Okay, Heath Huggers...

[Hawgon]

even though I am dissappointed with the loss, I will be converted if you can complete the following task:   

Tell me and the rest of the board in clear and convincing fashion what style of play Mr. Heath is trying to make this team play.  That is to say, what is our identity and how has Mr. Heath molded the team towards his vision?  Use specific examples from games this year.

I'll throw out a few thoughts to get you started.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team?  Apparently not.  We are fundamentally sound on neither offense of defense.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play?  Apparently not.  Our big men go long stretches without even touching the ball while our guards pass the ball around the perimeter and jack up the ill advised three.  Even when given the ball, the play of our big men is inconsistent and spotty.

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise?  Please.  Need we even seriously address this?

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  See above.

Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?  Apparently, only in the last five minutes or less after having trailed by ten or more. (Everyone knows that to do more would tire our highly effective three point shooters)  After some success, our up tempo turns into panicky rushed offensive possessions in the last two minutes.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  No we go long stretches of getting torched by outside shooters while playing a sickly zone.

Are we known for our great zone defense?  Please, we are among the worst three point defending teams in the nation.

Are we a team of scrappy over achievers?  I don't think anyone will ever use the term "over achievers" while discussing this team.

So, Heath Huggers.  Enlighten me.  Show me the light at the end of the tunnel and the broad canvas of Mr. Heath's vision, and I will be converted.

[Flatfoot]

Nice Post!  plus one for you.

[dj shanon "Notshavin" smeya]

Nice Post!  plus one for you.

Agreed.

SilverTip?  Others?

Not taunting here I promise, just looking for some "light at the end of the tunnel"..

[Hawgon]

even though I am dissappointed with the loss, I will be converted if you can complete the following task:  

Tell me and the rest of the board in clear and convincing fashion what style of play Mr. Heath is trying to make this team play.  That is to say, what is our identity and how has Mr. Heath molded the team towards his vision?  Use specific examples from games this year.

I'll throw out a few thoughts to get you started.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team?  Apparently not.  We are fundamentally sound on neither offense or defense.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play?  Apparently not.  Our big men go long stretches without even touching the ball while our guards pass the ball around the perimeter and jack up the ill advised three.  Even when given the ball, the play of our big men is inconsistent and spotty.

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise?  Please.  Need we even seriously address this?

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  See above.

Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?  Apparently, only in the last five minutes or less after having trailed by ten or more. (Everyone knows that to do more would tire our highly effective three point shooters)  After some success, our up tempo turns into panicky rushed offensive possessions in the last two minutes.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  No we go long stretches of getting torched by outside shooters while playing a sickly zone.

Are we known for our great zone defense?  Please, we are among the worst three point defending teams in the nation.

Are we a team of scrappy over achievers?  I don't think anyone will ever use the term "over achievers" while discussing this team.

So, Heath Huggers.  Enlighten me.  Show me the light at the end of the tunnel and the broad canvas of Mr. Heath's vision, and I will be converted.

[BigHog396]

Best post I have EVER seen on this board.  +10,000.  I couldn't have said it better myself.  No vision, no specific recruiting to play a specific style, and no fundamentals.  It's sickening watching what Anderson has done with UAB.  At least you know what to expect when you see them play, and win or lose, they give 110% all game long.

[BossHog13]

Excellent post! I couldn't have said that any better myself.

[HatfieldHog]

Best post I have EVER seen on this board.  +10,000.  I couldn't have said it better myself.  No vision, no specific recruiting to play a specific style, and no fundamentals.  It's sickening watching what Anderson has done with UAB.  At least you know what to expect when you see them play, and win or lose, they give 110% all game long.

As sadly as I hate to say it, we do seem to be a team with no Identity. Heath does not have the point guard play to be a half-court team.  We don't have the coaching to be a wide open defence style.  Most of our games this year we have looked like we had no real identity.

I hate to use the words "next year" today, but, it will be interesting to  see what a "Gary Irvin" ran offence can do next year.  Will we be that Big 10, half court team?   Can't answer that one yet.

See ya

[jkstock04]

Yep....good read.  Pretty much sums up our season...and it sucks. 

[jkcrunch]

Good post hard to argue that piece nice work

[Hog1751]

I agree...

[Thrilbilly]

Mega Post Alert...+1
PS I had to read a second time. Good post. Are you a teacher?

[HoopS]

In one word, confusion.

I pretty much support the guy but I cannot begin to give you our identity.

I wish Heath luck and hope we get to where he wants us, I just have no idea where this is headed for.

No, I'm not a hugger but I'm not completely dark either.  I am, confused.

Nice post Hawgon.

[mutdog]

Heath cut his teeth at Michigan (or state) and had more talent than what should be allowed.  They had big men that could dominate; guards that could shoot and dish. 

Now, he is at Arkansas and let's be realistic, he has some good talent, but not dominating. 

To be a good coach at Arkansas, whether it be football or basketball, you have to be innovative.  Nolan with all his negatives was different.  He played the up tempo game while everyone else played the slow ball.

Heath is trying to win the traditional way.  Well, unless you have superior talent, it just doesn't work.

Heath needs to understand his players and the opponents and be innovative with his style.  Maybe that is asking too much.  We shall see.

[zwhogfan]

Excellent post, hopefully Heath can figure it out before next season, +1

[Buff]

still waiting for a rebuttal...........+1. great post.  this is the kind i would expect from Biggus.

[BigHog396]

There won't be a rebuttal, because there isn't one.  It's not possible to layout any logical arguments against the post that started this thread.  I think all the huggers realize that.

[dj shanon "Notshavin" smeya]

In one word, confusion.

I pretty much support the guy but I cannot begin to give you our identity.

I wish Heath luck and hope we get to where he wants us, I just have no idea where this is headed for.

No, I'm not a hugger but I'm not completely dark either.  I am, confused.

Nice post Hawgon.

I agree 100%

Heath cut his teeth at Michigan (or state) and had more talent than what should be allowed.  They had big men that could dominate; guards that could shoot and dish. 

Now, he is at Arkansas and let's be realistic, he has some good talent, but not dominating. 

To be a good coach at Arkansas, whether it be football or basketball, you have to be innovative.  Nolan with all his negatives was different.  He played the up tempo game while everyone else played the slow ball.

Heath is trying to win the traditional way.  Well, unless you have superior talent, it just doesn't work.

Heath needs to understand his players and the opponents and be innovative with his style.  Maybe that is asking too much.  We shall see.

This makes sense, too, Mutdog.  Great job.

[mutdog]

The rebuttal is..... hire Gus to run the offense.  No huddle and go down field.  Score quick and often. 

Well, maybe Heath should hire Nolan as an assistant to teach him how to win with athletes.  Or recruit some basketball players that can shoot the rock. 

If sensibility does not work, then enjoy the absurd.

[nwarazfan]

Heath cut his teeth at Michigan (or state) and had more talent than what should be allowed.  They had big men that could dominate; guards that could shoot and dish. 

Now, he is at Arkansas and let's be realistic, he has some good talent, but not dominating. 

To be a good coach at Arkansas, whether it be football or basketball, you have to be innovative.  Nolan with all his negatives was different.  He played the up tempo game while everyone else played the slow ball.

Heath is trying to win the traditional way.  Well, unless you have superior talent, it just doesn't work.

Heath needs to understand his players and the opponents and be innovative with his style.  Maybe that is asking too much.  We shall see.

How does this apply to Ark basketball?  We can get superior talent in basketball.  Recruiting is absolutely not an excuse for our basketball program.

[nwarazfan]

The rebuttal is..... hire Gus to run the offense.  No huddle and go down field.  Score quick and often. 

Well, maybe Heath should hire Nolan as an assistant to teach him how to win with athletes.  Or recruit some basketball players that can shoot the rock. 

If sensibility does not work, then enjoy the absurd.

Hire Darrel Hawkins if he wants Nolan's defense and toughness.

[mutdog]

Heath cut his teeth at Michigan (or state) and had more talent than what should be allowed.  They had big men that could dominate; guards that could shoot and dish. 

Now, he is at Arkansas and let's be realistic, he has some good talent, but not dominating. 

To be a good coach at Arkansas, whether it be football or basketball, you have to be innovative.  Nolan with all his negatives was different.  He played the up tempo game while everyone else played the slow ball.

Heath is trying to win the traditional way.  Well, unless you have superior talent, it just doesn't work.

Heath needs to understand his players and the opponents and be innovative with his style.  Maybe that is asking too much.  We shall see.

How does this apply to Ark basketball?  We can get superior talent in basketball.  Recruiting is absolutely not an excuse for our basketball program.

That's a good question.  Heath's recruits over the last 4 years have mostly been 4 stars.  This fact has haunted me and I am bewildered by the lack of basketball abilities of these 4 star recruits. 

Then, I start looking closely at what type of players these guys are.  They are low post type players that are athletic, but, but, I can't stress the but enough; even when recruited their offensive abilities were their question mark.  Look back at their recruiting synopsis.  There seemed to be this question mark.

The reality of Heath's recruiting is good athlete with great up side, but no proven offensive abilities. 

I still say, recruit some pure shooters and this conversation will be unnecessary. Just my opinion. 

As for Heath, I certainly think that his coaching has a lot to be desired.  We shall see.

[Hawgon]

Can somebody for the love of JFB, tell me what the man is trying to accomplish?  He has no plan.  Or if he has a plan, he doesn't have the know how to implement it.

And by the way, maybe Mr. Heath's coaching pedigree is not as good as once thought.  Except for that great few years when he had Mateen Cleaves running the show, Mr. Izzo's teams have not been exactly lighting it up.  Notice they made an early exit today as well.

[Arkiejared]

Stan's philosophy that he is working toward is simple.  Recruit a bunch of good athletes/slashers.  THEN, make them play a slow motion half court game involving lots of standing around against zone defense before jacking up an outside shot.  THEN, hustle back instead of fighting for a board and play a man defense involving going behind screens and switching so you have a 5'0" guard trying to front a 7'2" post player.  And someone said there was no rebuttal...pish

[Thrilbilly]

The rebuttal is..... hire Gus to run the offense.  No huddle and go down field.  Score quick and often. 

Well, maybe Heath should hire Nolan as an assistant to teach him how to win with athletes.  Or recruit some basketball players that can shoot the rock. 

If sensibility does not work, then enjoy the absurd.

I thought about hiring Nolan as an assistant myself. Since we are still paying him could we force him to work?

[murray-vegas]

even though I am dissappointed with the loss, I will be converted if you can complete the following task:   

Tell me and the rest of the board in clear and convincing fashion what style of play Mr. Heath is trying to make this team play.  That is to say, what is our identity and how has Mr. Heath molded the team towards his vision?  Use specific examples from games this year.

I'll throw out a few thoughts to get you started.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team?  Apparently not.  We are fundamentally sound on neither offense of defense.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play?  Apparently not.  Our big men go long stretches without even touching the ball while our guards pass the ball around the perimeter and jack up the ill advised three.  Even when given the ball, the play of our big men is inconsistent and spotty.

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise?  Please.  Need we even seriously address this?

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  See above.

Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?  Apparently, only in the last five minutes or less after having trailed by ten or more. (Everyone knows that to do more would tire our highly effective three point shooters)  After some success, our up tempo turns into panicky rushed offensive possessions in the last two minutes.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  No we go long stretches of getting torched by outside shooters while playing a sickly zone.

Are we known for our great zone defense?  Please, we are among the worst three point defending teams in the nation.

Are we a team of scrappy over achievers?  I don't think anyone will ever use the term "over achievers" while discussing this team.

So, Heath Huggers.  Enlighten me.  Show me the light at the end of the tunnel and the broad canvas of Mr. Heath's vision, and I will be converted.

I might be brave and I might be stupid for even attempting this but here it goes. When I was a younger I remember a guy saying, "Are you better off than your were four years ago?"

I think while there are some things that Stan Heath does in a strange fashon(to be nice), there are some things he has done to get this program advancing in the right direction.

Recruiting now or recruiting 5 years ago? Which one would you pick? It seems like 8-4 years ago we would get players who came to the U of A and then left because they didn't like Fayetteville/U of Ark/school. I know Heath had 1 guy transfer with Mike Anderson to UAB and we didn't get Al Jefferson because the Celtics actually pay people to play basketball. Some recruits end up being great and some become Rimrockers. Haven't we gotten a better brand of HS basketball player in recent years? One may argue the point of what is he recruiting for...and I agree with this to a point. I think his philosophy is what some may call Big 10 basketball. The problem is that the HS kids we get don't play it. I'm not sure any HS teams in Arkansas play Big 10 basketball. A problem might be that he gets the best players he can and hopes they can adjust to his style. I think today is a perfect example. Bucknell had the type of player we should be recruiting. It fits his style.

Scheduling now or scheduling 5 years ago? I don't have one of the old ones in front of me but I know when I went to U of A under Nolan, we played everyone who was rated 300+ and an easy SWC schedule. I like the fact that even though we were playing above our heads at times, we still have a better non conference schedule than those schools who claim everything is in conference(Florida, Florida St, Miami, ect.)

A clean program now or a clean program 5 years ago? Day, Mayberry, and Miller were all on academic probation with my soph roommate. I had a class with Al Dillard and he never showed up for a test and got an F. There was that whole pay scandal with Springdale golf course(I believe) or one with a construction company. Day and a few guys had a romp with a woman in the dorm rooms and got suspended. Players were getting in trouble with drugs. Do I have to go on? I don't think a player could spell degree much less figure out how to get one. Now we seem(I don't get all the gossip) to have a better character of players. I know character doesn't put W's on the board but I think I'd rather be represented by the way the basketball team acts compared to the 40+ arrests under Nutt's watch.

With that being said I will try to address some of your concerns.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team? 

No, I can't say we are. Like I said I think it has to do with our recruiting vs the coaches style. maybe Heath should look at the type players that Wichita St/Bradley/No Iowa are getting. I think those guys are the ones we should be looking for.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play? 

God, I think if Jefferson had come here, that would have been answered with a yes. We put to many eggs into that basket and paid for it. I think if Hill had the consistant heart that he shows at times with an adequate backup then we could say to a degree yes. Maybe we should recuit overseas like a lot of the smaller schools are doing, we do it for track, why not basketball?

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise? 

Suddenly Brewer sucks? I thought he is the only player we are known for. I think our problems is too many 2's(or people who think they are 2's) and no 1's.

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?

Today we shot a better overall percentage from the field and lost. Most games this season our shooting from 2 pt range has been above the other teams. Our problem is shooting the 3 which really doesn't fit the coaches style of play. I think if there was no 3 pt line, this would be a better team. As from the line, this team sucks and no amount of coaching can help them. This is true throughout college basketball. In the last minute of the game 2 good shooters on Bucknell went 0-3. It happens to all kids nowadays.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  Are we known for our great zone defense?  Are we a team of scrappy over achievers? 

Our defense is terrible. I will give you this. I wish there was a list of great assistant coaches who coached great defense that we could get. One problem might be that Heath got elevated too quickly to head coach and didn't have enough "friends" who could come along to help. I wish we had 40 minutes of hell but we don't, we just have 4 minutes of hell. I think Nolan did a great thing by doing what coaches use to do, talk to other coaches about defense. Maybe Heath could take a page from Nolan on this

I know I didn't answer all your questions as well as you liked and you and 50 others will probably smite me before you read 3 lines of this but I really do believe that we are better off than we were and heading in the right direction as opposed to the wrong directino we were headed in with Nolan. It may not be the greatest program right now but I'll take this one over the one from 5 years ago in a heartbeat.

I hope things get a lot better next year and the team/coaches/inflatable mascots learn from the mistakes made this year and build on them.

[mutdog]

Good point.  Make him earn his money.  Wouldn't that be interesting to see Nolan as assistant?  Couldn't hurt.

[Hawgon]

even though I am dissappointed with the loss, I will be converted if you can complete the following task:  

Tell me and the rest of the board in clear and convincing fashion what style of play Mr. Heath is trying to make this team play.  That is to say, what is our identity and how has Mr. Heath molded the team towards his vision?  Use specific examples from games this year.

I'll throw out a few thoughts to get you started.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team?  Apparently not.  We are fundamentally sound on neither offense of defense.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play?  Apparently not.  Our big men go long stretches without even touching the ball while our guards pass the ball around the perimeter and jack up the ill advised three.  Even when given the ball, the play of our big men is inconsistent and spotty.

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise?  Please.  Need we even seriously address this?

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  See above.

Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?  Apparently, only in the last five minutes or less after having trailed by ten or more. (Everyone knows that to do more would tire our highly effective three point shooters)  After some success, our up tempo turns into panicky rushed offensive possessions in the last two minutes.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  No we go long stretches of getting torched by outside shooters while playing a sickly zone.

Are we known for our great zone defense?  Please, we are among the worst three point defending teams in the nation.

Are we a team of scrappy over achievers?  I don't think anyone will ever use the term "over achievers" while discussing this team.

So, Heath Huggers.  Enlighten me.  Show me the light at the end of the tunnel and the broad canvas of Mr. Heath's vision, and I will be converted.

I might be brave and I might be stupid for even attempting this but here it goes. When I was a younger I remember a guy saying, "Are you better off than your were four years ago?"

I think while there are some things that Stan Heath does in a strange fashon(to be nice), there are some things he has done to get this program advancing in the right direction.

Recruiting now or recruiting 5 years ago? Which one would you pick? It seems like 8-4 years ago we would get players who came to the U of A and then left because they didn't like Fayetteville/U of Ark/school. I know Heath had 1 guy transfer with Mike Anderson to UAB and we didn't get Al Jefferson because the Celtics actually pay people to play basketball. Some recruits end up being great and some become Rimrockers. Haven't we gotten a better brand of HS basketball player in recent years? One may argue the point of what is he recruiting for...and I agree with this to a point. I think his philosophy is what some may call Big 10 basketball. The problem is that the HS kids we get don't play it. I'm not sure any HS teams in Arkansas play Big 10 basketball. A problem might be that he gets the best players he can and hopes they can adjust to his style. I think today is a perfect example. Bucknell had the type of player we should be recruiting. It fits his style.

Scheduling now or scheduling 5 years ago? I don't have one of the old ones in front of me but I know when I went to U of A under Nolan, we played everyone who was rated 300+ and an easy SWC schedule. I like the fact that even though we were playing above our heads at times, we still have a better non conference schedule than those schools who claim everything is in conference(Florida, Florida St, Miami, ect.)

A clean program now or a clean program 5 years ago? Day, Mayberry, and Miller were all on academic probation with my soph roommate. I had a class with Al Dillard and he never showed up for a test and got an F. There was that whole pay scandal with Springdale golf course(I believe) or one with a construction company. Day and a few guys had a romp with a woman in the dorm rooms and got suspended. Players were getting in trouble with drugs. Do I have to go on? I don't think a player could spell degree much less figure out how to get one. Now we seem(I don't get all the gossip) to have a better character of players. I know character doesn't put W's on the board but I think I'd rather be represented by the way the basketball team acts compared to the 40+ arrests under Nutt's watch.

With that being said I will try to address some of your concerns.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team? 

No, I can't say we are. Like I said I think it has to do with our recruiting vs the coaches style. maybe Heath should look at the type players that Wichita St/Bradley/No Iowa are getting. I think those guys are the ones we should be looking for.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play? 

God, I think if Jefferson had come here, that would have been answered with a yes. We put to many eggs into that basket and paid for it. I think if Hill had the consistant heart that he shows at times with an adequate backup then we could say to a degree yes. Maybe we should recuit overseas like a lot of the smaller schools are doing, we do it for track, why not basketball?

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise? 

Suddenly Brewer sucks? I thought he is the only player we are known for. I think our problems is too many 2's(or people who think they are 2's) and no 1's.

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?

Today we shot a better overall percentage from the field and lost. Most games this season our shooting from 2 pt range has been above the other teams. Our problem is shooting the 3 which really doesn't fit the coaches style of play. I think if there was no 3 pt line, this would be a better team. As from the line, this team sucks and no amount of coaching can help them. This is true throughout college basketball. In the last minute of the game 2 good shooters on Bucknell went 0-3. It happens to all kids nowadays.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  Are we known for our great zone defense?  Are we a team of scrappy over achievers? 

Our defense is terrible. I will give you this. I wish there was a list of great assistant coaches who coached great defense that we could get. One problem might be that Heath got elevated too quickly to head coach and didn't have enough "friends" who could come along to help. I wish we had 40 minutes of hell but we don't, we just have 4 minutes of hell. I think Nolan did a great thing by doing what coaches use to do, talk to other coaches about defense. Maybe Heath could take a page from Nolan on this

I know I didn't answer all your questions as well as you liked and you and 50 others will probably smite me before you read 3 lines of this but I really do believe that we are better off than we were and heading in the right direction as opposed to the wrong directino we were headed in with Nolan. It may not be the greatest program right now but I'll take this one over the one from 5 years ago in a heartbeat.

I hope things get a lot better next year and the team/coaches/inflatable mascots learn from the mistakes made this year and build on them.
I might be brave and I might be stupid for even attempting this but here it goes.

We are worse off than we were five years ago, actually.  Five years ago, we had a coaching legend with an outstanding recruiting class coming.  We had a Rod Thigpen that deserved to be fired, but he could coach when he put his mind to it and he usually found the way to eventually push all the buttons on his team. 

I will ask you this question:  Do you honestly think Nolan Richardson would have missed the tournament 3 years in a row?  I don't.

One more question:  Are you certain we will make the tournament next year?  I am not.

And finally:  Being that we are in the situation we are in now, who would you rather have as a coach, Nolan or Stan?  If you even have to think two seconds on that one, well... you can't be helped.

And by the way, what is this you posted about Jefferson.  Even when he was recruited, it was known that he would be a one year college player at most.  So, you can't really answer my question about big men by throwing him in there.  He wouldn't have been there today.

[jdhoover]

I will try and answer the question by looking at the type of personnel we have right now.  It seems we have a lot of guys who play two positions (3/4).  What we didn't have but should next year are a couple of guards (two players who I believe are on the team but ineligible this year because of various reasons).  What we don't have in the line-up is a 5 who can play offense.

Maybe going after the kid from Mississippi who turned pro might not have been the best option, however, he was a powerful recruit who would have made a huge difference in the middle.

We are replacing Modica with Weems next year along with the two guards, Brewer, Townes, and Thomas.  Hill has to get better, along with more consistent play from McCurdy.  With this team I see another very strong wing-orientated team with better guard play (passing and shooting). 

Because of the various talent in the SEC, you will still have to mix it up defensively (man-to-man / zone / trap / press).  More consistency is all you can ask because at times this team was very good defensively allowing combacks and wins in late game situations.

Smite away, I guess.

[murray-vegas]

even though I am dissappointed with the loss, I will be converted if you can complete the following task:  

Tell me and the rest of the board in clear and convincing fashion what style of play Mr. Heath is trying to make this team play.  That is to say, what is our identity and how has Mr. Heath molded the team towards his vision?  Use specific examples from games this year.

I'll throw out a few thoughts to get you started.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team?  Apparently not.  We are fundamentally sound on neither offense of defense.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play?  Apparently not.  Our big men go long stretches without even touching the ball while our guards pass the ball around the perimeter and jack up the ill advised three.  Even when given the ball, the play of our big men is inconsistent and spotty.

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise?  Please.  Need we even seriously address this?

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  See above.

Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?  Apparently, only in the last five minutes or less after having trailed by ten or more. (Everyone knows that to do more would tire our highly effective three point shooters)  After some success, our up tempo turns into panicky rushed offensive possessions in the last two minutes.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  No we go long stretches of getting torched by outside shooters while playing a sickly zone.

Are we known for our great zone defense?  Please, we are among the worst three point defending teams in the nation.

Are we a team of scrappy over achievers?  I don't think anyone will ever use the term "over achievers" while discussing this team.

So, Heath Huggers.  Enlighten me.  Show me the light at the end of the tunnel and the broad canvas of Mr. Heath's vision, and I will be converted.

I might be brave and I might be stupid for even attempting this but here it goes. When I was a younger I remember a guy saying, "Are you better off than your were four years ago?"

I think while there are some things that Stan Heath does in a strange fashon(to be nice), there are some things he has done to get this program advancing in the right direction.

Recruiting now or recruiting 5 years ago? Which one would you pick? It seems like 8-4 years ago we would get players who came to the U of A and then left because they didn't like Fayetteville/U of Ark/school. I know Heath had 1 guy transfer with Mike Anderson to UAB and we didn't get Al Jefferson because the Celtics actually pay people to play basketball. Some recruits end up being great and some become Rimrockers. Haven't we gotten a better brand of HS basketball player in recent years? One may argue the point of what is he recruiting for...and I agree with this to a point. I think his philosophy is what some may call Big 10 basketball. The problem is that the HS kids we get don't play it. I'm not sure any HS teams in Arkansas play Big 10 basketball. A problem might be that he gets the best players he can and hopes they can adjust to his style. I think today is a perfect example. Bucknell had the type of player we should be recruiting. It fits his style.

Scheduling now or scheduling 5 years ago? I don't have one of the old ones in front of me but I know when I went to U of A under Nolan, we played everyone who was rated 300+ and an easy SWC schedule. I like the fact that even though we were playing above our heads at times, we still have a better non conference schedule than those schools who claim everything is in conference(Florida, Florida St, Miami, ect.)

A clean program now or a clean program 5 years ago? Day, Mayberry, and Miller were all on academic probation with my soph roommate. I had a class with Al Dillard and he never showed up for a test and got an F. There was that whole pay scandal with Springdale golf course(I believe) or one with a construction company. Day and a few guys had a romp with a woman in the dorm rooms and got suspended. Players were getting in trouble with drugs. Do I have to go on? I don't think a player could spell degree much less figure out how to get one. Now we seem(I don't get all the gossip) to have a better character of players. I know character doesn't put W's on the board but I think I'd rather be represented by the way the basketball team acts compared to the 40+ arrests under Nutt's watch.

With that being said I will try to address some of your concerns.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team? 

No, I can't say we are. Like I said I think it has to do with our recruiting vs the coaches style. maybe Heath should look at the type players that Wichita St/Bradley/No Iowa are getting. I think those guys are the ones we should be looking for.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play? 

God, I think if Jefferson had come here, that would have been answered with a yes. We put to many eggs into that basket and paid for it. I think if Hill had the consistant heart that he shows at times with an adequate backup then we could say to a degree yes. Maybe we should recuit overseas like a lot of the smaller schools are doing, we do it for track, why not basketball?

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise? 

Suddenly Brewer sucks? I thought he is the only player we are known for. I think our problems is too many 2's(or people who think they are 2's) and no 1's.

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?

Today we shot a better overall percentage from the field and lost. Most games this season our shooting from 2 pt range has been above the other teams. Our problem is shooting the 3 which really doesn't fit the coaches style of play. I think if there was no 3 pt line, this would be a better team. As from the line, this team sucks and no amount of coaching can help them. This is true throughout college basketball. In the last minute of the game 2 good shooters on Bucknell went 0-3. It happens to all kids nowadays.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  Are we known for our great zone defense?  Are we a team of scrappy over achievers? 

Our defense is terrible. I will give you this. I wish there was a list of great assistant coaches who coached great defense that we could get. One problem might be that Heath got elevated too quickly to head coach and didn't have enough "friends" who could come along to help. I wish we had 40 minutes of hell but we don't, we just have 4 minutes of hell. I think Nolan did a great thing by doing what coaches use to do, talk to other coaches about defense. Maybe Heath could take a page from Nolan on this

I know I didn't answer all your questions as well as you liked and you and 50 others will probably smite me before you read 3 lines of this but I really do believe that we are better off than we were and heading in the right direction as opposed to the wrong directino we were headed in with Nolan. It may not be the greatest program right now but I'll take this one over the one from 5 years ago in a heartbeat.

I hope things get a lot better next year and the team/coaches/inflatable mascots learn from the mistakes made this year and build on them.
I might be brave and I might be stupid for even attempting this but here it goes.

We are worse off than we were five years ago, actually.  Five years ago, we had a coaching legend with an outstanding recruiting class coming.  We had a Rod Thigpen that deserved to be fired, but he could coach when he put his mind to it and he usually found the way to eventually push all the buttons on his team. 

I will ask you this question:  Do you honestly think Nolan Richardson would have missed the tournament 3 years in a row?  I don't.

One more question:  Are you certain we will make the tournament next year?  I am not.

And finally:  Being that we are in the situation we are in now, who would you rather have as a coach, Nolan or Stan?  If you even have to think two seconds on that one, well... you can't be helped.

And by the way, what is this you posted about Jefferson.  Even when he was recruited, it was known that he would be a one year college player at most.  So, you can't really answer my question about big men by throwing him in there.  He wouldn't have been there today.

If you think the coach we had 5 years ago was the same coach we had 10 years ago, you are the one sadly mistaken. Nolan was nothing like he was when he first got here. The passion and fire was gone.

Personally, I think with Nolan as coach, we were on the way to probation. I'm not sure he could have made the dance with the players Heath had his first year so that would have been 2 in a row and hope that he made it in the third. I think Nolan knew when to get off the bus and jumped off because he knew his god like status was ending.

Am I certain that we will make the dance next year. No. Hell I'm not certain that I can get to work tomorrow without being killed by a semi. Nothing is certain in life. Sucks doesn't it.

Jefferson coming here might have brought other big men here. Kids today want to play in the NBA. If they saw Jefferson at Ark, then whose to say we wouldn't have been on their radar. Also I'm assuming Jefferson meant more wins. More wins means better recruits. I love how people ignore this fact at UNC. They just won a national title and had 7/8 openings. What kid wouldn't want to be a part of that?

[Hawgon]

Yeah, that NC thing really worked out well for us didn't it.  And, a worn out bitter and lazy Nolan Richardson, was a better coach that Stan Heath will ever be.

Hey, I don't want Nolan back and I wanted him gone at the time, but it is apparent that Stan was not the man to replace him.  It is time we realized that and move on to better things.  We really aren't better off than we were because we are fast losing our reputation as a basketball powerhouse.   In 2001, we still had the reputation, even if we had been down from our previous standards.  Not so anymore.

[mutdog]

even though I am dis sappointed with the loss, I will be converted if you can complete the following task:  

Tell me and the rest of the board in clear and convincing fashion what style of play Mr. Heath is trying to make this team play.  That is to say, what is our identity and how has Mr. Heath molded the team towards his vision?  Use specific examples from games this year.

I'll throw out a few thoughts to get you started.

Are we to be known as a fundamentally sound, if unexciting team?  Apparently not.  We are fundamentally sound on neither offense of defense.

Are we to be a team dominated by the big man known for our punishing inside play?  Apparently not.  Our big men go long stretches without even touching the ball while our guards pass the ball around the perimeter and jack up the ill advised three.  Even when given the ball, the play of our big men is inconsistent and spotty.

Are we known for good guards who are basketball savvy and wise?  Please.  Need we even seriously address this?

Are we to be known as a team of good shooters?  See above.

Are we to be a ball hawking scrambling up tempo team?  Apparently, only in the last five minutes or less after having trailed by ten or more. (Everyone knows that to do more would tire our highly effective three point shooters)  After some success, our up tempo turns into panicky rushed offensive possessions in the last two minutes.

Are we known for our tenacious man to man defense?  No we go long stretches of getting torched by outside shooters while playing a sickly zone.

Are we known for our great zone defense?  Please, we are among the worst three point defending teams in the nation.

Are we a team of scrappy over achievers?  I don't think anyone will ever use the term "over achievers" while discussing this team.

So, Heath Huggers.  Enlighten me.  Show me the light at the end of the tunnel and the broad canvas of Mr. Heath's vision, and I will be converted.

I have read your post now about 3 or 4 times and seem to want to argue but, I can't.  I don't want to throw rocks at Heath, but I can not disagree with you. The reason I read it 3 or 4 times is because of the miller lights that I have consumed starting the first half of our game when it looked like we were going to lose. 

I think that your position is irrefutable.  Good post. +1 Karma

[murray-vegas]

Yeah, that NC thing really worked out well for us didn't it.  And, a worn out bitter and lazy Nolan Richardson, was a better coach that Stan Heath will ever be.

Hey, I don't want Nolan back and I wanted him gone at the time, but it is apparent that Stan was not the man to replace him.  It is time we realized that and move on to better things.  We really aren't better off than we were because we are fast losing our reputation as a basketball powerhouse.   In 2001, we still had the reputation, even if we had been down from our previous standards.  Not so anymore.

Can I ask a question back then? Who should we have hired? Should we have had a temporary coach until the next great thing came along? I don't think every coach would leave his job to come to Arkansas. We had some bad marks on the program because of the Great Nolan. You have the advantage of hindsight while I'm asked to predict the future.

Some times you hire a Lou Holtz, some times you hire a Jack Crowe.

If we go out and hire a small school coach, people will say it's Heath all over again.

[BigHog396]

You go out and throw the money to get the best coach possible.  I believe Self was a possibility, and I am sure there are plenty of others who would have jumped at the chance to coach in BWA.  Everyone knows the reputation of our fans, and the Razorback tradition had already been etched in stone.  There is just no excuse for us going for a coach with no real head coaching experience.

[murray-vegas]

You go out and throw the money to get the best coach possible.  I believe Self was a possibility, and I am sure there are plenty of others who would have jumped at the chance to coach in BWA.  Everyone knows the reputation of our fans, and the Razorback tradition had already been etched in stone.  There is just no excuse for us going for a coach with no real head coaching experience.

Don't get me wrong. I thought Heath was the wrong hire at the time also. The problem is we hired him. I guess I'm the only one who felt the program was going down hill quickly and we are better off now. Sure it's not National title good but I'd rather have this then having to live through 5 years of Nolan crying.

[Hawgon]

Yeah, that NC thing really worked out well for us didn't it.  And, a worn out bitter and lazy Nolan Richardson, was a better coach that Stan Heath will ever be.

Hey, I don't want Nolan back and I wanted him gone at the time, but it is apparent that Stan was not the man to replace him.  It is time we realized that and move on to better things.  We really aren't better off than we were because we are fast losing our reputation as a basketball powerhouse.   In 2001, we still had the reputation, even if we had been down from our previous standards.  Not so anymore.

Can I ask a question back then? Who should we have hired? Should we have had a temporary coach until the next great thing came along? I don't think every coach would leave his job to come to Arkansas. We had some bad marks on the program because of the Great Nolan. You have the advantage of hindsight while I'm asked to predict the future.

Some times you hire a Lou Holtz, some times you hire a Jack Crowe.

If we go out and hire a small school coach, people will say it's Heath all over again.

I am not asking you to predict the future, just admit that the present sucks.  Fire him and try someone else.  If the new guy doesn't work, fire him and try someone else.   Hell, we may never be as good as we once were but we shouldn't stop trying.

[murray-vegas]

Hawgon, I really don't think it sucks right now. If we went 15-15, then yes it would have sucked. Is it great? No. Is it good? I think it's good. You don't.

We did win 22 games this year and you seem to give the impression we lost 22. I don't care if we win 22 games by 1 pt or 22 games by 50 pts. I just want us to keep winning 20+ games every year.

[fatman423]

You go out and throw the money to get the best coach possible.  I believe Self was a possibility, and I am sure there are plenty of others who would have jumped at the chance to coach in BWA.  Everyone knows the reputation of our fans, and the Razorback tradition had already been etched in stone.  There is just no excuse for us going for a coach with no real head coaching experience.

Let me preface this by saying that I am a Stan Heath fan, although I often find myself unable to defend him (including now).  The reason we have Coach Heath (as well is Nutt) is that damn hiring committee that John White has mandated.  That is why we can't get an established coach.  Self was never a realistic possibilty because of this.  No self-respecting established coach is going to sit in front of a committee of former lettermen and explain to them why he is qualified to coach here.  A chancellor has got to realize that he has no business getting involved in the hiring process of a head coach of any sport.  The only involvement he needs to have is to give the final approval to the hire the AD makes.  Until that happens, we will NEVER get a name coach to come here.

[Hawgon]

Hawgon, I really don't think it sucks right now. If we went 15-15, then yes it would have sucked. Is it great? No. Is it good? I think it's good. You don't.

We did win 22 games this year and you seem to give the impression we lost 22. I don't care if we win 22 games by 1 pt or 22 games by 50 pts. I just want us to keep winning 20+ games every year.

Understand this, it doesn't matter if you win 30 games a year in college basketball if you lose the first game in the NCAA tournament.  Besides, I remember when 22 was a down year.  In any case, as long as we have the NCAA tournament, it is the measure of success. 

With good coaching, we could have been much better.  I predict that we don't win 20 next year.  Mark it down.

Ever wonder why people still talk about the 1978 team and not the 1977 team.  Afterall, the 1977 team only lost one game, but he 1978 team went to the final four.

[mutdog]

Sorry Hawgon, the fire-hire;fire-hire approach is not acceptable.  As long as Heath can keep recruiting the 4 stars give him the time or rope that he needs. 

Eventually he will put the puzzle together and we will be pretty dang good.  We were not far from being dang good this year.  If recruits begin to see the futility in coming here, then pull the plug as quickly as possible. 

Bad recruiting + coach in learning would be disastrous.  But for now while recruiting is still good, give Heath a chance. 

[Hawgon]

Sorry Hawgon, the fire-hire;fire-hire approach is not acceptable.  As long as Heath can keep recruiting the 4 stars give him the time or rope that he needs. 

Eventually he will put the puzzle together and we will be pretty dang good.  We were not far from being dang good this year.  If recruits begin to see the futility in coming here, then pull the plug as quickly as possible. 

Bad recruiting + coach in learning would be disastrous.  But for now while recruiting is still good, give Heath a chance. 

Recruiting is in the results.  I think some see recruiting as an end to itself.  You recruit so that you can get players who will win games.  Heath hasn't shown the ability to put his recruits together in a  cohesive plan with which to win.  Four years is long enough in basketball.  I mean, crap, he isn't going to be fired, but we won't win 20 next year, mark it down.

[murray-vegas]

To be honest, if you don't make it out of the first weekend it sucks. I agree here.

Eddie only did it 4 out of 11 years.

Nolan did it 6 times in 17 years.

I know you don't want Heath to have 7+ more years to prove you wrong but we have had a lot of first/second round exits.

[mutdog]

The way I see it if recruiting remains above average then the coach that follows Heath will have some good players to work with. 

The only reason why Heath has not been dismissed by now is because recruiting has been good.  Yea, maybe he has not been able to utilize the recruits in an optimal manner, but the fact remains that as long as you can recruit there is hope.

Worst case, we sign all the players now committed to Arkansas.  Heath gets fired. 

The proverbial cupboard will not be bare for the next coach.

[Hawgon]

To be honest, if you don't make it out of the first weekend it sucks. I agree here.

Eddie only did it 4 out of 11 years.

Nolan did it 6 times in 17 years.

I know you don't want Heath to have 7+ more years to prove you wrong but we have had a lot of first/second round exits.

Nolan did a little better than that, I believe.  And you have to remember, that for most of Eddie's career at Arkansas, there were just 48 teams.  It was a lot tougher to make it out of the first weekend.  There weren't many Bucknells in the tournament in those days.  Arkansas is in the top 5 or 10 all time in NCAA wins.

[murray-vegas]

74-75 Eddie Sutton 17-9 (11-3) 2 -
75-76 Eddie Sutton 19-9 (9-7) 4 -
76-77 Eddie Sutton 26-2 (16-0) 1 NCAA First Round
77-78 Eddie Sutton 32-4 (14-2) T1 NCAA Final Four
78-79 Eddie Sutton 25-5 (13-3) 2 NCAA Regional Final
79-80 Eddie Sutton 21-8 (13-3) 2 NCAA First Round
80-81 Eddie Sutton 24-8 (13-3) 1 NCAA Regional Semifinal
81-82 Eddie Sutton 23-6 (12-4) 1 NCAA Second Round
82-83 Eddie Sutton 26-4 (14-2) 2 NCAA Regional Semifinal
83-84 Eddie Sutton 25-7 (14-2) 2 NCAA First Round
84-85 Eddie Sutton 22-13 (10-6) 2 NCAA Second Round
85-86 Nolan Richardson 12-16 (4-12) 7 -
86-87 Nolan Richardson 19-14 (8-8) 5 NIT Second Round
87-88 Nolan Richardson 21-9 (11-5) T2 NCAA First Round
88-89 Nolan Richardson 25-7 (13-3) 1 NCA Second Round
89-90 Nolan Richardson 30-5 (14-2) 1 NCAA Final Four
90-91 Nolan Richardson 34-4 (15-1) 1 NCAA Regional Final
91-92 Nolan Richardson 26-8 (13-3) 1 NCAA Second Round
92-93 Nolan Richardson 22-9 (10-6) 1W NCAA Regional Semifinal
93-94 Nolan Richardson 31-3 (14-2) 1 NCAA Champion
94-95 Nolan Richardson 32-7 (12-4) T1W NCAA Runner-Up
95-96 Nolan Richardson 20-13 (9-7) T2W NCAA Regional Semifinal
96-97 Nolan Richardson 18-14 (8-8) 2W NIT Final Four
97-98 Nolan Richardson 24-9 (11-5) 2W NCAA Second Round
98-99 Nolan Richardson 23-11 (9-7) 2W NCAA Second Round
99-00 Nolan Richardson 19-15 (7-9) 3W NCAA First Round
00-01 Nolan Richardson 20-11 (10-6) 2W NCAA First Round
01-02 Nolan Richardson** 14-15 (6-10) T4W -

[stronguard]

The fact that after 4+ years of STANLEY ball we are having to ask IF we are going in the right direction is proof enough to me that we aren't.  Any coach given time will figure out a way to win.  My concern is with the amount of time it is taking.  Memphis, Texas A&M, LSU, Tennessee, Georgetown, and Gonzaga are just a few names that have either re-built or just plain built in less time than it has taken for us to get back to the tourney, let alone win a little once we are there.  This has got to stop.  We need a winner.

[murray-vegas]

in 84 we had a bye into the 2nd round and lost first game to Virginia, does that make the 2nd round that much better?

[Richard_white]

Nice Post!  plus one for you.

Agreed.

SilverTip?  Others?

Not taunting here I promise, just looking for some "light at the end of the tunnel"..

The light ended in Dallas for me. 

[Hog1751]

I think I've become so adapt to the losing that I just don't care anymore. The light ended for me in the SEC tourney last year.

[Richard_white]

I was there today, I was going to stay in Dallas for the weekend to see the Hogs play but after the loss I was so disgsuted, I left. 

[Hog1751]

I was there today, I was going to stay in Dallas for the weekend to see the Hogs play but after the loss I was so disgsuted, I left. 

I would have left too.