Hindsight on candidates from '06

**cyhiphopp** · 02-05-2010, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Ficklone02

Whatever happens, I feel as though there would be alot of coaches out there that would want to come into to a situation such as ours. We have a great fanbase, an outstanding home venue, an AD and President of the university that are enthusiastic people persons (that sounds odd). And we do have some history as well, and of course we play in a major conference. These same attributes would seem to lend themselves well to attracting talent to play here as well. The more I type, the more I'm convincing myself that we really should be contending for top half of the big 12 each year.

I agree with some of the above and we should be able to get a solid coach if availabe. One problem is that every year of mediocre basketball is rotting away the fanbase and donor support for basketball. The fact that we play in a tough b-b-ball conference is also killing us because even being a decent team will put you in the bottom 3rd of the Big12.

It sucks that, due to the contract, we can't fire GMac now. We need som epositive momentum more than anything else at this point. We deffinitely aren't gaining any of that from big wins any time soon.

**khaal53** · 02-05-2010, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by RhoadsRage

Just keep watching through your GMAC rose-colored glasses then. I know what I see, and for the most part, it's not very exciting.

Please find something where I was defending GMac. I just pointed out that you were incorrect in saying that they hadn't run the press lately when they in fact have been using it in the second half of most games (if not all games).

**khaal53** · 02-05-2010, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by Tornado man

That is hardly a 3/4 court "press." Our opponents are hardly forced to even pick up their dribble.
Please.

Is that the qualifier for a press? There are different types of "presses" (obviously) used for a variety of different reasons. But it's still a "press".

**Goldfinger** · 02-05-2010, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by khaal53

I don't remember Jeff Capel being mentioned as a candidate.

Considering all we know about how JP conducts coaching searches (mainly from the Chizik hire and Rhoads hire), do we really want to specualte as to who he may/may not have considered for the MBB job in 2006?

Capel was not a candidate, it went very quickly, it was Jeter and McDermott and supposedly feelers were sent out to a few others including Turgeon to guage their interest and the interest was none.

Morgan was fired Wednesday night and an Mac and Jeter interviewed that weekend with an offer made to Mac Sunday night. It was sped up a little bit because McDermott had an offer from Kansas State (for more money even) and there were other schools looking at him as well.

As for Pollard using search firms in his hires, that is for the back ground checks and some of the initial contacts, otherwise Jamie does it all himself with input from some trusted advisors-Gary Thompson for basketball and I know in the first football search, Johnny Majors was talked to.

**CloneIce** · 02-05-2010, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclonestate78

Maybe you should go back and look at how structured of a game WM's team played against Baylor in his final season as coach..... A Baylor team that dropped 90 some odd points on our structured and disciplined defense. A Baylor team that won 4 games that season after being banned from playing any non conference games due to their players murdering their teammates and their coach trying to cover it up. That Baylor team was awful and was in total chaos. I guess they just weren't in as bad shape as WM's team was that year.

Nice try, but you were ripping on WM's 2nd team, the NCAA Tournament team, and that is what we were discussing. I guess completely changing the subject of a discussion mid-stride is one way to avoid admitting you are wrong. Pretty lame though.

I agree that his 3rd team played awful on defense when we lost all our big men from the previous year and replaced them with very poor, inexperienced defenders and rebounders.

**cyhiphopp** · 02-05-2010, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by khaal53

Is that what defines a press? There are different types of "presses" (obviously) used for a variety of different reasons. But it's still a "press".

Either way, whatever they are doing sucks. They may be trying to run the court more than they used to, but it is nowhere near the "exciting style" that GMac talked about before the season started.

It is either a coaching problem or a talent problem and the coach is responsible for the talent he brings in a retains. Period.

**RhoadsRage** · 02-05-2010, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by khaal53

Is that the qualifier for a press? There are different types of "presses" (obviously) used for a variety of different reasons. But it's still a "press".

Okay fine then, we use the less popular "olay-press"!!!

**CloneIce** · 02-05-2010, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclonestate78

I am just glad you didn't bring up the disciplined offense we ran under WM. Clearing out 4 guys and letting Stinson go one on one for 75% of the game wasn't exactly what I would call structure.

That offense made the AND1 teams look like structured basketball.

What is the obsession with structure? I am more worried about effectiveness than structure, but to each his own I guess.

I much preferred winning with a less-structured style to losing with more structure. I enjoy it when Iowa State plays good, winning basketball... I guess some prefer bad, losing, structured basketball. Doesn't make sense to me.

**Ylabhunter** · 02-05-2010, 02:19 PM

I dont think Capel was on the final list either, for one I would have been all over trying to get him. I assume he was on the list but declined through a third party when the feelers went out.

I believe basketball is much more difficult to find a good Head man because of a number of things. Basketball is all about recruiting and you can find alot of great recruiters that are not good head coaches. They just dont work out typically when they have to x and o. In football it seems you look for cordinators that prove their worth with results on the field.

**khaal53** · 02-05-2010, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by cyhiphopp

Either way, whatever they are doing sucks. They may be trying to run the court more than they used to, but it is nowhere near the "exciting style" that GMac talked about before the season started.

It is either a coaching problem or a talent problem and the coach is responsible for the talent he brings in a retains. Period.

Sounds to me like you're upset with how this season is turning out and not whether or not GMac has used the "press" recently. Fair enough.

**cyhiphopp** · 02-05-2010, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Ylabhunter

I dont think Capel was on the final list either, for one I would have been all over trying to get him. I assume he was on the list but declined through a third party when the feelers went out.

I believe basketball is much more difficult to find a good Head man because of a number of things. Basketball is all about recruiting and you can find alot of great recruiters that are not good head coaches. They just dont work out typically when they have to x and o. In football it seems you look for cordinators that prove their worth with results on the field.

Yep. Football coaches who are good at X's and O's can hire assistants who are good recruiters. There aren't a lot of basketball coaches who can do that.

**jsb** · 02-05-2010, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Ylabhunter

I dont think Capel was on the final list either, for one I would have been all over trying to get him. I assume he was on the list but declined through a third party when the feelers went out.

I believe basketball is much more difficult to find a good Head man because of a number of things. Basketball is all about recruiting and you can find alot of great recruiters that are not good head coaches. They just dont work out typically when they have to x and o. In football it seems you look for cordinators that prove their worth with results on the field.

I have no idea but the fact that both Stinson and Blalock had said they were leaving as well as Carr could have scared some coaches away. Not sure if Taggert had announced he was leaving, but if I remember right he did that after McDermott came to town.

**Ficklone02** · 02-05-2010, 02:23 PM

Imo, if you have a long athletic wing guy (to put at the top of the press) using an "annoyance press" is pretty effective. I liked that aspect of Morgan's game planning. It generally did not give up easy baskets, can produce the occassional turnover, and best of all takes the opponent longer to get into their offense--thus limiting the chances they will find a good shot opportunity.

The go for broke style press that Mizzou plays can work....I don't know if I'm a fan of that though as you really have to committ to that style of play if you're going to do it.

**CycloneWarning** · 02-05-2010, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclonestate78

I am just glad you didn't bring up the disciplined offense we ran under WM. Clearing out 4 guys and letting Stinson go one on one for 75% of the game wasn't exactly what I would call structure.

That offense made the AND1 teams look like structured basketball.

Pretty much the same offense that Mike Taylor and GMac ran in Year 1. When he wasn't turning the ball over, Taylor was launching. A lot of disciplined structure there.

But since then, it has really come together under GMac. Our offense is solid execution today.

**Tornado man** · 02-05-2010, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by khaal53

Is that the qualifier for a press? There are different types of "presses" (obviously) used for a variety of different reasons. But it's still a "press".

No it's not. The "qualifier for a press," at least to the coaches I played under, is to disrupt the opponents' dribbling and passing as they attempt to advance the ball up the court. Letting the other team dribble without forcing them to pass the ball off is not "disrupting."
In fact, late in some games, when steals are imperative, we don't even ramp it up.