since Mike Newell left 20 years ago. So what is your opinion of what it will take to recruit the type of players we need to win the SBC and get to the postseason on a fairly regular basis? We have the facilities now, so that's not a problem. It's been said that things go in cycles. Well our cycle is long overdue. What would you do immediately if you were in charge of the program?

(12-31-2010 05:08 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  since Mike Newell left 20 years ago. So what is your opinion of what it will take to recruit the type of players we need to win the SBC and get to the postseason on a fairly regular basis? We have the facilities now, so that's not a problem. It's been said that things go in cycles. Well our cycle is long overdue. What would you do immediately if you were in charge of the program?

I don't have a clue. And luckily it's not my job.

I guess I can come up with a few ways- cheating; paying players; signing kids with questionable character; taking more chances on kids with questionable academics. Not really big on any of them. I guess I'm okay with trying the last one on occasion. Didn't work with Will Coleman and a couple of others. It looks like it will pan out with Will Neighbour. I guess you can try to sign one of those kids a year- can't do more than that or you'll leave yourself in a hole.

I assumed everyone would understand I was talking about doing things legally. Certainly the Will Coleman and Will Neighbour idea is a workable one. I would maybe include signing a Gus Leeper, Jake Yancey type each year. And redshirt most of them once you get a pipeline of 6'10" players going. I think you have to take a chance on some skyscrapers, even though they might not be able to walk and chew bubble gum at the same time when you get them. At least they have potential which can be utilized at some point. And I don't buy the idea that you don't have a clue. Just because it's not your job, you've been around basketball and the program for a long time and certainly have seen how some programs continue to prosper while other seem to stay about the same.

(12-31-2010 05:08 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  So what is your opinion of what it will take to recruit the type of players we need to win the SBC and get to the postseason on a fairly regular basis?

Seems to me that the question should be "what kind of system works best with the players we are able to get?". We're doing that this year, kind of.

I don't know why the motion offense won't work with the quick athletes we are able to bring in. That's where I'd go. Down the hall, to the left. Coach Foley is an expert.

[quote='outsideualr' pid='6074281' dateline='1293833285']
since Mike Newell left 20 years ago.


What's wrong with that?

(12-31-2010 05:31 PM)Scotto Wrote:  

(12-31-2010 05:08 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  So what is your opinion of what it will take to recruit the type of players we need to win the SBC and get to the postseason on a fairly regular basis?

Seems to me that the question should be "what kind of system works best with the players we are able to get?". We're doing that this year, kind of.

I don't know why the motion offense won't work with the quick athletes we are able to bring in. That's where I'd go. Down the hall, to the left. Coach Foley is an expert.

Now that's one of the most sensible ideas I've heard in a long time. Why not draw on the talents of one of the best coaches in the game, women or men. However, I recall Steve telling me one time that while Joe is a great coach, his philosphy is different. Maybe that's the problem. I will say this. Coach Foley told me personally one time that the motion offense is hard to teach, hard to learn and hard to defend. Maybe Steve could send our players to Coach Foley's summer basketball camp for kids.

(12-31-2010 05:39 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  Coach Foley told me personally one time that the motion offense is hard to teach, hard to learn and hard to defend.

I don't doubt that. But is it a preferred system given our student-athletes..? That's the question.

Now that I can't answer. I think most of the kids we're able to recruit are best suited to play an up and down style but when they get here they find that's not what we do. And if you don't allow kids to play to their talents, you're not going to be a very good team. If you want to play a structured half court offense, you need to be recruiting a totally different type of athlete than we're recruiting.

(12-31-2010 05:45 PM)outsideualr Wrote:  I think most of the kids we're able to recruit are best suited to play an up and down style

They can play motion offense, and still run with the ball when they have the opportuity to do so. The Lady Trojans run when they get break opportunities to do so. When they have to, they pull it back out and run their motion. They don't play street ball or playground ball, if that is what you're talking about.

(12-31-2010 06:39 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  They can play motion offense, and still run with the ball when they have the opportuity to do so.

Sure. Everyone approaches this as an either/or situation, and it is not. Teams may have a strong half-court game as their bread and butter and may be basically conservative in their approach, and still run when the opportunity shows itself.