much upset that we had a bad season, but what led to that season, aka bad recruiting.  Recruiting is also why I believe basketball has an easier road to get back to prominence than football.  In football you have a roster of 85 scholarship players, and you recruit 25 new ones every year.  Most years, Arkansas only produces 4-5 P5 level athletes in football, that is a very small percentage of what you need, meaning you either have to take a chance on some guys who may not be P5 talent coming out of HS, or else recruit out of other states, and we just don't have that many recruiting hot spots close to campus.

In basketball on the other hand, outside of a few lean years, Arkansas tends to produce the same 4-5 P5 level players each year. Unlike football, you can only have 13 scholarship players, and in most years you are only recruiting 3 to 4 max, meaning Arkansas can largely pull most of it's talent from within the state, unless some of those players don't fit the system or  the particular needs at that time.

CMA has improved recruiting drastically, but he needs a solid showing on the floor this year, like Wilson said, if we see a complete collapse with no post season, with the talent we have, then it might be time to cut our losses.

[elksnort]

Much of this is repeated for the 100th time from other threads.
The best way to answer this may be to use another school. How can Kansas be a national power in basketball, but not in football? As an outsider, do you have the same expectations for Kansas basketball as Kansas football? Of course not.
This is not all due to Kansas having a long tradition in basketball.
Kansas simply doesn't have the resources to be a consistent power in football. They have wealthy alumni, rabid fans, can build whatever facilities they want, yet they'll never be a force in football. If so, they would have done so by now.
And that's all due to mathematics.
Kansas can recruit and build a successful basketball program, but they're simply unable to recruit nearly enough quality football players to build a contending team. They can hire Nick Saban or Urban Meyer and probably become competitive in the Big 12, but they'll still probably never win the Big 12, and certainly not a national title.
This is all so easy to understand.

Now, our football program is much better off and has more potential than Kansas. But still, extrapolate same points and apply them to Arkansas basketball/football. Ark simply doesn't have the recruiting resources to recruit enough 4 and 5 star players to consistently butt heads with the Bamas, LSUs, Floridas, etc of this conference. Ark signs some really good players every year, but they need probably three times as many to compete for the SEC and national titles. Ark basketball suffers from some of the same disadvantages, namely a state of less than 3 million people, but on the other hand, they only have 13 schollies and can only play five guys at a time. Combine that with less competition in the sport from the SEC, and the opportunity is there. Based on this, I have always kept higher expectations for basketball. I didn't say it was easy, but it is easier, relatively speaking.

I can't for the life of me believe that anyone could have similar expectations for both football and basketball. You either have to be really dumb, or willfully ignorant.

I'm not sure why anyone would criticize this post. He is posting what I tried to communicate before. It makes sense really.

[311Hog]

something i find interesting is that i believe that AR produces "more" high level basketball players than football players.

I think that is why some of our recent struggles are so painful because AR basketball "seems" to be pretty competitive nationally and has produced some very very good basketball players considering it's size and other disadvantages.

to me from a recruiting potential standpoint we have a MUCH greater chance of winning a title in basketball than football and it isn't even close.

[zuko]

You have got to be kidding. It's cupcake time man just like all the other seasons. First you schedule all the teams that are less than college caliber to beef up the record and give your team that, phoney, sense of power and then you are grossly enlightened after you get in to he SEC schedule that you are now playing teams that are equal to or better than you, so now the tests begin. So when you see that won/lost record in your conference standing, you will now know how good/bad you are.

[zuko]

I go with Wilson. You know, I will never give up that I believe Nolan Richardson engineered the firing of John Plelphry  and bring in Mike Anderson and so far, it's been a flop. Pelphry never got to finish his 5 years and after dealing the first two years with misfits problems, he was junked. They have let Anderson go a lot lot further than Pelphry and right now it still stinks. Sure they are 6 or 7 and 0 but that is by design  to inflate the egos of the players. Sooner or later they will have to play in their own  league and then we will see what they have. Right now, you have the lamenting about the guy/s that got away and  their is a good reason for that and that is winners don't want to play for losers and right now Mike Anderson is a loser. Still espousing that 40 minutes of Hell, well then with that team that NR had was a once in a lifetime event for a coach and Nolan didn't follow through with the recruiting advantage that team produced. That is when the process should have continued, but Nolan couldn't  produce in recruitment. We have coaching problems and we have to find the right guy/s and right now, we don't have them. The biggest problem that I see when they hire a new coach is that too much emphasis has been accepted on behalf of what happened in the past and for whatever reason, when a new guy comes in and tries to apply his stuff, he bombs. Mike Anderson left a successful program at Missouri, so why did he leave? Because Nolan got him to come to Arkanas.  Bielema had a successful past at Wisconsin, so why did he leave? He says to get more money for him and his assistants well he did and all of his assistants that came with him are gone, so why did they leave. Answer;  they cannot apply their past methods to their new teams. Suggestion:   Leave

[Letsroll1200]

I go with Wilson. You know, I will never give up that I believe Nolan Richardson engineered the firing of John Plelphry  and bring in Mike Anderson and so far, it's been a flop. Pelphry never got to finish his 5 years and after dealing the first two years with misfits problems, he was junked. They have let Anderson go a lot lot further than Pelphry and right now it still stinks. Sure they are 6 or 7 and 0 but that is by design  to inflate the egos of the players. Sooner or later they will have to play in their own  league and then we will see what they have. Right now, you have the lamenting about the guy/s that got away and  their is a good reason for that and that is winners don't want to play for losers and right now Mike Anderson is a loser. Still espousing that 40 minutes of Hell, well then with that team that NR had was a once in a lifetime event for a coach and Nolan didn't follow through with the recruiting advantage that team produced. That is when the process should have continued, but Nolan couldn't  produce in recruitment. We have coaching problems and we have to find the right guy/s and right now, we don't have them. The biggest problem that I see when they hire a new coach is that too much emphasis has been accepted on behalf of what happened in the past and for whatever reason, when a new guy comes in and tries to apply his stuff, he bombs. Mike Anderson left a successful program at Missouri, so why did he leave? Because Nolan got him to come to Arkanas.  Bielema had a successful past at Wisconsin, so why did he leave? He says to get more money for him and his assistants well he did and all of his assistants that came with him are gone, so why did they leave. Answer;  they cannot apply their past methods to their new teams. Suggestion:   Leave

John  Pelphrey couldn't get to .500 in the last 3 years in the so called poor SEC during his time as coach. Mike Anderson has turned the corner with this program and I encourage supporters and haters to just continue to watch. We need both!!!

[elksnort]

something i find interesting is that i believe that AR produces "more" high level basketball players than football players.

I think that is why some of our recent struggles are so painful because AR basketball "seems" to be pretty competitive nationally and has produced some very very good basketball players considering it's size and other disadvantages.

to me from a recruiting potential standpoint we have a MUCH greater chance of winning a title in basketball than football and it isn't even close.

this was my real reason for starting this post I guess I didn't explain myself very well