You post here occasionally, and so you know something of our frustrations at this program - almost there, but always the bridesmaid.

From the outside looking in, what is there that we need to do that we aren't doing? We can't get rid of the Hog-dominant environment. If you were the AD and coach, what would be your first steps.

(03-23-2009 11:41 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  You post here occasionally, and so you know something of our frustrations at this program - almost there, but always the bridesmaid.

From the outside looking in, what is there that we need to do that we aren't doing? We can't get rid of the Hog-dominant environment. If you were the AD and coach, what would be your first steps.

Well. You look at WKU, Gonzaga, Xavier, Southern Illinios, Butler, pick your team they always seem to schedule up. Maybe that is part of equation. But then you don't want to just play money games and you have to be prepared for the fact that you are going to get waxed in some of them. It pains me a bit, because I hate non-conference losses. But fans want to see those games, recruits want to play in those games, and they probably do make the team better, sharper, tougher.


And... I don't know if I should go here... but I am not a fan of your coach. I respect your program and I think you have great fans, but... I just don't know if Sheilds will ever do more than he has. I don't know maybe he will read this and prove me wrong.

I've noticed two things about him. #1 he doesn't seem charismatic. He doesn't seem to be that coach that players love playing for and draws people in. I mean, I don't know the man I'm just giving you my impression. I'm sure he's a nice guy. #2 he is really up tight. When I was watching our game in Little Rock I really noticed the striking difference between Shields and McDonald. McDonald was calm, collected, confident. Shields was pacing, screaming at the refs, his body language was really out of control. Players pick up on that.

Good asessment, especially the "playing up". A 200 plus SOS does not help the cause.

If pacing and yelling wins games, we'd be undefeated and playing for the N/C..!

(03-23-2009 06:30 PM)Scotto Wrote:  Good asessment, especially the "playing up". A 200 plus SOS does not help the cause.

If pacing and yelling wins games, we'd be undefeated and playing for the N/C..!

I think most of our fans were in favor of ditching the money games, for home and homes with midmajors. Not sure just how much of that 200+ RPI was our fault. I think to some degree we may have tried to schedule winnable games. However, I don't think anyone could have figured just how down Pepperdine, Loyola Marymount, MoState, LaTech, Rice and even ORU were going to be. In some seasons, those 6 teams plus Wright State (who ended up being reasonably good) and Memphis would be a heck of a nonconference schedule.

With regard to the coach being "wound too tight"- Scotto, you and I seemed to be outnumbered (at least on this board) with regard to the "Stevee incident". Just your typical coach tutoring a player on the sidelines, I guess.

How many of WKU's OOC games were money games..? I'm asking because I don't know.

(03-23-2009 06:01 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

(03-23-2009 11:41 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  You post here occasionally, and so you know something of our frustrations at this program - almost there, but always the bridesmaid.

From the outside looking in, what is there that we need to do that we aren't doing? We can't get rid of the Hog-dominant environment. If you were the AD and coach, what would be your first steps.

Well. You look at WKU, Gonzaga, Xavier, Southern Illinios, Butler, pick your team they always seem to schedule up. Maybe that is part of equation. But then you don't want to just play money games and you have to be prepared for the fact that you are going to get waxed in some of them. It pains me a bit, because I hate non-conference losses. But fans want to see those games, recruits want to play in those games, and they probably do make the team better, sharper, tougher.


And... I don't know if I should go here... but I am not a fan of your coach. I respect your program and I think you have great fans, but... I just don't know if Sheilds will ever do more than he has. I don't know maybe he will read this and prove me wrong.

I've noticed two things about him. #1 he doesn't seem charismatic. He doesn't seem to be that coach that players love playing for and draws people in. I mean, I don't know the man I'm just giving you my impression. I'm sure he's a nice guy. #2 he is really up tight. When I was watching our game in Little Rock I really noticed the striking difference between Shields and McDonald. McDonald was calm, collected, confident. Shields was pacing, screaming at the refs, his body language was really out of control. Players pick up on that.

I think you have made some interesting points. Steve is a very nice man. Off the court, he's a very warm and engaging person. If you knew him, you'd like him. But you make some points that LRTrojan has made on numerous occasions. He is not a charismatic personality. But a lot of great coaches fit that pattern. I think your second point might have more validity than any made thus far. If a coach is that tight, it could translate over to the players. I really believe that could be why we haven't done well in the tournaments.

It would be interesting to see how the kids would do if the coach wasn't even there, and they could just play. Just have someone make the substitutions, but no coaching during the game. Of course, if there was a situation at the end of the game, have someone explain to the kids how they should procede at that point, but in general, I know that's pie in the sky, but I'd just like to see the kids have free rein. Shoot when you have a good shot. Fast break when you can. Don't worry about the shot clock. Just play. I don't know if we'd do any better, but, hey, it might be fun to watch.

(03-24-2009 10:17 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-23-2009 06:01 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

(03-23-2009 11:41 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  You post here occasionally, and so you know something of our frustrations at this program - almost there, but always the bridesmaid.

From the outside looking in, what is there that we need to do that we aren't doing? We can't get rid of the Hog-dominant environment. If you were the AD and coach, what would be your first steps.

Well. You look at WKU, Gonzaga, Xavier, Southern Illinios, Butler, pick your team they always seem to schedule up. Maybe that is part of equation. But then you don't want to just play money games and you have to be prepared for the fact that you are going to get waxed in some of them. It pains me a bit, because I hate non-conference losses. But fans want to see those games, recruits want to play in those games, and they probably do make the team better, sharper, tougher.


And... I don't know if I should go here... but I am not a fan of your coach. I respect your program and I think you have great fans, but... I just don't know if Sheilds will ever do more than he has. I don't know maybe he will read this and prove me wrong.

I've noticed two things about him. #1 he doesn't seem charismatic. He doesn't seem to be that coach that players love playing for and draws people in. I mean, I don't know the man I'm just giving you my impression. I'm sure he's a nice guy. #2 he is really up tight. When I was watching our game in Little Rock I really noticed the striking difference between Shields and McDonald. McDonald was calm, collected, confident. Shields was pacing, screaming at the refs, his body language was really out of control. Players pick up on that.

I think you have made some interesting points. Steve is a very nice man. Off the court, he's a very warm and engaging person. If you knew him, you'd like him. But you make some points that LRTrojan has made on numerous occasions. He is not a charismatic personality. But a lot of great coaches fit that pattern. I think your second point might have more validity than any made thus far. If a coach is that tight, it could translate over to the players. I really believe that could be why we haven't done well in the tournaments.

It would be interesting to see how the kids would do if the coach wasn't even there, and they could just play. Just have someone make the substitutions, but no coaching during the game. Of course, if there was a situation at the end of the game, have someone explain to the kids how they should procede at that point, but in general, I know that's pie in the sky, but I'd just like to see the kids have free rein. Shoot when you have a good shot. Fast break when you can. Don't worry about the shot clock. Just play. I don't know if we'd do any better, but, hey, it might be fun to watch.

Reminds me of when Sidney was there. I honestly believe we would have won more than 4 games if we just had "rolled out the ball" and let the guys play. Certainly would not have won less than 4 games.

(03-24-2009 10:39 AM)mjs Wrote:  I honestly believe we would have won more than 4 games if we just had "rolled out the ball" and let the guys play.

Isn't that what Coach Foley does..? Teach in practice. Let them play in games.

(03-24-2009 10:39 AM)mjs Wrote:  Reminds me of when Sidney was there. I honestly believe we would have won more than 4 games if we just had "rolled out the ball" and let the guys play. Certainly would not have won less than 4 games.

Porter won 18 with essentially the same guys.

(03-24-2009 10:39 AM)mjs Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 10:17 AM)Dr. J. Wrote:  

(03-23-2009 06:01 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

(03-23-2009 11:41 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  You post here occasionally, and so you know something of our frustrations at this program - almost there, but always the bridesmaid.

From the outside looking in, what is there that we need to do that we aren't doing? We can't get rid of the Hog-dominant environment. If you were the AD and coach, what would be your first steps.

Well. You look at WKU, Gonzaga, Xavier, Southern Illinios, Butler, pick your team they always seem to schedule up. Maybe that is part of equation. But then you don't want to just play money games and you have to be prepared for the fact that you are going to get waxed in some of them. It pains me a bit, because I hate non-conference losses. But fans want to see those games, recruits want to play in those games, and they probably do make the team better, sharper, tougher.


And... I don't know if I should go here... but I am not a fan of your coach. I respect your program and I think you have great fans, but... I just don't know if Sheilds will ever do more than he has. I don't know maybe he will read this and prove me wrong.

I've noticed two things about him. #1 he doesn't seem charismatic. He doesn't seem to be that coach that players love playing for and draws people in. I mean, I don't know the man I'm just giving you my impression. I'm sure he's a nice guy. #2 he is really up tight. When I was watching our game in Little Rock I really noticed the striking difference between Shields and McDonald. McDonald was calm, collected, confident. Shields was pacing, screaming at the refs, his body language was really out of control. Players pick up on that.

I think you have made some interesting points. Steve is a very nice man. Off the court, he's a very warm and engaging person. If you knew him, you'd like him. But you make some points that LRTrojan has made on numerous occasions. He is not a charismatic personality. But a lot of great coaches fit that pattern. I think your second point might have more validity than any made thus far. If a coach is that tight, it could translate over to the players. I really believe that could be why we haven't done well in the tournaments.

It would be interesting to see how the kids would do if the coach wasn't even there, and they could just play. Just have someone make the substitutions, but no coaching during the game. Of course, if there was a situation at the end of the game, have someone explain to the kids how they should procede at that point, but in general, I know that's pie in the sky, but I'd just like to see the kids have free rein. Shoot when you have a good shot. Fast break when you can. Don't worry about the shot clock. Just play. I don't know if we'd do any better, but, hey, it might be fun to watch.

Reminds me of when Sidney was there. I honestly believe we would have won more than 4 games if we just had "rolled out the ball" and let the guys play. Certainly would not have won less than 4 games.

Why did Sid fail? I don't remember him standing up all that much , much less yelling.

Either he couldn't motivate, which I doubt. Or (and this is purely a guess) he was trying to bring in pro sets that were just too complicated for the team to catch onto quickly. A guess. Someone else have a better one?

(03-24-2009 11:39 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  Either he couldn't motivate, which I doubt. Or (and this is purely a guess) he was trying to bring in pro sets that were just too complicated for the team to catch onto quickly. A guess. Someone else have a better one?

I suspect it was the later. He certainly knew the game.

Which brings up an interesting point. Coach Moncrief played 4 years college ball and then 11 years in the NBA, including 5-time All-Star and 2-time defensive player of the year. Coach Shields played one year at McLennan (?) before becoming a golf-stud at Baylor.

Coach Moncrief couldn't get it done. And Coach Shields has won LOTS of divisional championships. Seems backwards.

Doing and teaching are two different things.

(03-24-2009 12:09 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  Doing and teaching are two different things.

For sure. Phil Jackson was a role player for the Knicks. Probably best pro coach since Auerbach for the Celtics. Did Auerbach even play?

(03-24-2009 11:25 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  

(03-24-2009 10:39 AM)mjs Wrote:  Reminds me of when Sidney was there. I honestly believe we would have won more than 4 games if we just had "rolled out the ball" and let the guys play. Certainly would not have won less than 4 games.

Porter won 18 with essentially the same guys.

Maybe it was because they were a year older and better. Coaching might not have had a lot to do with it. So if Sidney had been a better coach, we might have won four more games. That's great. An eight win season.

(03-23-2009 06:01 PM)Hilltopper2K Wrote:  

(03-23-2009 11:41 AM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  You post here occasionally, and so you know something of our frustrations at this program - almost there, but always the bridesmaid.

From the outside looking in, what is there that we need to do that we aren't doing? We can't get rid of the Hog-dominant environment. If you were the AD and coach, what would be your first steps.

Well. You look at WKU, Gonzaga, Xavier, Southern Illinios, Butler, pick your team they always seem to schedule up. Maybe that is part of equation. But then you don't want to just play money games and you have to be prepared for the fact that you are going to get waxed in some of them. It pains me a bit, because I hate non-conference losses. But fans want to see those games, recruits want to play in those games, and they probably do make the team better, sharper, tougher.


And... I don't know if I should go here... but I am not a fan of your coach. I respect your program and I think you have great fans, but... I just don't know if Sheilds will ever do more than he has. I don't know maybe he will read this and prove me wrong.

I've noticed two things about him. #1 he doesn't seem charismatic. He doesn't seem to be that coach that players love playing for and draws people in. I mean, I don't know the man I'm just giving you my impression. I'm sure he's a nice guy. #2 he is really up tight. When I was watching our game in Little Rock I really noticed the striking difference between Shields and McDonald. McDonald was calm, collected, confident. Shields was pacing, screaming at the refs, his body language was really out of control. Players pick up on that.

Interesting comment. FWIW, over the years when I brought a guest(s) with me to games, the things you mention were their same observations.

(03-23-2009 09:34 PM)Scotto Wrote:  How many of WKU's OOC games were money games..? I'm asking because I don't know.

0

Hats off to Topps. Very good SOS without money games. See guys, it can be done.

(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.