Nebraska

[L-T]

Thank you. I have enjoyed watching the Bearcats most of the time over the last few years and will always pull for them.

This program holds a special place in my heart, as I'm sure is the case with everyone who posts here. I love going to every game, and can't wait till 9:00 Wednesday gets here. But, even though I enjoy the games, there is definitely soomething missing from how much enjoyment I get from the games in recent years. It's just the knowledge that when I go to a game, I always know that we'll rarely get pumped up by the play of the offense. 5/3 will rarely go into a frenzy from something the offense does. You just don't get the same adrenaline rush from defensive excellence. Good defense is entertaining, but it is not a replacement for 3-pointers, dunks, fast breaks, great passing, dazzling ball skills, etc.

The best way to explain it is there was a time when if I had a seat or two available ( and I have premium seats near the floor), it would take one call to find a taker. This year, as in recent years, I'll literally go thru 10 phone calls and various people at the office and can't give them away. Eventually, I'll finally find someone to take them. I typically get 2 reactions...not interested because of the weak opponent, or not interested in watching a team who can't score. We win all the time. We go to the NCAA four years in a row. But, we still generate very little interest from the fanbase. Now we're downsizing the arena. No big splashes from a recruiting standpoint, and an anemic offensive identity over many years has us where we are today, a program with no buzz. We win. We're steady. We win with less talent. Our defense is always amazing. In spite of many positives, you can't give away tickets. Anyone who thinks the style of play and talent of incoming recruits isn't a big part of that is just being unrealistic.

 

[Doogle]

From Bob Huggins to Mick Cronin, the Bearcats' identity has always been effort and defense. Huggins had teams that won simply because they played harder than anyone else. Cronin has continued that to some extent.

The problem emerges when your ENTIRE identity is effort and defense and nothing more. Defense and playing hard can get you into the tourney but I wonder if UC will ever truly contend for anything but the occasional Sweet 16 the way they recruit and play. In the NCAA tourney, EVERYONE plays harder and EVERYONE ramps up their defense. You need a few guys that know how to create offense for themselves and others, and put the ball in the hole. I always go back to that Logan/McIlroy/Stokes team that got the #1 seed and lost in 2OT to UCLA in the round of 32. They worked hard. They fought. They had a good scorer in Logan. UCLA was really undeserving, they went half speed for most of that season. But in the tourney, they played harder. Turned up the D on Logan. And had guys like Kapono, Barnes and Gadzuric that were talented and able to score. And all the hard work and effort of an entire season ended in the 2nd round in Pittsburgh.

UC ran decent offense occasionally against Nebraska. They got a ton of wide open 3s and good inside looks. But I don't care how good you run the offense, how great your D is or how hard you play...if your shooters can't even catch rim on open 3s, your guards blow 5 foot floaters and your interior players can't finish layups, you're not going to beat anyone.

I don't think what we saw Saturday was a true indication of what the guys are capable of, but at the same time we have seen this movie quite a bit in the Cronin era. Every team needs a guy or two that can shoot and score and exhibit some semblance of a basketball IQ. Too often, our teams are lacking in those areas. Am I frustrated? Yes. Will I be watching the game Wednesday night on the edge of my seat? Yes. Just hoping for Mick to realize a change in recruiting philosophy is needed at some point, vis a vi Huggins' epiphany and subsequent scholly offer to Logan.

 

[L-T]

From Bob Huggins to Mick Cronin, the Bearcats' identity has always been effort and defense. Huggins had teams that won simply because they played harder than anyone else. Cronin has continued that to some extent.

The problem emerges when your ENTIRE identity is effort and defense and nothing more. Defense and playing hard can get you into the tourney but I wonder if UC will ever truly contend for anything but the occasional Sweet 16 the way they recruit and play. In the NCAA tourney, EVERYONE plays harder and EVERYONE ramps up their defense. You need a few guys that know how to create offense for themselves and others, and put the ball in the hole. I always go back to that Logan/McIlroy/Stokes team that got the #1 seed and lost in 2OT to UCLA in the round of 32. They worked hard. They fought. They had a good scorer in Logan. UCLA was really undeserving, they went half speed for most of that season. But in the tourney, they played harder. Turned up the D on Logan. And had guys like Kapono, Barnes and Gadzuric that were talented and able to score. And all the hard work and effort of an entire season ended in the 2nd round in Pittsburgh.

UC ran decent offense occasionally against Nebraska. They got a ton of wide open 3s and good inside looks. But I don't care how good you run the offense, how great your D is or how hard you play...if your shooters can't even catch rim on open 3s, your guards blow 5 foot floaters and your interior players can't finish layups, you're not going to beat anyone.

I don't think what we saw Saturday was a true indication of what the guys are capable of, but at the same time we have seen this movie quite a bit in the Cronin era. Every team needs a guy or two that can shoot and score and exhibit some semblance of a basketball IQ. Too often, our teams are lacking in those areas. Am I frustrated? Yes. Will I be watching the game Wednesday night on the edge of my seat? Yes. Just hoping for Mick to realize a change in recruiting philosophy is needed at some point, vis a vi Huggins' epipfhany and subsequent scholly offer to Logan.

Nice summary. Agree with everything you said.

 

[jbreeds1]

This season may be the perfect template to all rational Bearcat fans. So many moving parts on this team. You guys want to jump ship already?! Not me. This team will figure it out. Just trust the process. Guys will step up. I guarantee it...

 

[TheLongHaul]

Exactly. Not that Mick and the coaching staff aren't at least partially to blame for that class, they went 0 for 3 with Jermaine, Shaq, and GeLawn.

Plus, Jermaine Lawrence was supposed to be a badass sophomore this year.

The 2011 class and 2012 class were complete busts. 2011 was supposed to be a very good class but we know how that's gone. It's really hurting this program right now.

 

[Robert]

The 2011 class and 2012 class were complete busts. 2011 was supposed to be a very good class but we know how that's gone. It's really hurting this program right now.

The best player in the 2011 class is the guy who left the program for 2 years. Go figure...

 

[Robert]

This season may be the perfect template to all rational Bearcat fans. So many moving parts on this team. You guys want to jump ship already?! Not me. This team will figure it out. Just trust the process. Guys will step up. I guarantee it...

Who says anyone is jumping ship? Not like I'm going to convert to an X fan because the team is struggling. I will watch every game regardless.

 

[L-T]

The best player in the 2011 class is the guy who left the program for 2 years. Go figure...

Wow, isn't that ironic?

 

[L-T]

This program is stable and on fairly solid ground and is winning. Are we primed to make any deep March runs. Absolutely not. Can we get lucky and do it? Absolutely, just like George Mason, Virginia Commowealth, Butler etc. If we're happy with stability, then we're right where we should be. If the goal is to get the better recruits and be amongst the best of the best, i.e. great attendance, highly rated recruiting classes, highly ranked every year, deep runs in March from time to time, be in a Power 5 Conf., etc., then we're not that close. The difference of opinion in here is basically between those that like stability versus those that believe we're a lot better than just being a nice stable program that wins a lot more games than they lose.

Many argue that by making the tournament every year, we're going to have those years where everything suddenly clicks in March and we make a nice run. In other words, let's take stability and wait for those lucky years to occur. I would rather be a proactive program that is capable of the March runs every single year, and wait for the bad luck to prevent it from happening.

 

[waterhead]

Sanders is 56% in his career and Shaq is 60%. And I'll bet you anything you want that Ellis and Clark don't hit over 70% when combining their attempts. I think they'll both be in the high 50s range.

You and I can go back and forth on FT numbers all day but my point is going to be the same. I think our FT shooting will be fine (relatively)...I guess you don't. I'm not going to pull stats after the worst game of the year and act like those numbers are indicative of our shooting capabilities. It's the same type of early season alarmism sh!t that happened last year when KJ started off slow with 3's. Some people wanted him not to shoot another three all year. I just told people to be patient and he would start making shots. He ended up being pretty good after starting off so horribly.

I have bigger concerns than FT shooting. The pessimists come out after a bad game and the optimists come out after a good game. The realists will try not to expect either of those is going to be the norm...at least until it becomes the norm.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

This program is stable and on fairly solid ground and is winning. Are we primed to make any deep March runs. Absolutely not. Can we get lucky and do it? Absolutely, just like George Mason, Virginia Commowealth, Butler etc. If we're happy with stability, then we're right where we should be. If the goal is to get the better recruits and be amongst the best of the best, i.e. great attendance, highly rated recruiting classes, highly ranked every year, deep runs in March from time to time, be in a Power 5 Conf., etc., then we're not that close. The difference of opinion in here is basically between those that like stability versus those that believe we're a lot better than just being a nice stable program that wins a lot more games than they lose.

Many argue that by making the tournament every year, we're going to have those years where everything suddenly clicks in March and we make a nice run. In other words, let's take stability and wait for those lucky years to occur. I would rather be a proactive program that is capable of the March runs every single year, and wait for the bad luck to prevent it from happening.

what is your solution

 

[TheLongHaul]

You and I can go back and forth on FT numbers all day but my point is going to be the same. I think our FT shooting will be fine (relatively)...I guess you don't. I'm not going to pull stats after the worst game of the year and act like those numbers are indicative of our shooting capabilities. It's the same type of early season alarmism sh!t that happened last year when KJ started off slow with 3's. Some people wanted him not to shoot another three all year. I just told people to be patient and he would start making shots. He ended up being pretty good after starting off so horribly.

I have bigger concerns than FT shooting. The pessimists come out after a bad game and the optimists come out after a good game. The realists will try not to expect either of those is going to be the norm...at least until it becomes the norm.

In your opinion, at what point does it become the norm? I'm not too concerned about FT shooting yet, but it has already cost them an important game. But I would consider their offensive struggles the norm, not only for this season but for the entirety of Mick's tenure. I'm sure the offense will get better as the season progresses, but I'm not confident at all it will get drastically better, and the competition gets better too.

 

[BearcatSpaniard513]

I don't think anyone on here is arguing we have a great offense. It needs a lot of work and possibly an entirely new approach. The thing is we do not need a top 10 offense to be successful, just a top 50 or so. Our solid defense with the turnovers we create and the rebounding we fight for win us games. Mick's recruits are long and athletic. Let them run! Shaq's value would double in an uptempo offense and we have the depth to do it...

 

[L-T]

what is your solution

1) Put increased focus on the offensive side of the ball, not only in game planning & style of play, but in recruiting, to become a more balanced program capable of winning with either offense or defense....instead of having to rely on a top shelf defensive effort to squeak out victories. Maintain our identity of out-working everyone else and playing tough defense, but lose the identity of being a program that ignores offense.

2) The increased attention to offense should lead over time to being able to lure more offensively skilled players to sign on the dotted line. This, in turn, will lead to the advancement of more of our players into the NBA, which in turn provides immediate exposure and increased awareness of the program, thereby leading to greater expectations to offer recruits, which in the end will hopefully lead to better and better recruits choosing to come here.

3) As coach, I'm among the top 30 best paid coaches in America, so I should be expected to recruit at that level as well. In 2015 recruiting, the following programs, who are at or below our level of excellence, have landed TOP 20 recruiting classes.....Texas A&M, Fla. St., Maryland, Memphis, Illinois, Washington, Auburn, Oregon St, Wake Forest, Virginia tech, Villinova. For 2014, the list includes Xavier, UNLV, Georgia Tech, Seton Hall, Missouri, Stanford, San Diego St., S. California. From 2009 to 2013, the following teams made at least one appearance in the Top 20 recruiting classes....Xavier, Villinova, Georgia Tech, Oklahoma, Illinois, Marquette, Clemson, Memphis, N.C. St. Missouri, Tennessee, Wake Forest, Stanford, St. Johns, Alabama, Arkansas, Miss. St., Virg. Tech, Okla. St., Washington, Pitt., Baylor, Providence, Maryland, Houston, Virginia, Purdue, LSU, and SMU. Notice, I've left out the 10-15 or so programs that are there every year. During this whole period, we haven't cracked the top 20 once. In 2014, we got to #21 based largely on landing a 5-star Jermaine lawrence, but then we couldn't keep him here. With a Top 30 coaching salary, and a Top 20 all-time program, recruiting classes consistently ranked below 30 should be unacceptable. Therefore, the obvious solution to all problems is to do whatever it takes to recruit better...bottom line.

4) Become a program that attracts fans and builds loyalty by competing for the best recruits annually, and playing the game with excellence on both sides of the court.

 

[TheLongHaul]

I don't think anyone on here is arguing we have a great offense. It needs a lot of work and possibly an entirely new approach. The thing is we do not need a top 10 offense to be successful, just a top 50 or so. Our solid defense with the turnovers we create and the rebounding we fight for win us games. Mick's recruits are long and athletic. Let them run! Shaq's value would double in an uptempo offense and we have the depth to do it...

FYI - they have never had a top 50 offense so don't be too hopeful that happens.

I agree about letting them run, but that is not Mick's style even though he recruits for it (and often says that's his style).

 

[jacobkdoyle]

You and I can go back and forth on FT numbers all day but my point is going to be the same. I think our FT shooting will be fine (relatively)...I guess you don't. I'm not going to pull stats after the worst game of the year and act like those numbers are indicative of our shooting capabilities. It's the same type of early season alarmism sh!t that happened last year when KJ started off slow with 3's. Some people wanted him not to shoot another three all year. I just told people to be patient and he would start making shots. He ended up being pretty good after starting off so horribly.

I have bigger concerns than FT shooting. The pessimists come out after a bad game and the optimists come out after a good game. The realists will try not to expect either of those is going to be the norm...at least until it becomes the norm.

I wasn't pulling numbers from the worst game of the year. I pulled Shaq and Sanders career numbers and pointed out that Ellis is at 40% in the last 6 games (25 attempts). I think anyone on here knows I'm not some pessimistic fan waiting to cherry pick stats to make the team look bad.

 

[waterhead]

I wasn't pulling numbers from the worst game of the year. I pulled Shaq and Sanders career numbers and pointed out that Ellis is at 40% in the last 6 games (25 attempts). I think anyone on here knows I'm not some pessimistic fan waiting to cherry pick stats to make the team look bad.

Here is your original post that I responded to.

Originally Posted by jacobkdoyle View Post
Not worried about FT? Ellis started 16-19 and is 10 for his last 25. Shaq and Sanders are in their 4th year and shooting 55% and 33%. KJ is at 50%. We are barely above 65% as a team. That is horrible. We are worse in our 8th game than the first. People keep talking about "when we improve" and "wait til February"...hate to say it, but these guys are flat out bad players. Shots that hit nothing but backboard aren't suddenly going to be hitting nothing but net. That's the truth. And we have to watch most of these guy struggle for years and years to come. Caupain, Clark, Evans, and maybe Moore are our only ones with any hope.

It didn't have anything about their career numbers until I responded. It also sounds kind of pessimistic...but that's just my opinion. And I didn't say you pulled numbers FROM the worst game I said AFTER the worst game.

 

[waterhead]

In your opinion, at what point does it become the norm? I'm not too concerned about FT shooting yet, but it has already cost them an important game. But I would consider their offensive struggles the norm, not only for this season but for the entirety of Mick's tenure. I'm sure the offense will get better as the season progresses, but I'm not confident at all it will get drastically better, and the competition gets better too.

I don't want you to confuse that I think we will be fine at FT's with what I feel about the long term trend of scoring. We have seen the norm for offense in general and it's not good. As for FT's I would give it a half season before we have a good idea where the %'s are going to end up. KJ won't end up at 50% and JS won't end up at 33%...that is not the norm. Ellis and Clark...too early to tell but I think they will be OK for bigs.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Here is your original post that I responded to.

Originally Posted by jacobkdoyle View Post
Not worried about FT? Ellis started 16-19 and is 10 for his last 25. Shaq and Sanders are in their 4th year and shooting 55% and 33%. KJ is at 50%. We are barely above 65% as a team. That is horrible. We are worse in our 8th game than the first. People keep talking about "when we improve" and "wait til February"...hate to say it, but these guys are flat out bad players. Shots that hit nothing but backboard aren't suddenly going to be hitting nothing but net. That's the truth. And we have to watch most of these guy struggle for years and years to come. Caupain, Clark, Evans, and maybe Moore are our only ones with any hope.

It didn't have anything about their career numbers until I responded. It also sounds kind of pessimistic...but that's just my opinion. And I didn't say you pulled numbers FROM the worst game I said AFTER the worst game.

That particular post is pessimistic. And for good reason. But in general, I don't just wait for a bad game to point the bad stuff out. I don't have an agenda like that. I just think it is compmetely unacceptable for these guys to be so bad on free shots. Whether it is the last 6 games for Ellis, this season for Sanders, the whole career for Sanders, this season for Shaq, etc...it is all bad and needs to be brought up imo since it has already come back to bite us in the a$$. Why are you so confident that this will get better? We have already shot 167 as a team. That's a pretty big sample size.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Also, if you factor in exhibition games, Shaq had a 1-6 game from the line and we were 36-56 for 64%. We are 65% through 8 games on the regular season. How much is that realistically going to increase? Why isn't that the norm? Just bc that number doesn't suit you? After 223 attempts, sadly I think 65% is right in our zone. You can call me optimistic, pessimistic or realistic...but these are the numbers. They aren't good and they don't lie