Micks Philosophy needs to change.

[WAITE HOYT 2]

So, she had no faith in Mick being able to give him the discipline he needed?

if coaches are responsible for disciplining our kids we are in a lot of trouble.

 

[JumpinJack5]

JJ when I was in high school early 70's Bacon was the school.

Purcell wasn't too shabby either, they had that guy named Roger Staubach, he turned out to be a pretty decent player. We had Bron Bacevich, coaching icon, and the only team in the state of Ohio to beat LeBron while he was in high school.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Purcell wasn't too shabby either, they had that guy named Roger Staubach, he turned out to be a pretty decent player. We had Bron Bacevich, coaching icon, and the only team in the state of Ohio to beat LeBron while he was in high school.

Roger was before my time. I was a freshman when Derrick Dickey was a senior.

 

[JumpinJack5]

So, she had no faith in Mick being able to give him the discipline he needed?

Maybe Mick should be there to help him with homework, do his laundry for him, read him a bedtime story, and monitor his eating habits. Give me a break, these are freaking college kids, even if you wanted to you couldn't control everything that they do, you couldn't. Half of college is learning to live on your own and be self-sufficient, and if you can't do that, you should live at home, go to a community college/find a trade school, or get a job. College is so watered down right now because we live in a society that stresses that everyone should go to college. College isn't for everyone and we need to realize that some people would be better off in a community college or trade school

 

[JumpinJack5]

Roger was before my time. I was a freshman when Derrick Dickey was a senior.

Who did Bacon have at the time? Was Jim Rice there? I know Tom Merkle was there, he was a great athlete that you might remember.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Who did Bacon have at the time? Was Jim Rice there? I know Tom Merkle was there, he was a great athlete that you might remember.

Merkle sounds familiar. My niece graduated from there last year and my nephew is a junior.

 

[ralph1950]

Defense wins championships. Pitt averages 82 a game, Mick's defense holds them to 43. UC wins!

 

[TheLongHaul]

With all that talent, the NBA wanted no part of him. I'll bet Chane plays in the NBA. You want to take that bet? Don't you think the NBA scouts would take the fact that he was some huge focal point of all defenses into consideration? Wonder why that didn't impress them? If he was a focal point, it was probably because, as usual, nobody else on the team could shoot. Why not double the only guy who might hurt you? Again, the NBA is the ultimate judge. They didn't think much of Yancy's talent.

Chane isn't going to sniff the NBA either. Yancy produced way more than Chane has to this point, I really don't care about their NBA careers.

Oh, and you don't think Yancy got doubled? Proves you aren't really watching the games.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

You know we are so focused on attendance has anyone looked to see if attendance across college basketball is down. I ask that because the rule changes this year are implemented to put more offense in the game.

What prompted me to think about that was a article on ESPN college Basketball web page about attendance at Kentucky dr ending down every year since 2008.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Men's College Basketball Nation Blog
Blogs HomeMen's College Basketball NationNorth Carolina
Why is Kentucky's attendance declining?
December, 17, 2013
DEC 17
1:00
PM ET
By Eamonn Brennan | ESPN.com
RECOMMEND88TWEET10COMMENTS18EMAILPRINT
In 2008-09, Kentucky men's basketball coach Billy Gillispie led the Wildcats to a 22-14 record and an appearance in the NIT. Kentucky fans were furious. In March of 2009, Gillispie was fired; that afternoon, local media chased him around as he pretended to talk on the phone. It was hilarious and sad, a proud program reduced to a bad impression of TMZ.

John Calipari stepped into that breach a few weeks later, and no one has laughed at Kentucky much since. In 2009-10, with John Wall, Eric Bledsoe, and DeMarcus Cousins, Calipari won 35 games and went to the Elite Eight. In 2010-11, a slow UK start eventually turned into a 29-9 record and a Brandon Knight-led Final Four trip. In 2011-12, Calipari's 38-2 team was one of the most dominant in college hoops history.

[+] Enlarge
Mark Zerof/USA TODAY Sports
Attendance at Rupp Arena, which can fit 23,000 fans, is declining.
Last season's NIT disaster was a … setback, let's call it. But so what? In four years Calipari has a) been to two Final Fours, b) won a national title, c) recruited an absurd percentage of the nation's best talent, d) sent most of that talent to the NBA draft lottery and e) made Kentucky men's basketball a household name in every conceivable way.

And yet, despite all that, Kentucky's early-season attendance is declining.

That's what Lexington Herald-Leader writer John Clay discovered last week, when he compared attendance numbers for the first seven games of the 2013-14 season to their equivalents in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012. Clay's charts (at the link) offer up the numbers, and they point to a clear trend: Fewer people are showing up for UK basketball games this season than in Gillispie's final season. Huh?

Of course, a significant caveat applies: This is still Kentucky. Rupp Arena is one of the largest college hoops arenas in the country, and the Wildcats have led the nation in total attendance pretty much every season for the decade and a half [PDF]. (Before 1997, Kentucky frequently ranked No. 2 behind Syracuse; those two have been trading the belt since 1979. Syracuse was No. 1 in 2005 -- the only time since the mid-90s Kentucky hasn't finished first.) A decline in attendance at Rupp Arena is like a decline in "Call of Duty" sales: True or not, there are still a ton of people playing Call of Duty.

But, still, the numbers are there, and they are undeniable. The most interesting question is: Why? Clay's theories -- "television, or the lack of an enticing home schedule, or a lack of connection with the ever-changing roster, or the students" -- seem to represent the general consensus among Kentucky fans, at least those who responded to John on Facebook. There is also a fair amount of understandable frustration regarding this season's disappointing team -- frustration Calipari attempted to assuage in a blog post Tuesday morning:
I know we have to be more organized, our mission has to be clearer to the players, and I have to be less emotional during the game because we’ve got a bunch of young kids. I can’t put winning before their growth. … This is about getting these players to think a different way, to think about serving each other. My job is to serve them. Their job is to serve each other. …. I just have to stay patient and continue loving them as I challenge them and raise the bar -- no easy task when you’re dealing with 18-year-olds. These are good kids. They want to learn. We are going to be fine. Just remember it’s a process. Enjoy the ride, Big Blue Nation, because we need you.

Is this the hidden dynamic in Kentucky's attendance blips? It must be difficult to grow attached to a new team every season, and then turn that roster over entirely the following fall; a good number of people wrote some version of this theory to Clay in their responses. Is that the risk of Calipari's high-stakes talent experiment: That fans grow more distant and clinical, too?

I doubt it. If anything, the most likely culprits are the economic factors/ticket prices, TV availability and Kentucky's soft home nonconference schedule, if not necessarily in that order. The simplest explanations are usually the best, right? What am I missing?
RECOMMEND88TWEET10COMMENTS18EMAILPRINT

 

[TheLongHaul]

You know we are so focused on attendance has anyone looked to see if attendance across college basketball is down. I ask that because the rule changes this year are implemented to put more offense in the game.

What prompted me to think about that was a article on ESPN college Basketball web page about attendance at Kentucky dr ending down every year since 2008.

You seriously don't know? Of course attendance is down across the board. College basketball is becoming harder and harder to watch and throw in escalating ticket prices and HD tv and this is what you get. I still love to go and ticket prices for the cheap seats at 5/3 are still a good deal, but the play is weighing heavily on me.

 

[All we do is Guyn]

Alvin Mitchell, Octavious Ellis, Yancy "the Brown Bomber" Gates.....Mick has had his bad apples too. And, it was nice of the NCAA to finally change their ridiculous guidelines of not giving graduation credit for JUCOS. You can snow the unimformed with that 0% graduation rate BS Ralph, but we know the real story.

The Ellis dismissal is something that we know almost nothing about. There was a fight at a bar allegedly, and it happened not too long after a brawl against Xavier. Someone had to go to set an example.

Also, let's not forget that Ellis is a guy that went through an incredibly troubling childhood. Just hate to see people bashing him with no real evidence

 

[ucswais]

Just sayin all the apologist throw out the same junk about being a great recruiter, rebuilding a program, beating good programs... yet when you look at what matters he hasnt done squat. I'm prepared at this point to get dominated by uconn, memphis, and possibly temple and smu year in and year out under this leadership.... but hey fourth or fifth isn't last, right?

Maybe we're all confused on what matters then. Tell us what matters. I see UC winning games, making the tournament 3 straight years, making a sweet 16, making a BE title game, graduating players, running a clean program, and being consistently relevant. That stuff doesn't matter?

Only championships and final 4s matter? If so, a lot of coaches need to go based on that standard.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Maybe we're all confused on what matters then. Tell us what matters. I see UC winning games, making the tournament 3 straight years, making a sweet 16, making a BE title game, graduating players, running a clean program, and being consistently relevant. That stuff doesn't matter?

Only championships and final 4s matter? If so, a lot of coaches need to go based on that standard.

very well said!!!!

 

[Bcatfollower]

Maybe we're all confused on what matters then. Tell us what matters. I see UC winning games, making the tournament 3 straight years, making a sweet 16, making a BE title game, graduating players, running a clean program, and being consistently relevant. That stuff doesn't matter?

Only championships and final 4s matter? If so, a lot of coaches need to go based on that standard.

I never said championships and final 4's...I was referring to not even being able to win the conference or conference tourney. Everyone isn't confused on what matters, but there are a few on this board that are OK with existing in mediocrity. I guess finishing no better than 4th in the conference excites you....or just making the NCAA...perhaps you root for U.C. to be that Cinderella that makes in to a sweet 16....

I think more people want an actual contender for conference and ncaa...not borderline.

I mean...ohio U made the sweet 16 the same year we did....

 

[UCBearcats]

Maybe we're all confused on what matters then. Tell us what matters. I see UC winning games, making the tournament 3 straight years, making a sweet 16, making a BE title game, graduating players, running a clean program, and being consistently relevant. That stuff doesn't matter?

Only championships and final 4s matter? If so, a lot of coaches need to go based on that standard.

I guess it depends on what program you're talking about. If you don't win or compete for national championships at UK you get fired. Cooper got run out of OSU because he couldn't beat Michigan. Texas fired Mack Brown and they played for Big 12 championship 2 weeks ago. Their are certain places that don't accept anything less than greatness. It's those types of expectations from the fans that keep those programs great. If the expectations weren't there it would be easy for the those places to slip into mediocrity yet they never seem to for too long.

I always thought UC basketball was one of the those places. I know there's a lot of you that don't think UC has the right to have those expectations but there are many people that have them none the less. The way I look at it what's the point of even rooting for your team if you don't think they have a tiny chance to win a championship? UC should be competitive for championships, not tourneys. Mick even said when he got hired that was his goal.

Beating Pitt last night was great but it doesn't change one bit the way I feel about Mick and the future of this program. There are too many folks who tend to look at the last game or 2 and feel good or bad depending on the results. I'm looking at it from a larger point of view and I'm still not happy with what I see.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

I don't think you're being logical. There is nothing logical about watching the same struggles year after year and expecting them to chang with the same person at the helm. Bad offense every year, a couple decent recruits among many average/below average. Zero conf championships, zero conf tourny championships, one first round, one second round, and one third roundin the ncaa.

That is your quote. Same struggles year after year, like getting to the tourney? Please look up how many schools have made the NCAA 3 years in a row. We are in pretty decent company. I bet Ohio U isn't on there, or X, or UK.

So if he has so many avg/below avg players and gets to the NCAA, must be a pretty good coach then.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

I guess it depends on what program you're talking about. If you don't win or compete for national championships at UK you get fired. Cooper got run out of OSU because he couldn't beat Michigan. Texas fired Mack Brown and they played for Big 12 championship 2 weeks ago. Their are certain places that don't accept anything less than greatness. It's those types of expectations from the fans that keep those programs great. If the expectations weren't there it would be easy for the those places to slip into mediocrity yet they never seem to for too long.

I always thought UC basketball was one of the those places. I know there's a lot of you that don't think UC has the right to have those expectations but there are many people that have them none the less. The way I look at it what's the point of even rooting for your team if you don't think they have a tiny chance to win a championship? UC should be competitive for championships, not tourneys. Mick even said when he got hired that was his goal.

Beating Pitt last night was great but it doesn't change one bit the way I feel about Mick and the future of this program. There are too many folks who tend to look at the last game or 2 and feel good or bad depending on the results. I'm looking at it from a larger point of view and I'm still not happy with what I see.

If you are not happy, here is how to change that. Get 10,000 of your closest friends and go to every home game until the end of the year, make signs that say how you feel, join the 1200 club and talk to Whit and tell him what you think. Until then out athletic dept simply doesn't have the money to fire MC and hire someone, unlike the athletic departments at OSU, Mich etc...

"What is the answer to 99 out of 100 questions??....Money" Gordon Gecko

 

[JumpinJack5]

Maybe we're all confused on what matters then. Tell us what matters. I see UC winning games, making the tournament 3 straight years, making a sweet 16, making a BE title game, graduating players, running a clean program, and being consistently relevant. That stuff doesn't matter?

Only championships and final 4s matter? If so, a lot of coaches need to go based on that standard.

If that were the standard, there would only be 5-10 coaches with a job in the whole country right now. Mick has done a nice job and I am happy with the gradual progress. I hope he can start to take the program to the next level now!

 

[#BearcatNation]

I never said championships and final 4's...I was referring to not even being able to win the conference or conference tourney. Everyone isn't confused on what matters, but there are a few on this board that are OK with existing in mediocrity. I guess finishing no better than 4th in the conference excites you....or just making the NCAA...perhaps you root for U.C. to be that Cinderella that makes in to a sweet 16....

I think more people want an actual contender for conference and ncaa...not borderline.

I mean...ohio U made the sweet 16 the same year we did....

You're still not getting the point. Nobody is "satisfied" with the program. We all want better and expect better. The point is, a lot of people make it sound like we're struggling to have a winning record. Not at all the case. This year's recruiting class along with next year's should excite you. If it doesn't, are you expecting all kinds of 5 star guys? I'm not willing to throw in the towel on Cronin with so many young guys coming in. You have no idea how many of those guys would transfer/commit elsewhere. Not willing to set the program back again. If in a couple years these guys haven't panned out, then fine, maybe its time to start from scratch. But at this point, that doesn't make sense to me.