The '94 and '95 teams weren't playing this style...

[HognitiveDissonance]

I think Mike's style is entertaining as heck to watch...at home.
It works great...at home.
It's actually murder for opponents to play against...at home.

The problem is it doesn't play on the road.

The great Arkansas teams, ironically, didn't really play the style that Nolan made famous. Nolan realized he had to get bigger, so he went out and signed Darnell and Lee Wilson. He already had the best low-block player in the country in Corliss. And he great 3-ball shooters on the wings in Thurman, Stewart, Dillard, etc. and some guard play in Beck and McDaniel.

I just think you have to play half-court well, and be able to bang in the paint well, to do damage in the NCAAs. Obviously you need to be well rounded, but without the size and emphasis on half-court ball it's hard to be really good. Size matters. The irony is we have pretty good size, but MA refuses to play Kingsley and Portis together for some reason.

I would call the 94-95 Hog teams at least as much a half-court team as I would a full-court team. I think the 'all-out, frenetic' style can have its moments of glory, but it's more like Fool's Gold and not reliable for long-term success. It would be analogous to relying on running the spread offense and/or running an offense full of gadget plays in football; at some point you have to line up and be able to punch people in the mouth in football, and to some degree you must do the same in basketball. You must be able to pound people down low, get rebounds, play good half-court offense/defense.

[Razor6]

Agree!!!

[Hogfaniam]

I think Mike's style is entertaining as heck to watch...at home.
It works great...at home.
It's actually murder for opponents to play against...at home.

The problem is it doesn't play on the road.

The great Arkansas teams, ironically, didn't really play the style that Nolan made famous. Nolan realized he had to get bigger, so he went out and signed Darnell and Lee Wilson. He already had the best low-block player in the country in Corliss. And he great 3-ball shooters on the wings in Thurman, Stewart, Dillard, etc. and some guard play in Beck and McDaniel.

I just think you have to play half-court well, and be able to bang in the paint well, to do damage in the NCAAs. Obviously you need to be well rounded, but without the size and emphasis on half-court ball it's hard to be really good. Size matters. The irony is we have pretty good size, but MA refuses to play Kingsley and Portis together for some reason.

I would call the 94-95 Hog teams at least as much a half-court team as I would a full-court team. I think the 'all-out, frenetic' style can have its moments of glory, but it's more like Fool's Gold and not reliable for long-term success. It would be analogous to relying on running the spread offense and/or running an offense full of gadget plays in football; at some point you have to line up and be able to punch people in the mouth in football, and to some degree you must do the same in basketball. You must be able to pound people down low, get rebounds, play good half-court offense/defense.

Hey, Mike?...  what he said.

[SultanofSwine]

Looking strictly at coaching, mike is looking remarkably similar to hdn.

[Biggus Piggus]

Every year I see posts like this. I know you are trying to say something, but this message is wrong.

It is wrong in several ways:

"The great Arkansas teams, ironically, didn't really play the style that Nolan made famous." -- This is completely wrong. The national championship team played faster than any other team Nolan ever had. It was so dangerous because it could force turnovers and force missed shots, and in transition the defense could get hit from any range. The Hogs could throw an outlet pass and get a dunk, or a three. It was a highly skilled scoring team, with a great inside threat and tons of shooters, that also had incredibly good defenders on the perimeter. That style is timeless.

You can call the Corliss-Scotty teams halfcourt teams if you want, but they did not live on halfcourt ball. They produced flurries of points in which the Hogs scored in transition, over and over.

The wrong thing is that Mike Anderson's team dissolves into playing no discernible style on the road. At SMU, Arkansas had a chance to break open the game, and instead MA put in his scorers and traded baskets for the rest of the game. At ISU and Clemson, interior defense was nonexistent. Pressure defense was laughable.

In this system, if you don't have pressure on the ballhandler, nothing else is good enough to win. Arkansas is not playing any winning style, not on the road. MA changes everything he does on the road, not for good reasons, and the team falls apart. Season after season.

[Pork Twain]

I think the point that should be made more and isn't, is that while the 94/95 teams were great on the press and disrupting the other team, they could also slow it down and set up a very effective half-court game on both ends.  Nolan was a far superior coach to what we have in MA and that is usually the case with sequels.

[eusebius]

What Biggus wrote is correct.

[Hogimus Prime]

The 94-95 team press changed with the handcheck rule and lack of depth at guard positions.  They pressed and trapped in spurts and it was effective.

[Hollywood_HOGan45]

Every year I see posts like this. I know you are trying to say something, but this message is wrong.

It is wrong in several ways:

"The great Arkansas teams, ironically, didn't really play the style that Nolan made famous." -- This is completely wrong. The national championship team played faster than any other team Nolan ever had. It was so dangerous because it could force turnovers and force missed shots, and in transition the defense could get hit from any range. The Hogs could throw an outlet pass and get a dunk, or a three. It was a highly skilled scoring team, with a great inside threat and tons of shooters, that also had incredibly good defenders on the perimeter. That style is timeless.

You can call the Corliss-Scotty teams halfcourt teams if you want, but they did not live on halfcourt ball. They produced flurries of points in which the Hogs scored in transition, over and over.

The wrong thing is that Mike Anderson's team dissolves into playing no discernible style on the road. At SMU, Arkansas had a chance to break open the game, and instead MA put in his scorers and traded baskets for the rest of the game. At ISU and Clemson, interior defense was nonexistent. Pressure defense was laughable.

In this system, if you don't have pressure on the ballhandler, nothing else is good enough to win. Arkansas is not playing any winning style, not on the road. MA changes everything he does on the road, not for good reasons, and the team falls apart. Season after season.

This is getting very old VERY fast.

Same song, different verse. Every single year we choke on the road against bad teams. And HE DOESN'T ADJUST!!!!!!!

I love Mike. He's a razorback that helped us rise to the elite level. I want him to succeed so bad but yesterday felt like a load of bricks.

We had already turned the ball over two straight times!!! Make adjustments and KNOW that Madden doesnt have it!

[hogsanity]

Every year I see posts like this. I know you are trying to say something, but this message is wrong.

It is wrong in several ways:

"The great Arkansas teams, ironically, didn't really play the style that Nolan made famous." -- This is completely wrong. The national championship team played faster than any other team Nolan ever had. It was so dangerous because it could force turnovers and force missed shots, and in transition the defense could get hit from any range. The Hogs could throw an outlet pass and get a dunk, or a three. It was a highly skilled scoring team, with a great inside threat and tons of shooters, that also had incredibly good defenders on the perimeter. That style is timeless.

You can call the Corliss-Scotty teams halfcourt teams if you want, but they did not live on halfcourt ball. They produced flurries of points in which the Hogs scored in transition, over and over.

The wrong thing is that Mike Anderson's team dissolves into playing no discernible style on the road. At SMU, Arkansas had a chance to break open the game, and instead MA put in his scorers and traded baskets for the rest of the game. At ISU and Clemson, interior defense was nonexistent. Pressure defense was laughable.

In this system, if you don't have pressure on the ballhandler, nothing else is good enough to win. Arkansas is not playing any winning style, not on the road. MA changes everything he does on the road, not for good reasons, and the team falls apart. Season after season.

The thing was, the 94 and 95 teams were really the only teams Nolan had that COULD PLAY a grind it out half court style if needed. They also were tough enough in the half court on D to keep many teams from dictating the tempo for very long.

The NC game in 94 was a perfect example. The 1st half the tempo was in between what either team wanted. The 2nd half started with Duke really controlling the game, but the Hogs half court D was so tough, Duke could not sustain that control.

Most Nolan team, and every MA team I have ever seen does not have the half court defense to force teams to play fast. If the press is not working, they are dead. Once a team gets into a half court offense, they screen twice and either get a wide oepn look, or they draw Portis or Kingsley into a switch which leaves them on a guard and leaves someone like Bell on a 3 or a 4. 

[latrops]

I'm not much concerned about the teams of the early to mid-90s.  For now, I just want CMA to have the results here he was getting at UAB and Mizzou.  First I want to make the NCAAT a few times, maybe even a Sweet 16 or better.  In short, become relevant again.  AFTER we are reestablished as a consistent NCAAT team, THEN I'll worry about why we aren't competing for Final Fours or doing what Corliss, Scotty, Mayberry, and Day did.

[Jackrabbit Hog]

What Biggus wrote is correct.

Yes and no.  More yes than no.  The '94 and '95 teams were every bit as capable as any other at the full court game, forcing turnovers, scoring off those turovers, going on big back-breaking runs, etc.  BUT, they also were loaded with guys that had extremely high basketball IQs (Corliss, Scottie, Corey Beck for sure), and they were talented enough and smart enough to adapt when they needed to for a half court game.  Same thing with the '89-'92 group.  Probably the absolute best pressing, full court team we have ever had, a true 40 minutes of he11, but also capable of winning a half court game against anyone.  Again, a high IQ team with Mayberry as the catalyst. 

This team, and so far all of CMA's Arkansas teams, lack the chemistry and the basketball IQ that Nolan's best teams had.  To me, that's what sets apart what we're seeing now from what we all enjoyed back then.

[Biggus Piggus]

The thing was, the 94 and 95 teams were really the only teams Nolan had that COULD PLAY a grind it out half court style if needed. They also were tough enough in the half court on D to keep many teams from dictating the tempo for very long.

The NC game in 94 was a perfect example. The 1st half the tempo was in between what either team wanted. The 2nd half started with Duke really controlling the game, but the Hogs half court D was so tough, Duke could not sustain that control.

Most Nolan team, and every MA team I have ever seen does not have the half court defense to force teams to play fast. If the press is not working, they are dead. Once a team gets into a half court offense, they screen twice and either get a wide oepn look, or they draw Portis or Kingsley into a switch which leaves them on a guard and leaves someone like Bell on a 3 or a 4. 

This is wrong. The 1990-91 and '91-92 teams could play halfcourt offense and defense well when needed. The '91-92 team disappointed in the end because Oliver Miller was hurt, but it won the SEC regular season championship with a terrific record.

MA's best team at Missouri was very flexible too, with plenty of big men and very tough defending guards. He never had many bigs at UAB, no surprise there.

At Arkansas, MA has never had many guards as good as he had at Missouri or UAB. Probably why the team keeps disappointing.

[hogsanity]

This is wrong. The 1990-91 and '91-92 teams could play halfcourt offense and defense well when needed. The '91-92 team disappointed in the end because Oliver Miller was hurt, but it won the SEC regular season championship with a terrific record.

MA's best team at Missouri was very flexible too, with plenty of big men and very tough defending guards. He never had many bigs at UAB, no surprise there.

At Arkansas, MA has never had many guards as good as he had at Missouri or UAB. Probably why the team keeps disappointing.

I guess I just do not remember many teams forcing a slow tempo on the 91-92 team, but the few that did usually won.

You can blame guard play, which I did the last two years, or I can blame Mike's stubborness, or we can blame 2 dozen other things, but they all come back to the feet of the HC.

[Michu]

Arkansas' ability to play in the half court back in 94/95 was due to Corliss. Nolan did nothing different except have a once in a life time player.

[Hogimus Prime]

After the 94-95 all the other Razorback teams struggled in a halfcourt game.  The Reid/Bradley teams were good but struggled at times due lack of an inside threat and a swingman thay could get a basket.

[Hog Fan...DOH!]

Guard play. Guard play. Guard play.  Did I mention guard play? 

Help is on the way with Whitt.  Sophomores Babb and Beard, plus Freshman Whitt will help.  Bring in Monk in two years and all of a sudden you have a tremendous back court. 

Here are the questions:  can you win enough games this year to bust through the tournament barrier?  Can you attract a couple more Portis and Kingsley talents as well?  Will MA have both great guards and great bigs on the same team?

[Biggus Piggus]

Yes and no.  More yes than no.  The '94 and '95 teams were every bit as capable as any other at the full court game, forcing turnovers, scoring off those turovers, going on big back-breaking runs, etc.  BUT, they also were loaded with guys that had extremely high basketball IQs (Corliss, Scottie, Corey Beck for sure), and they were talented enough and smart enough to adapt when they needed to for a half court game.  Same thing with the '89-'92 group.  Probably the absolute best pressing, full court team we have ever had, a true 40 minutes of he11, but also capable of winning a half court game against anyone.  Again, a high IQ team with Mayberry as the catalyst. 

This team, and so far all of CMA's Arkansas teams, lack the chemistry and the basketball IQ that Nolan's best teams had.  To me, that's what sets apart what we're seeing now from what we all enjoyed back then.

The 1991-92 team was not a pressing team, played slower working around the strengths and weaknesses of Oliver Miller. That was the slowest-tempo team that Nolan had during his great years.

In 1994-95, Arkansas was significantly poorer on defense, relying on guts and guile and playing a lot of close games with low defensive efficiency. The last of the great teams was the worst-defending one.

Everybody likes to think of the '93-94 team as the one with the best inside game. Their first three seasons, the Mayberry-Day-Miller teams scored 58-62 points per game inside the arc. The national championship team scored only 50, and the runner-up team scored 44. Those two scored more from 3-point range than any other teams in Arkansas history.

The national championship team was so good because it scored so well while also making it very hard for opponents to score. It was the best 3-pt defensive team in school history while also keeping inside shooting down to 45% and also producing greatly positive turnover margins, without completely gutting itself on the boards.

[Michu]

Nothing is going to change until you have a point guard with a decent basketball IQ. Madden does not have that quality, yet MA continues to put the ball in his hand late in tight games. Our interior D sucks, yet MA continues to leave Kingsley on the bench. It's not that difficult to figure out.

[Hogimus Prime]

The 1991-92 team was not a pressing team, played slower working around the strengths and weaknesses of Oliver Miller. That was the slowest-tempo team that Nolan had during his great years.

Without Clint McDaniel in 1994-95, Arkansas was significantly poorer on defense, relying on guts and guile and playing a lot of close games with low defensive efficiency. The last of the great teams was the worst-defending one.

Everybody likes to think of the '93-94 team as the one with the best inside game. Their first three seasons, the Mayberry-Day-Miller teams scored 58-62 points per game inside the arc. The national championship team scored only 50, and the runner-up team scored 44. Those two scored more from 3-point range than any other teams in Arkansas history.

The national championship team was so good because it scored so well while also making it very hard for opponents to score. It was the best 3-pt defensive team in school history while also keeping inside shooting down to 45% and also producing greatly positive turnover margins, without completely gutting itself on the boards.

The 1991-92 team Nolan played Big O and Isaiah Morris together a majority of the time

Did you mean Roger Crawford on the 94-95 team cause McDaniel was on that team.  He missed a game or two with an injury thay season.  With Reid sitting out and Reggie Garrett in and out of Nolan's doghouse really killed that teams's backcourt depth.

[Biggus Piggus]

The 1991-92 team Nolan played Big O and Isaiah Morris together a majority of the time

Did you mean Roger Crawford on the 94-95 team cause McDaniel was on that team.  He missed a game or two with an injury thay season.  With Reid sitting out and Reggie Garrett in and out of Nolan's doghouse really killed that teams's backcourt depth.

You are right. My memory required some refreshing - don't know why I got rid of McDaniel like that.

What I do remember clearly: Half the team came back looking fat that season. Nolan liked to take it easy on his stars.

I guess I should take my own advice and look at the minutes. In '95, Williamson, Thurman, McDaniel and Beck all played about 30 minutes per game. On the '94 team, Williamson and Thurman topped the list at 29 apiece, then the minutes distribution was much more even below them.

Crawford was an important sub, but the key factor I notice - in conference games the Hogs had nine players average double-figures in minutes with two more just under that (Dillard and Wilson), and only Williamson and Thurman played 30 min/game.

The next year, Williamson, Thurman, McDaniel and Beck all played 30+ minutes in conference/NCAAT games. The next in line were F Stewart, G Garrett, G Dillard, C Robinson, F Rimac and F Martin. You're right, the guard depth wasn't there.

[The_Iceman]

Nothing is going to change until you have a point guard with a decent basketball IQ. Madden does not have that quality, yet MA continues to put the ball in his hand late in tight games. Our interior D sucks, yet MA continues to leave Kingsley on the bench. It's not that difficult to figure out.

When Kingsley and Portis were out there together, I remember one of the guards drove the lane and they were at each block, and the guard dumped to down to Kingsley for the slam. Then immediately, Kingsley was pulled.

I don't understand why those two can't see the floor more together.

[hogfan10]

The thing was, the 94 and 95 teams were really the only teams Nolan had that COULD PLAY a grind it out half court style if needed. They also were tough enough in the half court on D to keep many teams from dictating the tempo for very long.

The NC game in 94 was a perfect example. The 1st half the tempo was in between what either team wanted. The 2nd half started with Duke really controlling the game, but the Hogs half court D was so tough, Duke could not sustain that control.

Most Nolan team, and every MA team I have ever seen does not have the half court defense to force teams to play fast. If the press is not working, they are dead. Once a team gets into a half court offense, they screen twice and either get a wide oepn look, or they draw Portis or Kingsley into a switch which leaves them on a guard and leaves someone like Bell on a 3 or a 4. 

I think Nolan had 2 teams that could play up tempo and half court. The Mayberry, Day, & Miller teams were pretty good in the half court game also.

[Hogimus Prime]

You are right. My memory required some refreshing - don't know why I got rid of McDaniel like that.

What I do remember clearly: Half the team came back looking fat that season. Nolan liked to take it easy on his stars.

I guess I should take my own advice and look at the minutes. In '95, Williamson, Thurman, McDaniel and Beck all played about 30 minutes per game. On the '94 team, Williamson and Thurman topped the list at 29 apiece, then the minutes distribution was much more even below them.

Crawford was an important sub, but the key factor I notice - in conference games the Hogs had nine players average double-figures in minutes with two more just under that (Dillard and Wilson), and only Williamson and Thurman played 30 min/game.

The next year, Williamson, Thurman, McDaniel and Beck all played 30+ minutes in conference/NCAAT games. The next in line were F Stewart, G Garrett, G Dillard, C Robinson, F Rimac and F Martin. You're right, the guard depth wasn't there.

The 94-95 team coming back fat, the change in the handcheck rule and lack of guard depth is why I don't that team pressed as much as teams prior and after. When they did press teams got open shots, but that team could win shootouts.

I don't get into the numbers like you do, but I remember after Stewart hurt his knee against LSU and after he came back, Nolan put Elmer Martin in the starting lineup.  Nolan would go 10 deep with Beck, McDaniel, Thurman, Martin and Williamson starting with Dillard, Rimac, Stewart Wilson and Robinson with Garrett and Robert Reed seeing occasional minutes here and there.  Nolan played Stewart at the 3 at times.  That team wasn't a normal Nolan team.

[eusebius]

This conversation of Nolan's very good and championship teams is a nuanced one and there's good info in what's being posted. Go back and look at the box scores on hogstats and you will see a compelling story of how those teams lost. Bad shooting is one thing that stands out esp on the road. Thurman had some of his worst games in our losses. Dominant interior play beat us as well. Bama and Miss St had outstanding interior play: Dampier, McDyess. UMass beat us the same way: Camby, Bright, Roe. Auburn beat us when they shot nearly 70 percent. UK beat us in the tourney back to back years but they were about to go another title and final four run.

[eusebius]

The MayDay teams lost in SWC play to teams like Baylor and TCU and Texas on the road. The common denominator again was poor shooting and interior play. Texas had servicable big men Locksley Collie and Panama Myers. Baylor out shot us and got some home cooking as they got to the line over and over. David Wesley was their key guard. TCU's Kevin Strickland hit 9 threes one year to beat us. In MayDays only SEC season, losses to bama and georgia had the same trend. Robert horry made it tough defensively and Latrell Sprewell and James Robinson shot the lights out. Georgia beat us in the SEC tourney on a pre mature five second count and Laterial Green had 30 in that game.

I just realized a retrospectively complained about the refs from games 25 years ago. Forrest City Joe is rubbing off on me😄

[Jackrabbit Hog]

The MayDay teams lost in SWC play to teams like Baylor and TCU and Texas on the road. The common denominator again was poor shooting and interior play. Texas had servicable big men Locksley Collie and Panama Myers. Baylor out shot us and got some home cooking as they got to the line over and over. David Wesley was their key guard. TCU's Kevin Strickland hit 9 threes one year to beat us. In MayDays only SEC season, losses to bama and georgia had the same trend. Robert horry made it tough defensively and Latrell Sprewell and James Robinson shot the lights out. Georgia beat us in the SEC tourney on a pre mature five second count and Laterial Green had 30 in that game.

I just realized a retrospectively complained about the refs from games 25 years ago. Forrest City Joe is rubbing off on me😄

All time all-name team right there.

[Kevin]

the championship teams did not press as much. beck could pressure the ball, and have the guard commit turnovers by himself.

our wing players really got out in the passing lanes.

i think the biggest difference is they played faster to offense. the championship teams transitioned faster to offense.

like to see this team really run to the offensive end.

[eusebius]

the championship teams did not press as much. beck could pressure the ball, and have the guard commit turnovers by himself.

our wing players really got out in the passing lanes.

i think the biggest difference is they played faster to offense. the championship teams transitioned faster to offense.

like to see this team really run to the offensive end.

Let's see if Kevin is right. I know this is just a few game samples and selected plays, but let's see.

Ark @ UK '94

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SiO3LlYNpY

Ark vs G'town '94 NCAAT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvyOC9n6hV0

Ark @ Tex '90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLgdzJH4Tn8 

Ark vs Houston '90 SWC final

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwO2L0yWZ9w

Ark vs Duke '90 Preseason NIT Semi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qbzlbt0M5XU

Ark @ LSU '92

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcvDdpzm9kg

What's happening is Nolan is adjusting his pressure to what will be most effective. Vs Texas in 90, Mays, Blanks and Wright are all quick enough to beat the press and get easy looks or hit Collie and Myers on the other end. That's a very good Texas team we are playing there. So we play half court pressure. VS Houston in the SWC final, their guards are overmatched. Pressing is good because we overwhelm them and they can't handle it and we create our offense off the TO's. Vs Duke, we back off it early and then throw it on occasionally to disrupt Hurley, but he starts breaking it and we back off. That Duke team is the eventual national champ with Hurley, McCaffery and Hill handling the ball. In 92 @ LSU will open in a half court trap from hades. Can you imagine Day and Mayberry harrassing you at mid court when you pick up your dribble?! 

In '94 vs UK we have to get back on defense because they have the same mentality we do: push it and get open looks. UK is more bent on full court pressure that game as you can see that after scores, their bigs (Martinez or Prickett) immediately guard the in bounder. VS G'town Beck is picking the pt up 3/4 court. G'twon has quick guards as well so we are getting back on defense. 

Both of those iterations of Nolan's team's could quickly transition to offense off their defense but they could also get to offense quickly even off made baskets. How many college centers do you know who can throw and inbounds pass full court like Oliver Miller? Without watching every game of seven or eight seasons, it's hard to know exactly which one full-court pressed more. But if I had to guess I would say the May/Day teams did because the perimeter players on those teams were better full court defenders. Day, Mayberry, Howell, Hawkins, Bowers, and Murray were better as a group defending full court than Beck, Thurman, McDaniel, Dillard, Rimac, and Crawford. The players off the NC team that were most similar to the May Day teams defensively were McDaniel and Crawford. Nolan also had more beef up front on the NC team. The May Day teams had Miller and Credit, but the NC teams had Corliss, Big Stew, and then Tank and Lee.

Nolan got the most out of his personnel and he made adjustments when needed especially defensively.   

[HognitiveDissonance]

Arkansas' ability to play in the half court back in 94/95 was due to Corliss. Nolan did nothing different except have a once in a life time player.

Corliss was exceptional, yes, but without Darnell and Lee we don't win that championship. Size matters. Bigs are critical. Dwight Stewart was also the most underrated player on the team. A big(6'8, 260) who could bang down low and also drain threes. Amazing.

[WoodyHog]

I think the point that should be made more and isn't, is that while the 94/95 teams were great on the press and disrupting the other team, they could also slow it down and set up a very effective half-court game on both ends.  Nolan was a far superior coach to what we have in MA and that is usually the case with sequels.

The talent on the 94/95 team was also far superior to the talent on this team.  Let's not pin this all on style.

[eusebius]

The talent on the 94/95 team was also far superior to the talent on this team.  Let's not pin this all on style.

From 88-95 the classes that we brought in were loaded with five star and four star recruits (what would have been the equivalent then). But, not just that, the juco guys we got were top notch. And it wasn't just getting recruits, we got the right mix. And not only were they very good players, but they played really hard. Not only were they good athletes but they had high basketball IQ's. It was the perfect mix.

The reserves on those teams would be all SEC players now. Those teams were so good that we could lose guys like Roger Crawford and Craig Tyson and still win the NC.

The bar on that team is very high.

ESPN ranked that NC team as the 17th best ever in their 75th NCAA tournament poll. That's not too shabby.         

[WoodyHog]

From 88-95 the classes that we brought in were loaded with five star and four star recruits (what would have been the equivalent then). But, not just that, the juco guys we got were top notch. And it wasn't just getting recruits, we got the right mix. And not only were they very good players, but they played really hard. Not only were they good athletes but they had high basketball IQ's. It was the perfect mix.

The reserves on those teams would be all SEC players now. Those teams were so good that we could lose guys like Roger Crawford and Craig Tyson and still win the NC.

The bar on that team is very high.

ESPN ranked that NC team as the 17th best ever in their 75th NCAA tournament poll. That's not too shabby.         

Exactly my point.  People making comparisons to the 94/95 team to prove some point about this teams style and whether or not it can be/was effective need to tread lightly.  Maybe we should adopt the style employed by the Golden State Warriors -- they seem to be playing pretty well at the moment.

[HognitiveDissonance]

Exactly my point.  People making comparisons to the 94/95 team to prove some point about this teams style and whether or not it can be/was effective need to tread lightly.  Maybe we should adopt the style employed by the Golden State Warriors -- they seem to be playing pretty well at the moment.

Not worried about the NBA.
Mine was only a point about what seems to work well in the college game. Build inside/out. There are exceptions to the rule of guard-oriented teams(1997 Arizona comes to mind with Bibby/Dickerson/Simon) but the norm seems to be quality bigs with good guard play.
Read some interesting things from Jim Calhoun. Winner of three titles. His philosophy was to get that big man(men) and build around. Protect the rim. Get garbage baskets. Also some interesting quotes years ago from Jerry Tarkanian about pressing. Said he thought it just wore you down. He was more of a half-court trap type of team.
I guess I tend to agree with some of these guys like Tark and Calhoun, and as mentioned, our best teams fit the same pattern. Tough inside. Those teams had more success than our other more 'up-tempo' teams in the past 25 years. Interesting, and I think it's no coincidence.

[Kevin]

I wish we had shooters all over the floor like the Warriors

[ballz2thewall]

Not worried about the NBA.
Mine was only a point about what seems to work well in the college game. Build inside/out. There are exceptions to the rule of guard-oriented teams(1997 Arizona comes to mind with Bibby/Dickerson/Simon) but the norm seems to be quality bigs with good guard play.
Read some interesting things from Jim Calhoun. Winner of three titles. His philosophy was to get that big man(men) and build around. Protect the rim. Get garbage baskets. Also some interesting quotes years ago from Jerry Tarkanian about pressing. Said he thought it just wore you down. He was more of a half-court trap type of team.
I guess I tend to agree with some of these guys like Tark and Calhoun, and as mentioned, our best teams fit the same pattern. Tough inside. Those teams had more success than our other more 'up-tempo' teams in the past 25 years. Interesting, and I think it's no coincidence.

tark had a super badass team at the time in 1990.  the running style was dominated by he, nolan, and a few others.  larry johnson solidified that team as power forward much like korliss did at arkansas.  super tough; cat couldn't scratch them.  those were some fun days.

[eusebius]

Not worried about the NBA.
Mine was only a point about what seems to work well in the college game. Build inside/out. There are exceptions to the rule of guard-oriented teams(1997 Arizona comes to mind with Bibby/Dickerson/Simon) but the norm seems to be quality bigs with good guard play.
Read some interesting things from Jim Calhoun. Winner of three titles. His philosophy was to get that big man(men) and build around. Protect the rim. Get garbage baskets. Also some interesting quotes years ago from Jerry Tarkanian about pressing. Said he thought it just wore you down. He was more of a half-court trap type of team.
I guess I tend to agree with some of these guys like Tark and Calhoun, and as mentioned, our best teams fit the same pattern. Tough inside. Those teams had more success than our other more 'up-tempo' teams in the past 25 years. Interesting, and I think it's no coincidence.

Valid pts and Calhoun is a good example. Izzo and Calhoun and Calipari don't play a pretty brand of basketball. It's ugly and it's defensive oriented. The UConn/ Butler game a few years ago was 53-41. Heath was trying to bring that Big Ten mentality to Arkansas, but he never got those gritty guards like Izzo had with Cleaves, or Calhoun with Walker and Napier.

Pitino and Donovan have adjusted their styles over time to move more to a half court game. 1987 Pitino had Donovan and Del Ray Brooks on his Providence Final Four Team and they were more up tempo. But Donovan has become a defense first coach and looked for tough gritty pt guards like Taurean Green and then rim protectors like Horford and Noah. Pitino has done the same, tough guards (Siva and Smith) and rim protectors. Like you said, that seems to be blueprint for winning now.

Teams have also figured out how to defend the three better. Even in 1990, the 3 pt line had only been around three years, and coaches were still figuring out how to defend it. Now, if you can defend the three, rebound and play on ball defense, you can still shoot poorly and win. It's ugly and it's not always exciting, but it's what typically wins in the tourney.

BTW- speaking of shooting poorly and winning, the Hogs shot only 39% FG and 27.8% 3pt in the NC game vs Duke. But we forced 23 TO's and only had 12.       

[fanofthehog]

The '94 team didn't rely on the press and attack style.  They certainly employed it at times, but it was not all they ran.  That team could execute effectively in a half court offense.  The biggest difference was Corey Beck, he was an absolute stud at the PG position.  We are missing that guy right now.  Madden has had plenty of time to prove himself, he has not.  Maybe one of the younger guys will step up, but that is obviously our greatest deficiency at this point.

[Hogimus Prime]

Not worried about the NBA.
Mine was only a point about what seems to work well in the college game. Build inside/out. There are exceptions to the rule of guard-oriented teams(1997 Arizona comes to mind with Bibby/Dickerson/Simon) but the norm seems to be quality bigs with good guard play.
Read some interesting things from Jim Calhoun. Winner of three titles. His philosophy was to get that big man(men) and build around. Protect the rim. Get garbage baskets. Also some interesting quotes years ago from Jerry Tarkanian about pressing. Said he thought it just wore you down. He was more of a half-court trap type of team.
I guess I tend to agree with some of these guys like Tark and Calhoun, and as mentioned, our best teams fit the same pattern. Tough inside. Those teams had more success than our other more 'up-tempo' teams in the past 25 years. Interesting, and I think it's no coincidence.

That 97 Arizonia team did have a couple of 'bigs' in AJ Bramlett and Bennett Davidson that could rebound and protect the rim.

[downsouthhawg72]

I think CMA is to of a guard oriented coach to be able to recruit big guys that he needs & it's looking like he's either to stubborn or just not a good game management coach on the road to know when to play his big guys or where to play them together. Unfortunately for us it will stop him from being able to recruit any good type flight big guys to come here & that will be his down fall in the long run. It sucks because I like CMA & wanted him as the coach but I'm seeing way to many coaching mistakes on the road from him that he shouldn't be making.

He recruited Kingsley & Thompson because he needed big guys & he don't play them. He recruited PG's & at the end of the game he don't have them in the game to handle the ball. How many times will he let bad free throw shooters be in the game to get failed. Harris shouldn't be in the game to even be able to get failed & neither should J. Willaims. Harris lost us games last year because of free throw shooting & is doing it again this year. That's on CMA.

[Pork Twain]

The talent on the 94/95 team was also far superior to the talent on this team.  Let's not pin this all on style.

This not about talent, it is about style.   I am not comparing this team to that team and saying they could compete, they would get destroyed by any Nolan team.  I am saying that our inability to vary our style of play is hurting us.  We are not losing because we lack talent.

[WoodyHog]

This not about talent, it is about style.   I am not comparing this team to that team and saying they could compete, they would get destroyed by any Nolan team.  I am saying that our inability to vary our style of play is hurting us.  We are not losing because we lack talent.

My point is that trying to make style comparisons with a much more talented team can lead to the conclusion that the more talented team plays the "better" style, because they win more.  I agree with your general point that big man presence is needed, but basketball in general has moved to be a much more guard oriented game, so that a low post scorer isn't required anymore.  You need bigs for defense and rebounding, but a successful team can operate on offense without a low post scorer.  Countless examples of this in the college game and the NBA.

[Pigsear]

The MayDay teams lost in SWC play to teams like Baylor and TCU and Texas on the road. The common denominator again was poor shooting and interior play. Texas had servicable big men Locksley Collie and Panama Myers. Baylor out shot us and got some home cooking as they got to the line over and over. David Wesley was their key guard. TCU's Kevin Strickland hit 9 threes one year to beat us. In MayDays only SEC season, losses to bama and georgia had the same trend. Robert horry made it tough defensively and Latrell Sprewell and James Robinson shot the lights out. Georgia beat us in the SEC tourney on a pre mature five second count and Laterial Green had 30 in that game.

I just realized a retrospectively complained about the refs from games 25 years ago. Forrest City Joe is rubbing off on me😄

Speaking of FCJ, where's he at in all these conversations?

[Biggus Piggus]

Someone brought up Calhoun. He had some awesome guards.