Why do so many fans insist on having 40 Minutes of Hell return?

[SLC]

Question. 

I see many of our fans wanting to return to 40 minutes of hell.  Why?

The game has changed; hand checking has been made illegal.  Recruiting has changed too.  The last few years of Nolan's tenure were not successful but many still believe it will succeed today.  I hate to break it to you but style does not win, getting good players and teaching them to execute the game (beginning with fundamentals) wins. 

Insisting on the 40 Minutes of Hell style of play will likely mean we overlook good coaches who can succeed at Arkansas.  Example, a lot of posters and fans say we want Mike Anderson back because he will bring back 40 Minutes of Hell.  Even if we got Mike Anderson back, do you really think he'd take us back to Final Fours?  IMO, too many fans are pining away trying to recreate the late 80's to mid 90s.  It's over and the sooner they realize this, the better off everyone will be.  I think Mike would be an improvement but he is certainly not the only coach that can win at Arkansas.

We need a coach who can recruit, coach and run a program that will succeed in today's game with today's players.  A lot of our fans limit our options by insisting on an obsolete style of play that will not win.  Are our fans so unsophisticated that we need a fast tempo style of basketball to be entertained by?  Even if that style of play will not consistently excel?  I do not think so.  Today's game will require the ability to run a half court offense at times, play defense and rebound and our fans understand this.  Sure, you can still press whether it is a full court or ¾ court press, but the key is dictating tempo at the time of your choosing.   40 Minutes of Hell didn't do that after 95. 

Let's find a coach that can bring a winning basketball to Arkansas, regardless of the style of play.  Let's win, after all I find winning to be very entertaining and I think you will too.

[Smithian]

I agree completely. Winning ball is fun ball regardless how it is done.

Honetly, after watching our halfcourt offenses this year, I don't care if we go with a conservative coach if that coach has a good halfcourt offense. I know the NBA is more sophisticated, but it hurts to watch a Miami Heat game then an Arkansas game. The Heat's halfcourt offense is a neverending motion with offball screens, quick passes, dribble handoffs, rotation by spot up shooters, high picks, and the defining thing is every hustling and sprinting to position. Every time Arkansas gets in the halfcourt, all you see are them lazily passing it around on the perimeter before we have to force it to the post, baseline, or just a high isolation with a limp screen set by an overmatched freshman. I don't expect John Pelphrey to be running an NBA quality halfcourt offense, but how is it that the only time you ever see a screen or some actual visions of an offense is the first couple possessions of the game, out of halftime, or after a timeout?

I just want our next coach to be a good one, however he decides to coach. Look at his record, look at his credentials, look at his recruiting, don't factor in "fit" or "style of play". Our program is near rock bottom, but it can be recovered. The next coach will have a lot of building blocks like Rotnei Clarke, Glen Bryant, and Marshawn Powell.

[heathtits]

Scott Drew.

Bottom Line.

[Hogimus Prime]

I'm not sure why so many fans insist on the return of 40 Minutes of Hell.

The style is outdated and even then we won in 94 and returned to the NC game in 95 we were not a 40 Minutes of Hell type team.

I want a coach that'll have a defined style of offense and defense, but have his team built to play big or small.

[Smithian]

I agree, Hogimus. The only time you ever see coaches have any success building a combo team able to be big or small are the guys at North Carolina, Texas, or Kansas. You need to be ready to win at one style or the other.

[heathtits]

Well Mizzou went to the Elite 8 last year but that apparently isn't success to some on here.

[SLC]

But do we pin all of our hopes and dreams on one guy?  Is he the only choice?

[1highhog]

I agree, we no longer were running the 40 minutes of hell during the 94 and 95 years, that style was pretty much over when MayDay left.

[Temprees]

But do we pin all of our hopes and dreams on one guy?  Is he the only choice?

We haven't pinned our hopes on one guy (Anderson).  We had Heath, and we now have Pelphrey.  Oh, I should add that attendance declined under Heath, and has declined further under Pelphrey.  Right now, our hopes and dreams are on Pelphrey.

[SLC]

Right now our hopes and dreams are dashed.   Actually, more like a dumpster fire.

[Marshfieldhog]

40 minutes of winning is all I care about..no matter how it happens

[Temprees]

Question. 

I see many of our fans wanting to return to 40 minutes of hell.  Why?

The game has changed; hand checking has been made illegal.  Recruiting has changed too.  The last few years of Nolan's tenure were not successful but many still believe it will succeed today.  I hate to break it to you but style does not win, getting good players and teaching them to execute the game (beginning with fundamentals) wins. 

Insisting on the 40 Minutes of Hell style of play will likely mean we overlook good coaches who can succeed at Arkansas.  Example, a lot of posters and fans say we want Mike Anderson back because he will bring back 40 Minutes of Hell.  Even if we got Mike Anderson back, do you really think he'd take us back to Final Fours?  IMO, too many fans are pining away trying to recreate the late 80's to mid 90s.  It's over and the sooner they realize this, the better off everyone will be.  I think Mike would be an improvement but he is certainly not the only coach that can win at Arkansas.

We need a coach who can recruit, coach and run a program that will succeed in today's game with today's players.  A lot of our fans limit our options by insisting on an obsolete style of play that will not win.  Are our fans so unsophisticated that we need a fast tempo style of basketball to be entertained by?  Even if that style of play will not consistently excel?  I do not think so.  Today’s game will require the ability to run a half court offense at times, play defense and rebound and our fans understand this.  Sure, you can still press whether it is a full court or ¾ court press, but the key is dictating tempo at the time of your choosing.   40 Minutes of Hell didn’t do that after 95. 

Let’s find a coach that can bring a winning basketball to Arkansas, regardless of the style of play.  Let’s win, after all I find winning to be very entertaining and I think you will too.

It would be a grave mistake to not consider style of play in the next coach's decision.  Style of play is a major factor in recruiting the top players.  Generally, the top players (guards and forwards) like to play a faster tempo style.  The NBA is a fast tempo league, and most of the top player aspire to play in the NBA.  It is not a coincidence that the top 3 teams in college (Kansas, Texas and Kentucky, are all fast or up-tempo teams.  North Carolina, Duke, and UConn are teams that have been good over a period of years, and they all play an up-tempo style. 

Heath was winning, and his teams' records were improving each year.  But his style of play was not very exciting, and attendance started to decline.

[rude1]

Great, some of you obviously either don't watch basketball, or have selective memory when it comes to MA and the 40 min. of hell style of ball. Did you not watch any of the NCAA tourney last year? Or does it only count when it doesn't work? Get real here, MA has had great success still using that style.

[Seconds]

40 minutes of winning is all I care about..no matter how it happens

This is beautiful.....absolute gold! +1

[SLC]

It would be a grave mistake to not consider style of play in the next coach's decision.  Style of play is a major factor in recruiting the top players.  Generally, the top players (guards and forwards) like to play a faster tempo style.  The NBA is a fast tempo league, and most of the top player aspire to play in the NBA.  It is not a coincidence that the top 3 teams in college (Kansas, Texas and Kentucky, are all fast or up-tempo teams.  North Carolina, Duke, and UConn are teams that have been good over a period of years, and they all play an up-tempo style. 

Heath was winning, and his teams' records were improving each year.  But his style of play was not very exciting, and attendance started to decline.

The point is to find the best coach period.  I didn't say play slow, I said control tempo.  To exclude other good coaches because they are not Mike Anderson would be an even more grave mistake.

[Smithian]

Like I said in the other thread, if Arkansas fans won't trade style of play for wins at this point, then we are beyond help.

[Temprees]

The point is to find the best coach period.  I didn't say play slow, I said control tempo.  To exclude other good coaches because they are not Mike Anderson would be an even more grave mistake.

Nolan's 40 min of hell, was always controlled tempo.  It was also a grave mistake to exclude Anderson, Oliver Purnell and Anthony Grant from our last hiring decision.`

[SLC]

This thread is focused on the next hire, not what should have been done.  Hell, the biggest mistake was not replacing Nolan with Bill Self. 

[tiber]

This thread is focused on the next hire, not what should have been done.  Hell, the biggest mistake was not replacing Nolan with Bill Self. 

...and as such we are still paying for the sins of the Father.

[SLC]

...and as such we are still paying for the sins of the Father.

That's bunk, we simply have a poor coach.

[BrooklynRoss]

Kansas and Kentucky play uptempo. So do Purdue and Michigan State (as opposed to their conference-mates.) I imagine people are interested in uptempo because it's both fun to watch and (at this moment) successful. Yes, and it's also a good thing to be able to play defense and execute half-court offense when needed. In fact, execution can often be considered an element of success in any field.