(05-25-2011 04:53 PM)KennesawBasketball Wrote:  We only have to recruit for a 1 year ban, which isn't much, and to be honest, with the loss of scholarship, we won't recruit much for next year either, so we are probably only signing 1-2 guys at most next year. After that the post season ban will be lifted, we will start to scholarships back and we will be back on the road to recovery. We get rid of 5 of our best players, then will lost 25 games this coming year...we can have a good season this year with that talent in place.

You are insane. You dont think every school we recuit against wont tell recruits this over and over and over again? Even after we pay the penelty, people will use this against us.

This is a 3-5 year process. After the post seaosn ban. If it is only 1 year.

Plus you really think Cummings, Anderson, Dawson and Oshmen will stick around if they play in the post season?

@ K'saw owls: Never said Ingle and his staff were awful. What I said was that for his style of offense to be successful, that they had to be very good shooters and they had to take care of the ball. It was a plodding style that relied on set plays. Wisconsin makes it work every year, but the Owls haven't made it work in 6-7 years. Ignorant, I am not.

As for the academics, before I saw the report I would've agreed with you that it was an after thought that was used as the "moral reason" for his firing. After reading the report, it was a big part of the reason he was let go. Let's not kid ourselves, though, if you don't win you get fired.

I'm curious, anyone know the graduation rate over the past 11 years?

@ K'saw Basketball: I'm not questioning that by Ingle winning the DII championship, he is the best coach in our history. I questioned your definition of "awful in every sense of the word" when describing Zenoni and Yarlett. Zenoni (& Yarlett as an asst.) won their conference and went to the national tournament, losing to the eventual national champion. Yarlett has the highest winning % of all 3 coaches. I'm simply saying, that can't be described as "awful in every sense of the word."

KSU was going DI whether Ingle was the coach or not. It was something that Betty Seigel wanted very badly, as did Dr. Waples. You know, that whole adding to her legacy thing.


Looking forward, Coach Preston knew this was going to be the punishment. Everyone in that athletic department knew it a while back. Next season will be like being the 1 legged man in an arse kicking contest. No post season ban next year, so "they have that going for them........which is nice."

Agree with most of those points hooter. I wouldn't say that Ingle's offense required great shooters, I would say that it required a GREAT penetrator to set up open looks for other players. Terrence Hill and Golden Ingle were both great penetrators so our offense worked for the most part during those seasons. When you look back at that first D1 season it is amazing we won 1 conference game, much less 10. We had 8 freshman, a guy in his first year back from a 2 1/2 year mormon mission, a juco player that we signed in June, and a returning 1/2 scholarship player. That team winning 10 games in conference was a greater accomplishment in some senses than winning the national championship. I thought that was Ingle's best coaching job while he was here. That team should have gone 0-30, yet somehow had a respectable season. When Ingle did that I really thought he was going to be in it for the long haul.

KB, I think your right about Ingle making that happen was pretty impressive. I feel that the past season or two, the intensity was lost. Think if the team played the way they did against GT the entire season. In Ingle's book, he mentioned about his Cherokee HS(I think) team in the state championship didn't give up and played as a team even as they lost. I didn't see this the past two seasons and there was a lot of yelling at each other on the court. I feel that either Ingle was either too comfortable or acted kind of how a captain accepts that his ship is sinking.

I feel his offense could be helped by either good penetrators or exceptional shooting(what offense wouldn't) but communication and teamwork were essential for his offense which was lacking the past few years. This goes to explain the discourse with the team and Cummings, mentioned above. Also, communication leads to better defense which can lead to better offense.

Agree with that kelti. The players and the staff weren't on the same page for most of the season and it showed. Again - mutual blame is to be given just as in the academic situation. Hopefully the guys will get things worked out going into next year.

"I feel his offense could be helped by either good penetrators or exceptional shooting(what offense wouldn't) but communication and teamwork were essential for his offense which was lacking the past few years. This goes to explain the discourse with the team and Cummings, mentioned above. Also, communication leads to better defense which can lead to better offense."
____________________________________________________
1st: As you admit above, all offenses would love to have good penetrators and exceptional shooting. However, his offense was reliant on picks, proper floor spacing, and not turning the ball over. They did none of these things well over the past 6 seasons. Add to that a team shooting 30% from the 3point line and you've got a recipe for a losing season.

2nd: his offense requires good shooters. Good as defined by your post players shooting above 50% and wings knocking shots down around 35% to 45%. His offense is geared towards having strong post players, but his teams lack that. He needed to change his offense to suit the players he had, they needed to play more motion and get the ball up and down the floor. For whatever reason, he stuck with an offense that was not suited to his players and is easily defended.

3rd: One of the most telling (and underrated) stats you can look at, is number of assists for the team in a season. If you have a bunch, you've got guys who love to play together. It often tells you how good an offense is, as well. The more assists, the better the offense.

4th: If a coach is unwilling to play to his players strengths or recruit the wrong players for his system, then it will not turn out good. So, you can blame the players if you want, but it is more likely the coaches who are at fault.

As for Ga. Tech, I was at the game. It had more to do with Tech players not playing hard, then the Owls' intensity. 8 minutes to go and Tech was down by less than 10. Tech was playing awful and taking stupid shots. The last 4-5 minutes, Tech turned the ball over and took really stupid shots. As happy as I was with the win, I told someone that it was all smoke and mirrors and not to believe that the Owls were that good......