Mick definitely needs to organize his classes better. UC should be bringing in about 3 per year. Loading up on a big class means if 2 or 3 aren't productive, you're hamstring for awhile and leave options limited in future classes. This year UC is bringing in two new players, and Kilpatrick will come off his redshirt year. That helps somewhat. Losing Belton and Biggie being what he is has not helped Cronin one bit. The lack of production inside is hurting UC badly. Once the team is able to smooth out the classes, things should get easier to make adjustments from year to year.
One thing I didn't like was us loading up with Mitchell, Davis, Dixon, Parker, and even Bishop. Guys who could score, but aren't pure (at the very least consistent) shooters.
Honestly, MC has got to figure out what kind of team UC will be. Tough and physical? Run and Gun, or a guard-oriented three point shooting team. It appears as though UC has zero identity.
A different line-up every night. Guys getting a lot of playing time....then none at tall. Guys like Wilks, Biggie, and Parker saw much more time early on, then their playing time has waned. IMO, the line-up and team identity should be ironed at fairly early on, as when that's when the experimentation should be taken place. For UC, it was a year long, ever-changing course in what not to do.
Is it a problem of mediocre talent, or a matter of players being unsure of their roles as it changed from game to game. UC went through periods of watching the Lance Hi-Lite show and standing around to stretches of Lance looking unsure of when to shoot. His passing was electric early on, and seemed to fall-off at the end. Parker had some very good games early on, then didn't play, then looked like a freshmen. Davis and Cash didn't start, then they did, then didn't get much PT, then after a solid game, would see more, then less.
Is there any wonder why our team looks disorganized on offense? I'm still not sure any other coach would have done things much differently, as you have to play the guys who are producing. I am, however, thinking that less experimentation would have had a more positive effect.
One thing I didn't like was us loading up with Mitchell, Davis, Dixon, Parker, and even Bishop. Guys who could score, but aren't pure (at the very least consistent) shooters.
Honestly, MC has got to figure out what kind of team UC will be. Tough and physical? Run and Gun, or a guard-oriented three point shooting team. It appears as though UC has zero identity.
A different line-up every night. Guys getting a lot of playing time....then none at tall. Guys like Wilks, Biggie, and Parker saw much more time early on, then their playing time has waned. IMO, the line-up and team identity should be ironed at fairly early on, as when that's when the experimentation should be taken place. For UC, it was a year long, ever-changing course in what not to do.
Is it a problem of mediocre talent, or a matter of players being unsure of their roles as it changed from game to game. UC went through periods of watching the Lance Hi-Lite show and standing around to stretches of Lance looking unsure of when to shoot. His passing was electric early on, and seemed to fall-off at the end. Parker had some very good games early on, then didn't play, then looked like a freshmen. Davis and Cash didn't start, then they did, then didn't get much PT, then after a solid game, would see more, then less.
Is there any wonder why our team looks disorganized on offense? I'm still not sure any other coach would have done things much differently, as you have to play the guys who are producing. I am, however, thinking that less experimentation would have had a more positive effect.