80 minutes divided among Will, Gus and James. All three won't be on the court together very often with Isler at the 3. That is basically 27 minutes each on average. I expect Will will have that, but the other two will be a little short of that. So there are a few minutes there for Hill. If no one gets hurt, we have plenty of depth at the post.

The big issue is the pivot and that is just 40 minutes. Gus needs to play 20 minutes. That leaves 20 minutes. Some of the other "bigs" can play the 4 and we can get 7 minutes a game out of Will as center. Now you have to get 13 minutes. Most sbc teams don't have a 2nd string center so jw can play it some.

I really think we are going to have to play some zone this year. If you can play 10 minutes of zone a game, you only have to play 30 minutes of man defense by a center. That means gus and will can just about cover 30 minutes. The kid from tx is going to have to give us 7 minutes a game if he can.

I don't think we can count on Poulter this year. Someone told me he told them he's going to have surgery on his foot again. If that's the case, he's not going to play much, if at all, this year. So the five is going to be mainly in the hands of Gus, Will, and probably Hill. I guess James could play there also, but it's not his natural position for sure.

does he get a medical red shirt? That will be a 6 year senior.

If he is good enough to contribute, I would assume they would apply for a sixth year, but I believe they can't do that until after his normal eligibility is concluded. In other words, either during or after his fifth season. That's a long time away. Who knows what will happen by then. Probable new AD. Possible new coach. The young man might not even be here next year if he can't contribute. Players have a way of leaving before their time here is finished. Like most programs these days.

(09-23-2013 09:52 AM)outsideualr Wrote:  If he is good enough to contribute, I would assume they would apply for a sixth year, but I believe they can't do that until after his normal eligibility is concluded. In other words, either during or after his fifth season. That's a long time away. Who knows what will happen by then. Probable new AD. Possible new coach. The young man might not even be here next year if he can't contribute. Players have a way of leaving before their time here is finished. Like most programs these days.

Don't you think you might have that backwards? Possible new AD, and if that happens, probable new coach. I would hope that if we got a new AD, he'd certainly want to change coaches. Why would a new AD want to keep a guy who hasn't accomplished anymore than Shields has in eleven years? A new AD sure wouldn't get off on the right foot of trying to excite a fan base by keeping a stale coach.

(09-23-2013 12:09 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  A new AD sure wouldn't get off on the right foot of trying to excite a fan base by keeping a stale coach.

On the assumption that exciting the fan base is at the top of his "to do," list, you could be correct.

(09-23-2013 12:19 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  

(09-23-2013 12:09 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  A new AD sure wouldn't get off on the right foot of trying to excite a fan base by keeping a stale coach.

On the assumption that exciting the fan base is at the top of his "to do," list, you could be correct.

Unless Steve has a "bad" year, however that may be defined, I doubt a new AD would come in and immediately fire his head basketball coach. Maybe if he is hired this fall. No way he would come in the late Spring and make that change before he get a feel for the place and what exactly is going on in the UALR athletic department. I would agree that if we lost 18 games, like Kerry predicted, it might be an easy decision. But not if we have a reasonably good season like last year, when we had the 4th best record out of 12 teams.

I don't think he would take immediate action, but he might give an immediate "or else."

Unless he's stupid, he'd better come in and find out real quick why the attendance is dropping like a rock, and make a huge change. Before he can start working on getting the public excited about a change, he'd better make a huge change and hire a new coach. He'd be stupid to leave a guy here that has been here for eleven years. Isn't that a pretty good barometer of what caused the continuing drop in attendance? Some of you people I can't figure out. Ya'll try to come up with anything that you think might save Shields. I think most fans would want to see a complete house cleaning in the athletic department if there was an AD vacancy. Just take a poll on this board. I still believe mjs is Shields agent.

(09-23-2013 02:20 PM)LRTrojan Wrote:  Unless he's stupid, he'd better come in and find out real quick why the attendance is dropping like a rock, and make a huge change. Before he can start working on getting the public excited about a change, he'd better make a huge change and hire a new coach. He'd be stupid to leave a guy here that has been here for eleven years. Isn't that a pretty good barometer of what caused the continuing drop in attendance? Some of you people I can't figure out. Ya'll try to come up with anything that you think might save Shields. I think most fans would want to see a complete house cleaning in the athletic department if there was an AD vacancy. Just take a poll on this board. I still believe mjs is Shields agent.

I'm actually not his agent, and wouldn't lose sleep one way or the other. While I certainly like Steve, my allegiance is to the program, and most coaches know that about their boosters. You have been saying Steve should be fired since 2008. Each year, starting with 2008, I have simply argued he wouldn't be fired. I don't make the decisions, that was just my opinion- And, of course, I was right. At this moment, based on my assessment that Chris won't be on as solid ground as he has been if he doesn't get the UNLV job, my opinion is Steve will be gone if he has a bad year (i.e. under .500) and will be in serious danger if he has a "mediocre" year. If we get a new AD, all bets are off, since I have no idea who he or she will be.

My response had nothing to do with what I might think needs to be done. I just don't think any new AD would come in and summarily fire the coach unless there were something badly out of whack.

I honestly think any new manager looks to put their stamp on things right out of the gate. Most of the time personal is a part of that.

(09-23-2013 03:42 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  My response had nothing to do with what I might think needs to be done. I just don't think any new AD would come in and summarily fire the coach unless there were something badly out of whack.

Something is out of whack when your attendance is falling for years, your season ticket sales have been off about 350 a year for three years, and you're generally the 3rd or 4th best team in a league that is one of the lowest ranked D-1 leagues in the country. Am I the only one on this board that can see this stuff?

I see it and say we can do better.


My complaint is that some ate scared to try to do better.


What if some in a minimum wage job with a 4 year degree said this is the best i can do?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

(09-23-2013 03:44 PM)insideualr Wrote:  I honestly think any new manager looks to put their stamp on things right out of the gate. Most of the time personal is a part of that.

You know a lot more about the business world than I do. Still, I don't see an AD who is hired late Spring firing the basketball coach on his first week or two on the job (unless something is really out of whack, like Pappy said). If he has year(s) and money left on his contract, a firing decision may not be in his hands anyway unless the folks on this board (and others) but their money where there mouth is. Even if his buyout is only in the 200-250K range, I just don't know anyone in LR who would pay that to get rid of a coach (I'm talking about at UALR, not Fayetteville).

Like I said before, and Pappy said above, this is my opinion on what would realistically happen. I'm not offering an opinion on what should or shouldn't be done. I have never fired anyone and don't intend to start now.

I've finally figured it out. The strategy to keeping Shields employed here is to keep his contract extended where it can't be bought out.

Whether or not I think a new AD should fire Steve eventually, I certainly do NOT think he ought to waltz in here without knowing the circumstances and fire him right from the get-go. Give him a line in the sand, for sure, but why would anyone walk into a new job and just fire the hands unless there was something scandalous going on?

I love yall.

I dont know what can happen about the money.

But i do know if we cant produce a deep run in the sbc tournament most years we are failing as a program.

If we dont try to correct it by getting a new coach and system then i dont need to put any more money in it.

If steve can produce then we can keep him but a ten year record minus the ncaa trip is 4-9. That history says a lot about what to expect from here unless he changes to fit the plays and quits over coaching from the sideline.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

If we were to hire a new AD immediately, he might tell Steve that he had to do thus and so to keep his job, and nothing wrong with that. If he fired him after this season, so be it. But I doubt he would walk in from Day #1 and fire him. In the first place, that would be terribly disruptive to the program to have the coach fired with no scandal at the beginning of the season. In the second place, any AD worth is going to want to see the lay of the land before he takes action.