Tulsa

[cincyguy13]

UCLA has the 11th best offense in the country. What ever Mick is doing over there, he should probably keep doing.

They just beat top 25 Colorado without their best NBA prospect who is now done for the season.


Recruiting to the AAC is absolutely brutal. And John Brannen is starting to realize that. His first failure in recruiting was recruiting a good recruiter to come to UC.. He said na, Ill stay in the SEC and at Alabama. And now we have a full on Mid Major staff, like his number one guy is not a young cat, he is a career long mid major coach.

But people on this very board used to hammer Mick's recruiting. They said Mick couldn't recruit and I always said that recruiting to this busted ass misfit league is always going to be a challenge. John Brannen is getting a lot of No's now. and now that we suck and look pitiful, its going to be harder to get those recruits.

But man, what mick is doing in year 2 with players who are just average by UCLA standards, is pretty remarkable. The dude now has a top 11 offense and yet doesn't have a 5 star on the team which is not normal for UCLA.



My question is: Why are bama, ucla & Arkansas better than us and seemingly on a better projected path than us??? All 3 of those schools were in worse shape than UC when they all took over.

Why are those schools picking up faster than UC?

I don’t know about bama, and Arkansas but I know UCLA had 8 4 stars on their roster last year. I’d said that would be a good place to start if you are looking for a reason.

 

[justinhub2003]

This is what I’ve been saying for two years. You don’t have to play cronin ball to win. You don’t have to win on toughness. Be good at basketball. There are other ways.

I think what you're quickly finding out is Mick adapts to his league, the players he get to play for his current and the style that works for that league.


UCLA is 11 in offense and 66 in defense

I think Mick adapted to playing in the big east and it being a tough league. It worked, it kept him competitive. And then when we got moved to the AAC, he kept that style up because it also worked in the AAC and it worked at an even higher level. Mick's success in this league now fundamentally changed the entire league to play that style. Houston made its success by Mimicking what Mick Did with toughness, defense and rebounding. USF followed suit. WSU always played tough and defensive.

Mick defined a league that John Brannen recruits, so far have struggled in.


Now, Mick is at UCLA, he has access to players who have far more offensive upside. So offensively they are much improved. But Mick does 2 things well no matter what and thats offensive rebound and protect the ball.


I think Mick did exactly what it took to win in this league and also did the best with what he could get to come to this league. And the consistency speaks for itself. He is the coach at UCLA because of his successes at UC.

 

[justinhub2003]

I don’t know about bama, and Arkansas but I know UCLA had 8 4 stars on their roster last year. I’d said that would be a good place to start if you are looking for a reason.

But stars don't matter right? You told me the other day they don't. We saw those guys play and they sucked..

Here is the record of UCLA before Mick got there: 17-16


Mick's group of 3 stars and mid major beat that team by 29 frickin points. They sucked.

And the team that UC beat by 29 points was lead by Moses brown, Jaylen hands & Kris Wilkes, all 5 stars, who all decided to go pro and leave when Mick took over.


These were losing players recruited by a losing coach.

 

[cincyguy13]

But stars don't matter right? You told me the other day they don't. We saw those guys play and they sucked..

Here is the record of UCLA before Mick got there: 17-16


Mick's group of 3 stars and mid major beat that team by 29 frickin points. They sucked.

And the team that UC beat by 29 points was lead by Moses brown, Jaylen hands & Kris Wilkes, all 5 stars, who all decided to go pro and leave when Mick took over.


These were losing players recruited by a losing coach.

When did I say that? Rankings matter. It’s more of a sure thing to have a 5 star and more of a outlier the lower you go.

 

[cincyguy13]

But stars don't matter right? You told me the other day they don't. We saw those guys play and they sucked..

Here is the record of UCLA before Mick got there: 17-16


Mick's group of 3 stars and mid major beat that team by 29 frickin points. They sucked.

And the team that UC beat by 29 points was lead by Moses brown, Jaylen hands & Kris Wilkes, all 5 stars, who all decided to go pro and leave when Mick took over.


These were losing players recruited by a losing coach.

I’m fine with 3 star players at this level. They take time to develop. Mix in some higher ceiling / 4 star kids and you can win. That’s obviously where you have to start. That’s why it’s hard to get a finished product in a year and a half

 

[sedziobs]

How is any of this relevant? How about if you spend the same amount of time and effort analyzing any of the other top programs out there who don't use Cronin's style. We have a much better chance of becoming like any of those than UCLA. Cronin is not our coach!

 

[cincyguy13]

How is any of this relevant? How about if you spend the same amount of time and effort analyzing any of the other top programs out there who don't use Cronin's style. We have a much better chance of becoming like any of those than UCLA. Cronin is not our coach!

I think some people only think there is one way to win. Only one way and one man that can do it.

 

[justinhub2003]

How is any of this relevant? How about if you spend the same amount of time and effort analyzing any of the other top programs out there who don't use Cronin's style. We have a much better chance of becoming like any of those than UCLA. Cronin is not our coach!

Gonzaga is unattainable IMO

So which other non power schools have a consistent culture we could look too?

Houston ?
WSU?
VCU?


All those teams have an identity to survive with toughness when you can’t always get top tier talent.

And Gonzaga gets top tier talent, it took a long while to build that program up. You won’t get that same time at UC

Ohhh Gonzaga though. Going back to 2013, they’ve had a top 30 defense in every year minus one and even then, that was top 50

Gonzaga even had the #1 defense in the country a few years ago.



So like... if you want to be a big time program that isn’t up & down all the time then you gotta play defense. And not just defense. You need to play elite defense.


I’m convinced that John brannen couldn’t coach a top 10 defense with 5 kawai Leonard’s. They’d still get back doored, there still press only to allow a wide bucket in the lane.


When I say toughness I mean defense. Because defense Is about will. It’s about ego. It’s about trying hard every possession when your exhausted. You will never find a great defense that’s isn’t also tough.


Success in the non power leagues will always come back to defense and culture.

 

[sedziobs]

UCLA is a power school. If we're limiting ourselves to comparisons with non-power schools, let's stop talking about UCLA. Ok?

 

[cincyguy13]

UCLA is a power school. If we're limiting ourselves to comparisons with non-power schools, let's stop talking about UCLA. Ok?

UCLA is also in LA. One of the biggest cities in the world. Nicest weather, best history of a basketball school, and recruits go there without asking.

 

[sedziobs]

When I say toughness I mean defense. Because defense Is about will. It’s about ego. It’s about trying hard every possession when your exhausted. You will never find a great defense that’s isn’t also tough.

I would say defense is about discipline. Trying hard when you're exhausted is how you get exploited by patient, methodical offenses. Toughness is about being unfazed by an aggressive opponent and maintaining discipline. Toughness is the opposite of energy, intensity, and effort. It's the antidote.

 

[cincyguy13]

Gonzaga is unattainable IMO

So which other non power schools have a consistent culture we could look too?

Houston ?
WSU?
VCU?


All those teams have an identity to survive with toughness when you can’t always get top tier talent.

And Gonzaga gets top tier talent, it took a long while to build that program up. You won’t get that same time at UC

Ohhh Gonzaga though. Going back to 2013, they’ve had a top 30 defense in every year minus one and even then, that was top 50

Gonzaga even had the #1 defense in the country a few years ago.



So like... if you want to be a big time program that isn’t up & down all the time then you gotta play defense. And not just defense. You need to play elite defense.


I’m convinced that John brannen couldn’t coach a top 10 defense with 5 kawai Leonard’s. They’d still get back doored, there still press only to allow a wide bucket in the lane.


When I say toughness I mean defense. Because defense Is about will. It’s about ego. It’s about trying hard every possession when your exhausted. You will never find a great defense that’s isn’t also tough.


Success in the non power leagues will always come back to defense and culture.

Why is Gonzaga unattainable? We were Gonzaga 20 years ago.

 

[cincyguy13]

Why is Gonzaga unattainable? We were Gonzaga 20 years ago.

All it takes is one kid to buy in. Or one run. It’s really hard and it takes years, you don’t turn into it over night but it can happen anywhere. The schools that you think of as powerhouses didn’t start that way

 

[justinhub2003]

UCLA is a power school. If we're limiting ourselves to comparisons with non-power schools, let's stop talking about UCLA. Ok?

I comparing 2nd year coaches. What they inherited. Are they progressing?

I’d say Bama fans feel good about the Oats hire
I’d say ark fans good about the musselman hire
I’d say UCLA fans feel good about mick hire

But reading multiple message boards, there is more than just a few voices of resistance who are unhappy so far with Brannen.

I’m not expecting championships in year 2 but I am expecting a direction and progression. And I’ve not seen much.


But I go by what I see. If UC comes out and gets a road sweep this week, I’ll be ecstatic. Because the team will have grown & gotten better. But right this Team and coach are lost until found

 

[cincyguy13]

I comparing 2nd year coaches. What they inherited. Are they progressing?

I’d say Bama fans feel good about the Oats hire
I’d say ark fans good about the musselman hire
I’d say UCLA fans feel good about mick hire

But reading multiple message boards, there is more than just a few voices of resistance who are unhappy so far with Brannen.

I’m not expecting championships in year 2 but I am expecting a direction and progression. And I’ve not seen much.


But I go by what I see. If UC comes out and gets a road sweep this week, I’ll be ecstatic. Because the team will have grown & gotten better. But right this Team and coach are lost until found

Did the other teams have 6-7 mid major players on the roster? I don’t know, I’m asking.maybe they did

 

[justinhub2003]

All it takes is one kid to buy in. Or one run. It’s really hard and it takes years, you don’t turn into it over night but it can happen anywhere. The schools that you think of as powerhouses didn’t start that way

Dude. Before brannen started here? UC was known as one of 3 or 4 teams that were considered a power school even though they were in a power league.

Like us, zags, Dayton, WSU and now Houston


We were already on our way. Now brannen is seemingly losing all momentum. When you lose in the AAC they will put more and more of your games on ESPN+

He needs to Carry the torch not let it go out and try to relight it

 

[justinhub2003]

Did the other teams have 6-7 mid major players on the roster? I don’t know, I’m asking.maybe they did

I quit this argument. You win. Uc is great. This whole season is mick’s fault. John has this team humming. 2021 will be a top 10 class. Defense looks fantastic. Chris Vogt deserves to start & play 40 min.

Just win and all my gripes go away

 

[sedziobs]

The list of top non-power schools isn't all that long. For simplicity, here's the top 50 teams on Torvik from last year:

Gonzaga, Dayton, San Diego St, Houston, BYU, Wichita St, Utah St, St Marys, Richmond, Cincinnati, St Louis

There's a wide variety of styles in there. Gonzaga, Dayton, and BYU had top 10 offenses (St Marys was 14th). Houston and Wichita St had top 20 defenses (St Louis was 35th).

San Diego St and St Marys were two of the slowest tempos in the country. Gonzaga, BYU, and Wichita St had high tempos.

Houston and St Louis were two of the best offensive rebounding teams in the country, BYU and Richmond were two of the worst. Gonzaga, Utah St, and St Marys were some of the best defensive rebounding teams in the country, Cincinnati was one of the worst.

Cincinnati and Wichita St had a top 15 2pt defense, St Marys and Richmond were outside the top 100 (Gonzaga was 88th).

 

[cincyguy13]

I quit this argument. You win. Uc is great. This whole season is mick’s fault. John has this team humming. 2021 will be a top 10 class. Defense looks fantastic. Chris Vogt deserves to start & play 40 min.

Just win and all my gripes go away

No one claimed one of those things. Not one. Find me one be where somebody says it’s all micks fault, this team is humming, 2021 will be a top 10 class, defense looks great, or anyone that says Vogt is good.

 

[sedziobs]

You're talking about so many things that no one can make any sense of it, and very little of it is actually about UC.

So which other non power schools have a consistent culture we could look too?
...
Success in the non power leagues will always come back to defense and culture.

I comparing 2nd year coaches. What they inherited. Are they progressing?

I’d say Bama fans feel good about the Oats hire
I’d say ark fans good about the musselman hire
I’d say UCLA fans feel good about mick hire