I think as he gets stronger he will take it to the hole agressively a lot more often, and score more points on free throws.
Youth
- Thread starter sloaner
- Start date
I think as he gets stronger he will take it to the hole agressively a lot more often, and score more points on free throws.
You're not backing off your anti-youth-excuse bandwagon, and I respect that.
But you keep saying it's a talent issue, not a youth issue. Every time someone says we are young, you say "No, we just arn't talented." Just because our talent doesn't = KU's talent does NOT mean we are not talented. It just means we are not AS talented. How do we compete if we are not AS talented? 1) Recruit like KU does (which isn't going to happen), or 2) develop talent. I know it's an odd concept (sarcasm), but it is possible to take talent like DG, Lucca, and Ham (who probably wouldn't play at KU as freshman or sophos), and slowly mold them into very good players would CAN compete with KU's freak athletes by the time get to be juniors/seniors.
In two years when Lucca, CB, and DG are seniors, they still probably won't be collectively as "talented" as KU's guys. BUT they'll have the experience to compete and beat them, just like all of our good Cyclone teams in the past have done. So I say screw the talent argument. We've got some decent talent. And we're bringing in more next year. But like a good whiskey, the talent we have now just hasn't "aged" long enough yet. It's not hard to see. Currently, our production IS coming from our younger guys. That is fact.
So, with our 7 man class last year will we be really good in three years then suck again for three more years waiting for the next 7 man class?
We will never recruit like KU.
That is why we have to be smart! 7 players is not smart. We have to have consistent classes. Get some solid players in here.
Signing 7 guys, followed by 2 is a recipe for disaster for a school like Iowa State.
If we sign 4 to 5 players every class that range from 3/4 stars than we will be just fine talent wise. We haven't been doing that until now! That is why we are struggling
South Dakota State was an awful loss...no way of spinning that...those things DO happen though. Our Elite Eight team lost at Drake, and our next conference title team got taken to overtime by Morningside (who was worse than this year's South Dakota State team). I repeat, Conference title team was that was taken to OT by Morningside...
We are struggling because 2.5 years ago there was 4 guys on the roster. Not sure why everybody is so worried about this...redshirts, juco...they'll get it worked out.
We still played all of our guys like it was a real game...what's your point? It was a Big 12 champion on their homecourt against Morningside...
Also to add to my first post in regards to Kansas.
I never expect us to be Kansas. When we are better than Kansas it is b/c we are more EXPERIENCED than Kansas. But that is not to say that we can't be a good basketball team w/o having all seniors.
We should still be able to make the NIT w/ sophmores getting a lot of minutes.
Experience is key to being GREAT. But we can still be good w/o experience and that is with talent
I never expect us to be Kansas. When we are better than Kansas it is b/c we are more EXPERIENCED than Kansas. But that is not to say that we can't be a good basketball team w/o having all seniors.
We should still be able to make the NIT w/ sophmores getting a lot of minutes.
Experience is key to being GREAT. But we can still be good w/o experience and that is with talent
There is a huge difference. We use to lose to Marathon Oil in exhibition games. Coaches play more guys and try different things that they wouldn't do if it was an actual game
Pretty sure. Here's the recap:
Men's Basketball Needs OT to Beat Morningside - Iowa State University Athletics Official Web Site - www.CYCLONES.com - Iowa State Cyclones Sports
I'm almost positive.
Never is an awfully long time. Circa 1980, anyone at Duke would have said that they would "Never recruit like UNC, UCLA or Kentucky".
When did we sign 7? Last year we signed six, one of them a juco. That actually makes five freshmen--just as you suggested below.
Oh yeah--Christopherson transferred--that's not really a "signing", you know.
The problem was that the roster was in such constant flux that McDermott had to establish a baseline of talent--and reliable students. Too many holes to fill, all at once.
Now, he signs two this years, three or four next year, and three or four the next. Where's the problem?
Global Sports, EA Sports, Marathon Oil, etc...were built from former Division One players...some of which were even Big 12 Caliber talent...Morningside had nowhere near the talent level of some of the exhibition teams we have played...
Not sure what you are talking about. Before Coach K got to Duke they won a NCAA Title, were in the Elite 8, and lost in the championship. That was 78,79, and 80. They have always recruited really really well.
Christopherson actually did sign. Anybody who transfers has to sign and they take a scholarship. Thus 7
Christopherson was an unexpected windfall. And these guys aren't all in the same class.
Criticizing bringing in a large number in the same class is like criticizing a coach who brings in two placekickers in the same class (Mahoney and Guyer). You have to factor in the history.
In the case of the kickers, one reason Dan McCarney didn't win more games was because the kickers he signed kept getting hurt, sometimes in a matter of weeks (Mahoski) after signing. So signing two placekickers simply made sense, in case one got hurt.
So also was bringing in seven a compensation for attrition. Had Clayton Vette stayed, Mac probably wouldn't have signed one of Vanderbeken. Had Brister not left, Christopherson (the windfall) would have went elsewhere. He planned to redshirt a couple of them (Eikmeier, Mann, Hamilton and Pomlee were all possibilities). They were hardly all seven going to end up in the same class.
I don't know his reasoning. Please, feel free to ask Mac yourself.
I'm sure that if he had known how much of an upswing in recruiting a new assistant would be, he might have saved some schollies. In any case, the number of players scholarshiped in a class just seems a really weak criticism to me.
Yeah, there was that Gminki fellow, etc. Bad example.
Would you prefer Texas, a football school that "never" was going to be a basketball power? That's part of the reason they jumped into the Big XII, after all. How about Wake itself?
