(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

WKU played Louisville, Gerogia, Florida State, and Mississippi State this year. Those would be the "money games". I think what Hilltopper2K meant was that the WKU mindset is that they consider themselves to be able to beat any team in the country at any given time. There are no money games for them, because that would imply that they are willingly taking a butt-kicking for cash.

No one kicks WKU's butt. That's the midset. It's a great one to have, and that's why they're so successful. Their culture is more ambitious, confident, and success-oriented, whereas ours is the "when are we ever gonna catch a break?"

WKU says "Make your OWN breaks".

(03-24-2009 07:28 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

WKU played Louisville, Gerogia, Florida State, and Mississippi State this year. Those would be the "money games". I think what Hilltopper2K meant was that the WKU mindset is that they consider themselves to be able to beat any team in the country at any given time. There are no money games for them, because that would imply that they are willingly taking a butt-kicking for cash.

No one kicks WKU's butt. That's the midset. It's a great one to have, and that's why they're so successful. Their culture is more ambitious, confident, and success-oriented, whereas ours is the "when are we ever gonna catch a break?"

WKU says "Make your OWN breaks".

That is impressive. Were any of those games at Diddle, or were all on the road? I would have no objection to playing those games, but I'd hate to play them all on the road.

(03-24-2009 07:32 PM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:28 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

WKU played Louisville, Gerogia, Florida State, and Mississippi State this year. Those would be the "money games". I think what Hilltopper2K meant was that the WKU mindset is that they consider themselves to be able to beat any team in the country at any given time. There are no money games for them, because that would imply that they are willingly taking a butt-kicking for cash.

No one kicks WKU's butt. That's the midset. It's a great one to have, and that's why they're so successful. Their culture is more ambitious, confident, and success-oriented, whereas ours is the "when are we ever gonna catch a break?"

WKU says "Make your OWN breaks".

That is impressive. Were any of those games at Diddle, or were all on the road? I would have no objection to playing those games, but I'd hate to play them all on the road.

Louisville and Florida State were at neutral sites, Georgia was at home, and Miss St. was on the road, according to espn.com.

When we grow up I hope we're like WKU.

(03-24-2009 07:34 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:32 PM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:28 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

WKU played Louisville, Gerogia, Florida State, and Mississippi State this year. Those would be the "money games". I think what Hilltopper2K meant was that the WKU mindset is that they consider themselves to be able to beat any team in the country at any given time. There are no money games for them, because that would imply that they are willingly taking a butt-kicking for cash.

No one kicks WKU's butt. That's the midset. It's a great one to have, and that's why they're so successful. Their culture is more ambitious, confident, and success-oriented, whereas ours is the "when are we ever gonna catch a break?"

WKU says "Make your OWN breaks".

That is impressive. Were any of those games at Diddle, or were all on the road? I would have no objection to playing those games, but I'd hate to play them all on the road.

Louisville and Florida State were at neutral sites, Georgia was at home, and Miss St. was on the road, according to espn.com.

Florida St. was a one time tourny (granted much closer for them), Mississippi St. will return the game next year to Diddle, Louisville is a four year deal (one game in Nashville, next in Freedom Hall, next in Diddle, and the last game in UofL's new arena in downtown Louisville.) And of course next year we start the four year series with South Carolina, and I think I heard we are starting a series with LSU next year also.

(03-24-2009 07:28 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

WKU played Louisville, Gerogia, Florida State, and Mississippi State this year. Those would be the "money games". I think what Hilltopper2K meant was that the WKU mindset is that they consider themselves to be able to beat any team in the country at any given time. There are no money games for them, because that would imply that they are willingly taking a butt-kicking for cash.

No one kicks WKU's butt. That's the midset. It's a great one to have, and that's why they're so successful. Their culture is more ambitious, confident, and success-oriented, whereas ours is the "when are we ever gonna catch a break?"

WKU says "Make your OWN breaks".

I mean none of those were buy games. They were either a nuetral site tournament or we will get return games.

(03-24-2009 07:17 PM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

When schedule are made out, nobody knows how opponents are going to do that season. In a normal season, with the teams we scheduled,
our SOS would probably have been a lot better. Just the luck of the draw. That's what I don't like about the RPI. It gives too much emphasis on things that a team can't control. Once the schedule is set, all that you can control are wins and losses.

That's not [b]totally true. I was much closer to Coach Fricke than the current assistants, so maybe things have changed somewhat. But I know Coach Fricke would study the rosters of teams he was considering scheduling- he would know exactly how many seniors they had and what type of team they had coming back. If he was looking for a money game, no way he would have scheduled last year's senior laden Chickenhawgs, but he would have gladly scheduled them this year (I'm just using them as an example). If he was looking at scheduling a midmajor, he'd look at how good he thought they might be. Of course, it works both ways- some teams who may have avoided us this year, will be happy to schedule us next year when they see that Stevee, Fowler, Shane, and Brandon are gone.

So I do think our schedule ended up weaker than even we had hoped. However, to say it was simply "bad luck" is probably not accurate either. The fact that we have scheduled 4 year series with LaTech and MoState does suggest we are changing are scheduling philosophy, since at some point those schools are likely to be good.

Quote:"He needs to take care of the ball," McDonald said. "He has to handle adversity better. When things aren't going good, people are going to look to him, and he can't react poorly. He's a senior now. He has to face the fire with the right body language and the right attitude."

McDonald is talking about Anthony Sally here, but I think it could apply to Steve Sheilds as well.


When AD's interview a coach they should understand that being qualified doesn't just mean knowing x's and o's. Any coach that has played college basketball, been an assistant for several years and then been a head assistant for several years is probably going to understand the x's and o's well enough to win.

Hard work sucks. These kids work harder at basketball than most of us will ever work at anything. Convincing 18-22 year old kids to do what they don't want to do is hard.

The most important qualification for a head coach is being able to connect with, motivate, and teach young men. You almost have to be a psychologist. You have to have an intuitive understanding of human nature. All the great coaches are a certain caliber of person. They would be successful if they were bankers or stock brokers or a construction foreman. It seems that one of the secrets of life is bending the will of others to meet your own. Another way of saying that is... charisma.

(03-24-2009 08:22 PM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:17 PM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 07:02 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

When schedule are made out, nobody knows how opponents are going to do that season. In a normal season, with the teams we scheduled,
our SOS would probably have been a lot better. Just the luck of the draw. That's what I don't like about the RPI. It gives too much emphasis on things that a team can't control. Once the schedule is set, all that you can control are wins and losses.

That's not [b]totally true. I was much closer to Coach Fricke than the current assistants, so maybe things have changed somewhat. But I know Coach Fricke would study the rosters of teams he was considering scheduling- he would know exactly how many seniors they had and what type of team they had coming back. If he was looking for a money game, no way he would have scheduled last year's senior laden Chickenhawgs, but he would have gladly scheduled them this year (I'm just using them as an example). If he was looking at scheduling a midmajor, he'd look at how good he thought they might be. Of course, it works both ways- some teams who may have avoided us this year, will be happy to schedule us next year when they see that Stevee, Fowler, Shane, and Brandon are gone.

So I do think our schedule ended up weaker than even we had hoped. However, to say it was simply "bad luck" is probably not accurate either. The fact that we have scheduled 4 year series with LaTech and MoState does suggest we are changing are scheduling philosophy, since at some point those schools are likely to be good.

That kind of alludes to LR Trojan's comment at the beginning of the season that someone did some good research to get our schedule. It makes your record look good but that's why the SOS is calculated to ensure that teams that play stronger schedules are rewarded for playing better teams.

(03-24-2009 09:19 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

Quote:"He needs to take care of the ball," McDonald said. "He has to handle adversity better. When things aren't going good, people are going to look to him, and he can't react poorly. He's a senior now. He has to face the fire with the right body language and the right attitude."

McDonald is talking about Anthony Sally here, but I think it could apply to Steve Sheilds as well.


When AD's interview a coach they should understand that being qualified doesn't just mean knowing x's and o's. Any coach that has played college basketball, been an assistant for several years and then been a head assistant for several years is probably going to understand the x's and o's well enough to win.

Hard work sucks. These kids work harder at basketball than most of us will ever work at anything. Convincing 18-22 year old kids to do what they don't want to do is hard.

The most important qualification for a head coach is being able to connect with, motivate, and teach young men. You almost have to be a psychologist. You have to have an intuitive understanding of human nature. All the great coaches are a certain caliber of person. They would be successful if they were bankers or stock brokers or a construction foreman. It seems that one of the secrets of life is bending the will of others to meet your own. Another way of saying that is... charisma.

Steve Shields is at the point where If he wanted to and the opportunity arose he could "take the cash" as they did on the old game show "Let's Make a Deal" instead of gambling on what's behind "door #3". He is well respected and I assume well known by many of the top coaches in the country. Should a top assistant vacancy at a major BCS school appear, let's say Kentucky, where he has a chance to relax and have a fresh start and continue doing what he does best--teaching defense--without the pressure to lead a team to postseason he would be a fool no to, assuming money, family or contractual issues are not an issue. What's lurking behind door #3 is a enormous question mark and is likely to be a total ass of a season or two at the most, especially if current trends are stubbornly upheld (player issues, marginal offense). It would put his job in immediate jeopardy and he would surely be fired within two years. Where would that leave the UALR program if he left now? I suspect not much worse than it is now, considering the personnel issues of the past few seasons, with both players and assistant coaches. We cold fill that vacancy fairly easy. Just hire (or promote) someone as Hilltopper2K said with "charisma" and an orientation toward more productive offensive sets who will cheerfully throw "grinder ball" out the window. Sad as it is to say, if that ever comes to pass and it succeeds, nobody will miss Shields on the sideline.

just my $0.02

(03-24-2009 10:49 PM)Robert C Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 09:19 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

Quote:"He needs to take care of the ball," McDonald said. "He has to handle adversity better. When things aren't going good, people are going to look to him, and he can't react poorly. He's a senior now. He has to face the fire with the right body language and the right attitude."

McDonald is talking about Anthony Sally here, but I think it could apply to Steve Sheilds as well.


When AD's interview a coach they should understand that being qualified doesn't just mean knowing x's and o's. Any coach that has played college basketball, been an assistant for several years and then been a head assistant for several years is probably going to understand the x's and o's well enough to win.

Hard work sucks. These kids work harder at basketball than most of us will ever work at anything. Convincing 18-22 year old kids to do what they don't want to do is hard.

The most important qualification for a head coach is being able to connect with, motivate, and teach young men. You almost have to be a psychologist. You have to have an intuitive understanding of human nature. All the great coaches are a certain caliber of person. They would be successful if they were bankers or stock brokers or a construction foreman. It seems that one of the secrets of life is bending the will of others to meet your own. Another way of saying that is... charisma.

Steve Shields is at the point where If he wanted to and the opportunity arose he could "take the cash" as they did on the old game show "Let's Make a Deal" instead of gambling on what's behind "door #3". He is well respected and I assume well known by many of the top coaches in the country. Should a top assistant vacancy at a major BCS school appear, let's say Kentucky, where he has a chance to relax and have a fresh start and continue doing what he does best--teaching defense--without the pressure to lead a team to postseason he would be a fool no to, assuming money, family or contractual issues are not an issue. What's lurking behind door #3 is a enormous question mark and is likely to be a total ass of a season or two at the most, especially if current trends are stubbornly upheld (player issues, marginal offense). It would put his job in immediate jeopardy and he would surely be fired within two years. Where would that leave the UALR program if he left now? I suspect not much worse than it is now, considering the personnel issues of the past few seasons, with both players and assistant coaches. We cold fill that vacancy fairly easy. Just hire (or promote) someone as Hilltopper2K said with "charisma" and an orientation toward more productive offensive sets who will cheerfully throw "grinder ball" out the window. Sad as it is to say, if that ever comes to pass and it succeeds, nobody will miss Shields on the sideline.

just my $0.02

I can't see Steve leaving on his own to become an assistant at a BCS school. I would think he is used to being the boss of his program, and unless he could get a head coaching job in a better situation, I can't see him leaving, given the choice.

Coach Shields is 40-something..? Surely we can get 20 more years out of him, right..?

(03-24-2009 10:49 PM)Robert C Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 09:19 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

Quote:"He needs to take care of the ball," McDonald said. "He has to handle adversity better. When things aren't going good, people are going to look to him, and he can't react poorly. He's a senior now. He has to face the fire with the right body language and the right attitude."

McDonald is talking about Anthony Sally here, but I think it could apply to Steve Sheilds as well.


When AD's interview a coach they should understand that being qualified doesn't just mean knowing x's and o's. Any coach that has played college basketball, been an assistant for several years and then been a head assistant for several years is probably going to understand the x's and o's well enough to win.

Hard work sucks. These kids work harder at basketball than most of us will ever work at anything. Convincing 18-22 year old kids to do what they don't want to do is hard.

The most important qualification for a head coach is being able to connect with, motivate, and teach young men. You almost have to be a psychologist. You have to have an intuitive understanding of human nature. All the great coaches are a certain caliber of person. They would be successful if they were bankers or stock brokers or a construction foreman. It seems that one of the secrets of life is bending the will of others to meet your own. Another way of saying that is... charisma.

Steve Shields is at the point where If he wanted to and the opportunity arose he could "take the cash" as they did on the old game show "Let's Make a Deal" instead of gambling on what's behind "door #3". He is well respected and I assume well known by many of the top coaches in the country. Should a top assistant vacancy at a major BCS school appear, let's say Kentucky, where he has a chance to relax and have a fresh start and continue doing what he does best--teaching defense--without the pressure to lead a team to postseason he would be a fool no to, assuming money, family or contractual issues are not an issue. What's lurking behind door #3 is a enormous question mark and is likely to be a total ass of a season or two at the most, especially if current trends are stubbornly upheld (player issues, marginal offense). It would put his job in immediate jeopardy and he would surely be fired within two years. Where would that leave the UALR program if he left now? I suspect not much worse than it is now, considering the personnel issues of the past few seasons, with both players and assistant coaches. We cold fill that vacancy fairly easy. Just hire (or promote) someone as Hilltopper2K said with "charisma" and an orientation toward more productive offensive sets who will cheerfully throw "grinder ball" out the window. Sad as it is to say, if that ever comes to pass and it succeeds, nobody will miss Shields on the sideline.

just my $0.02

I'd miss the guy...I do like him as a person. He's a good man. But I would be excited at the prospect of actually having an offense! If he left I'd hate it if we lost Klein in the deal though.

(03-24-2009 11:25 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  I'd miss the guy...I do like him as a person. He's a good man. But I would be excited at the prospect of actually having an offense! If he left I'd hate it if we lost Klein in the deal though.

We just might gain a head coach in Big Joe, though.

you think he'd be willing to take on that kinda workload? i hope he'd be willing to teach a perimeter game, and if so, I hope he'd be good at it. I'd worry that as a head coach it would be more inside stuff, though I'm sure he'd want us to pass the ball back OUT, too...

(03-25-2009 12:11 AM)eh9198 Wrote:  you think he'd be willing to take on that kinda workload? i hope he'd be willing to teach a perimeter game, and if so, I hope he'd be good at it. I'd worry that as a head coach it would be more inside stuff, though I'm sure he'd want us to pass the ball back OUT, too...

Just like Coach Shields, big Joe is a heck of a nice guy. Maybe he is a good coach, too. I don't know one way or the other. All I do know is that Derrick Bails seems to have regressed and Big Mike was no better this year than last. I would assume coaching the big men is his responsibility. Maybe he was involved in recruiting Will Neighbour- although Joe Kleine is likely as familiar to Neighbour as someone who played in the English soccer league in the mid-90's is to me.

(03-25-2009 12:31 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:11 AM)eh9198 Wrote:  you think he'd be willing to take on that kinda workload? i hope he'd be willing to teach a perimeter game, and if so, I hope he'd be good at it. I'd worry that as a head coach it would be more inside stuff, though I'm sure he'd want us to pass the ball back OUT, too...

Just like Coach Shields, big Joe is a heck of a nice guy. Maybe he is a good coach, too. I don't know one way or the other. All I do know is that Derrick Bails seems to have regressed and Big Mike was no better this year than last. I would assume coaching the big men is his responsibility. Maybe he was involved in recruiting Will Neighbour- although Joe Kleine is likely as familiar to Neighbour as someone who played in the English soccer league in the mid-90's is to me.

Coach Sullivan is responsible for Will Neighbors.

(03-25-2009 10:59 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:31 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:11 AM)eh9198 Wrote:  you think he'd be willing to take on that kinda workload? i hope he'd be willing to teach a perimeter game, and if so, I hope he'd be good at it. I'd worry that as a head coach it would be more inside stuff, though I'm sure he'd want us to pass the ball back OUT, too...

Just like Coach Shields, big Joe is a heck of a nice guy. Maybe he is a good coach, too. I don't know one way or the other. All I do know is that Derrick Bails seems to have regressed and Big Mike was no better this year than last. I would assume coaching the big men is his responsibility. Maybe he was involved in recruiting Will Neighbour- although Joe Kleine is likely as familiar to Neighbour as someone who played in the English soccer league in the mid-90's is to me.

Coach Sullivan is responsible for Will Neighbors.

I assume I am missing a joke of some type- or is Coach Sullivan someone I should know?

(03-25-2009 11:37 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 10:59 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:31 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:11 AM)eh9198 Wrote:  you think he'd be willing to take on that kinda workload? i hope he'd be willing to teach a perimeter game, and if so, I hope he'd be good at it. I'd worry that as a head coach it would be more inside stuff, though I'm sure he'd want us to pass the ball back OUT, too...

Just like Coach Shields, big Joe is a heck of a nice guy. Maybe he is a good coach, too. I don't know one way or the other. All I do know is that Derrick Bails seems to have regressed and Big Mike was no better this year than last. I would assume coaching the big men is his responsibility. Maybe he was involved in recruiting Will Neighbour- although Joe Kleine is likely as familiar to Neighbour as someone who played in the English soccer league in the mid-90's is to me.

Coach Sullivan is responsible for Will Neighbors.

I assume I am missing a joke of some type- or is Coach Sullivan someone I should know?

Oops. For some reason I always want to call coach Cunningham Sullivan. I meant Charles Cunningham. Sorry. Those damn brain cells keep disappearing at a greater rate every day.

(03-25-2009 11:44 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 11:37 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 10:59 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:31 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-25-2009 12:11 AM)eh9198 Wrote:  you think he'd be willing to take on that kinda workload? i hope he'd be willing to teach a perimeter game, and if so, I hope he'd be good at it. I'd worry that as a head coach it would be more inside stuff, though I'm sure he'd want us to pass the ball back OUT, too...

Just like Coach Shields, big Joe is a heck of a nice guy. Maybe he is a good coach, too. I don't know one way or the other. All I do know is that Derrick Bails seems to have regressed and Big Mike was no better this year than last. I would assume coaching the big men is his responsibility. Maybe he was involved in recruiting Will Neighbour- although Joe Kleine is likely as familiar to Neighbour as someone who played in the English soccer league in the mid-90's is to me.

Coach Sullivan is responsible for Will Neighbors.

I assume I am missing a joke of some type- or is Coach Sullivan someone I should know?

Oops. For some reason I always want to call coach Cunningham Sullivan. I meant Charles Cunningham. Sorry. Those damn brain cells keep disappearing at a greater rate every day.

Makes sense. He does look Irish