EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 8, 2017 12:07:43 GMT -5
But he's new to Ohio State.. Very few if any of the kids on Ohio State's roster have played in Holtsmann's system, they're in a transition period also.. CBB and the NBA are very different in many ways but isn't coaching, coaching? Doesn't PE's coaching experience count for something on the college level? You know the answers to these questions, don't know why you are asking me... No it's not the same. Holtman made a lateral move, Coach moved to a different level.. There's been many many articles written about the challenges of college coaches moving to the NBA and vice versa I could only find 2 recent articles on NBA folks moving to the college ranks.. One from ESPN in 2015 never addressed the coaching aspects of the move, it concentrated on the administrative differences.. The other article from USA Today was very similar but it did have one mention of the coaching aspect which supports my point that the on court stuff is really the same in both places.. Seems to me when you get on the court coaching is coaching.. www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/11/nba-to-ncaa-coaching-eric-musselman-nevada-avery-johnson-albama-mark-price-charlotte/81594574/College basketball is a different beast, even if much of it remains the same: The Xs and Os, the player evaluation, the drills and development.
|
|
|
Post by practice on Aug 8, 2017 12:12:22 GMT -5
Why is it controversial that Ewing wants to build this team and its confidence? It really doesn't help to start the season with a couple of 20+ point losses. Does no one remember the beatings last year's squad took from OSU and Wisconsin? This is year 1 of the Ewing Era ... he's starting from scratch as a head coach in college basketball. He's introducing a new system of play to a roster of kids he either inherited and/or never coached before. In addition to coaching offense and defense there's something to be said for teaching a team how to win. How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. I think the front page articles on HoyaSaxa regarding scheduling are snippy and not well reasoned. News alert: making the NIT this season will be a victory. Let's learn to walk before we run.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 12:37:41 GMT -5
You know the answers to these questions, don't know why you are asking me... No it's not the same. Holtman made a lateral move, Coach moved to a different level.. There's been many many articles written about the challenges of college coaches moving to the NBA and vice versa I could only find 2 recent articles on NBA folks moving to the college ranks.. One from ESPN in 2015 never addressed the coaching aspects of the move, it concentrated on the administrative differences.. The other article from USA Today was very similar but it did have one mention of the coaching aspect which supports my point that the on court stuff is really the same in both places.. Seems to me when you get on the court coaching is coaching.. www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/11/nba-to-ncaa-coaching-eric-musselman-nevada-avery-johnson-albama-mark-price-charlotte/81594574/College basketball is a different beast, even if much of it remains the same: The Xs and Os, the player evaluation, the drills and development. Why didn't you quote the whole paragraph? Obviously that's true, but you can't remove the off the court requirements mentioned before that sentence from the job. It's 1 job The practice restrictions (Length and amount). The off season coaching restrictions. The academic requirements. The mentoring. The fact you have to recruit 24/7 365 etc etc... All those things are new and have to be balanced with the on the court stuff. From the same article:
|
|
justsaying
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 709
|
Post by justsaying on Aug 8, 2017 13:06:25 GMT -5
Why is it controversial that Ewing wants to build this team and its confidence? It really doesn't help to start the season with a couple of 20+ point losses. Does no one remember the beatings last year's squad took from OSU and Wisconsin? This is year 1 of the Ewing Era ... he's starting from scratch as a head coach in college basketball. He's introducing a new system of play to a roster of kids he either inherited and/or never coached before. In addition to coaching offense and defense there's something to be said for teaching a team how to win. How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. I think the front page articles on HoyaSaxa regarding scheduling are snippy and not well reasoned. News alert: making the NIT this season will be a victory. Let's learn to walk before we run. I agree with and i would think anyone that came into a new situation and had to take the remains of a team and build from there would agree unless that team was left loaded with studs when you got there. Then there would still be the matter of relationships to build and chemistry.
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Aug 8, 2017 13:15:32 GMT -5
I cannot believe that there are 9 pages on this topic. The program was at rock bottom a few months back with a total collapse of a clearly dysfunctional team, Waters bailing and JT3's firing. PE comes in and in a few months retains most of the remaining roster and our lone recruit, Walker; brings in Blair, Sodom and Dickerson simply to have enough bodies to populate a roster; and hires an all new staff except for the junior JT3 holdover. He brings in an NBA style offense that he learned under top NBA guys like the van Gundys and Steve Clifford, and which he managed to turn Kemba Walker into a very good NBA guard.
He is out strong and visible on the recruiting trail despite the doubters stating he is too old, too content, too inexperienced, etc. He then steals a top 60 recruit everyone thought was bound for Maryland, besting Broadus as a bonus.
I will cut the greatest player in GU history a break and trust his judgment on where he feels the roster is and whether the team should drag itself out to Oregon to please Phil Knight and Nike, get its brains beat in on ESPN with Bilas et al lamenting how low the once proud GU program has fallen. No thanks.
I hope that PE can get these guys to the NIT or steal a low NCAA bid, but if not I will settle for a new look and some hope for the future. I could not envision another season like 3 of the past 4 when GU was not worth watching after January, losing to St. John's and DePaul, and being outright humiliated by Nova, Provvy, etc.
|
|
FrazierFanatic
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,573
Member is Online
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Aug 8, 2017 13:15:48 GMT -5
Why is it controversial that Ewing wants to build this team and its confidence? It really doesn't help to start the season with a couple of 20+ point losses. Does no one remember the beatings last year's squad took from OSU and Wisconsin? This is year 1 of the Ewing Era ... he's starting from scratch as a head coach in college basketball. He's introducing a new system of play to a roster of kids he either inherited and/or never coached before. In addition to coaching offense and defense there's something to be said for teaching a team how to win. How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. I think the front page articles on HoyaSaxa regarding scheduling are snippy and not well reasoned. News alert: making the NIT this season will be a victory. Let's learn to walk before we run. NIT would certainly be a successful season, especially if coupled with more recruiting wins in the next few months.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,402
|
Post by iowa80 on Aug 8, 2017 13:49:57 GMT -5
There are some straw men being constructed here as to the board's reaction to some recent program decisions. The decision to renege on a commitment to the Knight tournament is worthy of discussion--some don't mind it, some do. The decision to hire Ronnie T. is worthy of discussion--some don't mind it, some do. All the while, direct criticism of PE since his hire has been very muted. One could almost say nonexistent. Message boards exist for discussion, and this is discussion.
|
|
|
Post by ewingitrust on Aug 8, 2017 13:54:30 GMT -5
Why is it controversial that Ewing wants to build this team and its confidence? It really doesn't help to start the season with a couple of 20+ point losses. Does no one remember the beatings last year's squad took from OSU and Wisconsin? This is year 1 of the Ewing Era ... he's starting from scratch as a head coach in college basketball. He's introducing a new system of play to a roster of kids he either inherited and/or never coached before. In addition to coaching offense and defense there's something to be said for teaching a team how to win. How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. I think the front page articles on HoyaSaxa regarding scheduling are snippy and not well reasoned. News alert: making the NIT this season will be a victory. Let's learn to walk before we run. agree with everything you just said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 14:32:19 GMT -5
How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. This is the part that annoys me most of all. First of all, we're not a "new program." We have a new coach and a roster that has had a ton of turnover. There are dozens of other programs in the country who also have a new coach and a roster that has had a ton of turnover. Why are we assuming that we're going to take 2 or 3 huge-margin losses? And even if we did, is our confidence so fragile that we (coach, players, fans) wouldn't be able to put that in perspective? Everyone would expect us to get mauled by Michigan State - but guess what? It's their first game of the year, too. They have the talent advantage, but they're working on chemistry and incorporating new guys as well. The likely path of MSU - UConn - Portland could very well result in a blowout loss, a close game/tossup (UConn's not anything special right now), and a win (although I know nothing about Portland, I have no idea why people assume that they'd run us out of the gym). It could also result in a close loss, a win, and another win. Or it could be three losses. But to assume that we'd be destroyed 2 or 3 times is silly. We're not at Michigan State's level talent-wise, but we're not devoid of D-I level talent either. Maybe Govan and Derrickson continue to develop and stay healthy. Maybe Mosely and Mulmore are shooting better. Maybe Dickerson can drive and finish. Maybe Walker is an under-the-radar freshman who will surprise all of us. Maybe Pickett is The Truth. Or maybe they all suck and don't deserve a shot to prove themselves against the best competition. In which case, backing out so we can beat up on UMES to "build confidence" was the right call.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Aug 8, 2017 15:23:20 GMT -5
How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. This is the part that annoys me most of all. First of all, we're not a "new program." We have a new coach and a roster that has had a ton of turnover. There are dozens of other programs in the country who also have a new coach and a roster that has had a ton of turnover. Why are we assuming that we're going to take 2 or 3 huge-margin losses? And even if we did, is our confidence so fragile that we (coach, players, fans) wouldn't be able to put that in perspective? Everyone would expect us to get mauled by Michigan State - but guess what? It's their first game of the year, too. They have the talent advantage, but they're working on chemistry and incorporating new guys as well. The likely path of MSU - UConn - Portland could very well result in a blowout loss, a close game/tossup (UConn's not anything special right now), and a win (although I know nothing about Portland, I have no idea why people assume that they'd run us out of the gym). It could also result in a close loss, a win, and another win. Or it could be three losses. But to assume that we'd be destroyed 2 or 3 times is silly. We're not at Michigan State's level talent-wise, but we're not devoid of D-I level talent either. Maybe Govan and Derrickson continue to develop and stay healthy. Maybe Mosely and Mulmore are shooting better. Maybe Dickerson can drive and finish. Maybe Walker is an under-the-radar freshman who will surprise all of us. Maybe Pickett is The Truth. Or maybe they all suck and don't deserve a shot to prove themselves against the best competition. In which case, backing out so we can beat up on UMES to "build confidence" was the right call. Yes. Where have you been?
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Aug 8, 2017 15:44:54 GMT -5
How anyone here can think taking potentially 2 (and maybe 3) losses by huge margins is going to help a new program is beyond me. This is the part that annoys me most of all. First of all, we're not a "new program." We have a new coach and a roster that has had a ton of turnover. There are dozens of other programs in the country who also have a new coach and a roster that has had a ton of turnover. Why are we assuming that we're going to take 2 or 3 huge-margin losses? And even if we did, is our confidence so fragile that we (coach, players, fans) wouldn't be able to put that in perspective? Everyone would expect us to get mauled by Michigan State - but guess what? It's their first game of the year, too. They have the talent advantage, but they're working on chemistry and incorporating new guys as well. The likely path of MSU - UConn - Portland could very well result in a blowout loss, a close game/tossup (UConn's not anything special right now), and a win (although I know nothing about Portland, I have no idea why people assume that they'd run us out of the gym). It could also result in a close loss, a win, and another win. Or it could be three losses. But to assume that we'd be destroyed 2 or 3 times is silly. We're not at Michigan State's level talent-wise, but we're not devoid of D-I level talent either. Maybe Govan and Derrickson continue to develop and stay healthy. Maybe Mosely and Mulmore are shooting better. Maybe Dickerson can drive and finish. Maybe Walker is an under-the-radar freshman who will surprise all of us. Maybe Pickett is The Truth. Or maybe they all suck and don't deserve a shot to prove themselves against the best competition. In which case, backing out so we can beat up on UMES to "build confidence" was the right call. Yes Cam, we understand that you feel pulling out was the wrong choice. On the other side the best player in Hoyas history, basketball Hall of Famer, top 50 player of all time and the man who is paid to recruit, develop and coach the team obviously feels otherwise. I understand your right to an opinion... but I'm on his side.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Aug 8, 2017 15:47:59 GMT -5
We're not at Michigan State's level talent-wise, but we're not devoid of D-I level talent either. Maybe Govan and Derrickson continue to develop and stay healthy. Maybe Mosely and Mulmore are shooting better. Maybe Dickerson can drive and finish. Maybe Walker is an under-the-radar freshman who will surprise all of us. Maybe Pickett is The Truth. Or maybe they all suck and don't deserve a shot to prove themselves against the best competition. In which case, backing out so we can beat up on UMES to "build confidence" was the right call. The other thing is NOBODY would expect us to win that game. So the downside of the loss is pretty small, aside from confidence of the kids. But let's look at this way. Aside from Syracuse, we will likely have 10 OOC games. We are VERY LIKELY to play horrible opponents in nearly every game. Winning those games might instill some confidence, but beating up on bad teams doesn't help, especially if you do great in the OOC and then get slaughtered in the Big East (see 2004). And what if we actually won a game in Portland against Michigan State? The upside of that way outweighs downside. I get that Ewing might be cautious to put the guys out in the limelight so early, but I think it's something that could have been managed.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Aug 8, 2017 15:51:42 GMT -5
I cannot believe that there are 9 pages on this topic. The program was at rock bottom a few months back with a total collapse of a clearly dysfunctional team, Waters bailing and JT3's firing. PE comes in and in a few months retains most of the remaining roster and our lone recruit, Walker; brings in Blair, Sodom and Dickerson simply to have enough bodies to populate a roster; and hires an all new staff except for the junior JT3 holdover. He brings in an NBA style offense that he learned under top NBA guys like the van Gundys and Steve Clifford, and which he managed to turn Kemba Walker into a very good NBA guard. I agree with much of what you say, but we really have no idea what offensive style he is going to bring. Is he going to run a lot of pick and rolls? Isolations? Triangle offense? Motion offense? "NBA-style offense" is really a meaningless term on its own. Given Ewing's own experience in the NBA, I do expect he will take what he's learned and craft the offense around modern principles, which is fine and could be fun to watch. But let's not pretend like we have any idea what he's going to do on offense, because we really don't. But it won't be the Princeton offense, which should make some people happy. Perhaps more importantly, I want to see what Ewing and co. do on defense. Our defense was atrocious under JT3 (and while I supported him I always called him out on defense and fouling), and that's a major area where Ewing can improve. I hope to see that.
|
|
|
Post by centercourt400s on Aug 8, 2017 16:14:02 GMT -5
We're not at Michigan State's level talent-wise, but we're not devoid of D-I level talent either. Maybe Govan and Derrickson continue to develop and stay healthy. Maybe Mosely and Mulmore are shooting better. Maybe Dickerson can drive and finish. Maybe Walker is an under-the-radar freshman who will surprise all of us. Maybe Pickett is The Truth. Or maybe they all suck and don't deserve a shot to prove themselves against the best competition. In which case, backing out so we can beat up on UMES to "build confidence" was the right call. The other thing is NOBODY would expect us to win that game. So the downside of the loss is pretty small, aside from confidence of the kids. But let's look at this way. Aside from Syracuse, we will likely have 10 OOC games. We are VERY LIKELY to play horrible opponents in nearly every game. Winning those games might instill some confidence, but beating up on bad teams doesn't help, especially if you do great in the OOC and then get slaughtered in the Big East (see 2004). And what if we actually won a game in Portland against Michigan State? The upside of that way outweighs downside. I get that Ewing might be cautious to put the guys out in the limelight so early, but I think it's something that could have been managed. Who says beating up on bad teams isn't going to help? Leave the strength of schedule, RPI and "prove yourself against the best" talk for another year when expectations can realistically be higher. Games where the guys have a chance to get used to what the coach is trying to get them to do and how other teams react to it, without having to worry about their opponent too much, could be hugely valuable. The coach and staff and administration obviously feel they will. I think you vastly underestimate the transition underway here.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Aug 8, 2017 16:24:50 GMT -5
What is known about this team going forward is that there is so much that is unknown. That's it. Everything is still more of a question mark than an exclamation point. The coach has much to do and has apparently prioritized the recruiting trail, which is good. The Administration is not filling the information void except with brief announcements and that is business as usual. As the meager pieces of information slowly leak from the Hilltop there is very little to debate but much to speculate. It is what it is.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,402
|
Post by iowa80 on Aug 8, 2017 16:49:24 GMT -5
The other thing is NOBODY would expect us to win that game. So the downside of the loss is pretty small, aside from confidence of the kids. But let's look at this way. Aside from Syracuse, we will likely have 10 OOC games. We are VERY LIKELY to play horrible opponents in nearly every game. Winning those games might instill some confidence, but beating up on bad teams doesn't help, especially if you do great in the OOC and then get slaughtered in the Big East (see 2004). And what if we actually won a game in Portland against Michigan State? The upside of that way outweighs downside. I get that Ewing might be cautious to put the guys out in the limelight so early, but I think it's something that could have been managed. Who says beating up on bad teams isn't going to help? Leave the strength of schedule, RPI and "prove yourself against the best" talk for another year when expectations can realistically be higher. Games where the guys have a chance to get used to what the coach is trying to get them to do and how other teams react to it, without having to worry about their opponent too much, could be hugely valuable. The coach and staff and administration obviously feel they will. I think you vastly underestimate the transition underway here. I don't have a problem with beating up on bad teams, even thought that rep was an annoying hallmark of the first Thompson era . . . and stuck ...and stuck ...and stuck. But there is ample room on the schedule to do that. Assuming that this decision is based on basketball (and that may not be the case), the concerns affecting the decision would appear to be the timing of the games, the quality of one of the opponents, and the coaching transition. I get that, and would certainly endorse less than aggressive opponents for games not already scheduled.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 8, 2017 18:45:54 GMT -5
I could only find 2 recent articles on NBA folks moving to the college ranks.. One from ESPN in 2015 never addressed the coaching aspects of the move, it concentrated on the administrative differences.. The other article from USA Today was very similar but it did have one mention of the coaching aspect which supports my point that the on court stuff is really the same in both places.. Seems to me when you get on the court coaching is coaching.. www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/03/11/nba-to-ncaa-coaching-eric-musselman-nevada-avery-johnson-albama-mark-price-charlotte/81594574/College basketball is a different beast, even if much of it remains the same: The Xs and Os, the player evaluation, the drills and development. Why didn't you quote the whole paragraph? Obviously that's true, but you can't remove the off the court requirements mentioned before that sentence from the job. It's 1 job The practice restrictions (Length and amount). The off season coaching restrictions. The academic requirements. The mentoring. The fact you have to recruit 24/7 365 etc etc... All those things are new and have to be balanced with the on the court stuff. From the same article: I wasn't trying to duck or shade the context of the article in anyway.. I felt the quote said well what I was saying, there are big differences between college and pro ball but most of that is off the court stuff.. I get your point that Holtmann and Jordan already know what PE is still learning about running a college program so I agree that they're far ahead in that respect.. But are they really that far ahead of PE when it comes to actually coaching their teams?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2017 19:40:07 GMT -5
Why didn't you quote the whole paragraph? Obviously that's true, but you can't remove the off the court requirements mentioned before that sentence from the job. It's 1 job The practice restrictions (Length and amount). The off season coaching restrictions. The academic requirements. The mentoring. The fact you have to recruit 24/7 365 etc etc... All those things are new and have to be balanced with the on the court stuff. From the same article: I wasn't trying to duck or shade the context of the article in anyway.. I felt the quote said well what I was saying, there are big differences between college and pro ball but most of that is off the court stuff.. I get your point that Holtmann and Jordan already know what PE is still learning about running a college program so I agree that they're far ahead in that respect.. But are they really that far ahead of PE when it comes to actually coaching their teams? I don't know about that, but it's all part of it. You can't separate one part from the other.
|
|
|
Post by jld54 on Aug 8, 2017 21:24:47 GMT -5
I cannot believe that there are 9 pages on this topic. The program was at rock bottom a few months back with a total collapse of a clearly dysfunctional team, Waters bailing and JT3's firing. PE comes in and in a few months retains most of the remaining roster and our lone recruit, Walker; brings in Blair, Sodom and Dickerson simply to have enough bodies to populate a roster; and hires an all new staff except for the junior JT3 holdover. He brings in an NBA style offense that he learned under top NBA guys like the van Gundys and Steve Clifford, and which he managed to turn Kemba Walker into a very good NBA guard. I agree with much of what you say, but we really have no idea what offensive style he is going to bring. Is he going to run a lot of pick and rolls? Isolations? Triangle offense? Motion offense? "NBA-style offense" is really a meaningless term on its own. Given Ewing's own experience in the NBA, I do expect he will take what he's learned and craft the offense around modern principles, which is fine and could be fun to watch. But let's not pretend like we have any idea what he's going to do on offense, because we really don't. But it won't be the Princeton offense, which should make some people happy. Perhaps more importantly, I want to see what Ewing and co. do on defense. Our defense was atrocious under JT3 (and while I supported him I always called him out on defense and fouling), and that's a major area where Ewing can improve. I hope to see that. NBA style means an offense that is modern basketball, not a Princeton offense that was outdated and required very special players like Jeff, Roy, etc. it will not be the triangle which jumped the shark before the Princetown O did. Pro style means something that kids like, that is exciting to watch and prepares top talent for the NBA. And yes, let's hope we have a better D as well.
|
|
kghoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,997
|
Post by kghoya on Aug 8, 2017 22:20:16 GMT -5
can anyone point to another school bowing out of a big time preseason tournament this late in the game? i'd be curious to know just how unusual this is
|
|