Article on TN first day of practice

[BroadwayVa]

Not

A


Chance. Not this year, or the next or any thereafter. Water (Aqua-foliaceae) finds its own level.

Personally, I'd be happy if Tn is a highly ranked team when Geno meets them again.

 

[JordyG]

Personally, I'd be happy if Tn is a highly ranked team when Geno meets them again.

So would I. Yet a team without height at the 5 (and KK is at best a poor mans Mercedes) with a long history of undisciplined play at both ends of the court makes a bad combination. SEC teams willing to slow the pace are going to feast inside, and/or just wait for the TO's. Next year Tenn will be lucky to be top 20. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean Holly's team won't play like demons against UConn, which I'm willing to bet they will, each and every time.

 

[Geew1992]

Tennessee Guard-Forward Meme Jackson:
On what stands out about this year's team:
"What stands out to me is everyone is working hard. (It's) not just one, two or three people, the whole team is putting in work before and after practice. This summer we played a lot of pick-up, so that's just something new to me that we haven't done in the past."

Hmmmm...........Haven't we heard this every year??!!

 

[willtalk]

Any or all of: learning to run an offense; executing against zone defenses; making better decisions with the basketball; better shot selection...
These all come to mind pretty quickly based on the last few year's of watching them.--------------------
I think this is just more evidence that the TN style of play is not evolving to keep up with the way the game is played today..

That is a very important point. Holly stated a while back that even Pat Summit would not be as successful today. Holly is running the system she learned from Pat, but probably not as effectively. Still Pats system certainly was outdated. Tenn was on the way down even before she was effected by her illness. I think Holly was right in respect to her statement. Pat was certainly able to run her own system more effectively than her student does, but never the less the long term decline would have been the same.

 

[BroadwayVa]

That is a very important point. Holly stated a while back that even Pat Summit would not be as successful today. Holly is running the system she learned from Pat, but probably not as effectively. Still, Pats system certainly was outdated. Tenn was on the way down even before she was effected by her illness. I think Holly was right in respect to her statement. Pat was certainly able to run her own system more effectively than her student does, but never the less the long-term decline would have been the same.

I'm not a Pat hater but I am a Holly detractor! The disease that took Pat was working on her brain years before symptoms showed. So, as aggressive as she was and had a hate of losing akin to Geno's I believe, if healthy, she would have moved her "game" forward. With seeing the success of Geno's motion and movement and all the rest of his "game" she would have adapted.
Holly, however (at least not to my knowledge), does not have mental issues that would preclude her from taking Pat's game and moving to the new game.
Most coaches would, out of reverence for Pat, keep her game for a period then show the world what her knowledge and improvements could do. Holly is not an innovator and appears stuck in 1992. I want more for Tenn and for Women's BB in general.

 

[willtalk]

I'm not a Pat hater but I am a Holly detractor! The disease that took Pat was working on her brain years before symptoms showed. So, as aggressive as she was and had a hate of losing akin to Geno's I believe, if healthy, she would have moved her "game" forward. With seeing the success of Geno's motion and movement and all the rest of his "game" she would have adapted.
Holly, however (at least not to my knowledge), does not have mental issues that would preclude her from taking Pat's game and moving to the new game.
Most coaches would, out of reverence for Pat, keep her game for a period then show the world what her knowledge and improvements could do. Holly is not an innovator and appears stuck in 1992. I want more for Tenn and for Women's BB in general.

A coaches system is not exclusive to the offense or defense that they run. It also involves how they relate to players. The WCBB landscape has been changing at an excelerated rate on many levels and in many area's. This is not just in the level of skills that the players bring out of high school but also their attitudes.

John Wooden, some time after retirement, once stated that he would not be able to coach that present crop of college players. Pat was an old school disciplinarian. With her it was her way or the highway. It was not just her technical approach to the game that was going out of style but her relationship to her players. The choices available to players today in respect to excellent coaching and top programs has increased. Along with an increased level of Prima Donna attitudes presently coming out of high school, most players are less likely to put up with a Pat Summit approach as they were during her day.

It was not so much that Pats coaching ability declined, rather the level of coaches around her got exponentially better. She basically only had to compete against coaches like Vivian Stringer, not only in just recruiting but also in the NCAA's. I am not criticizing Pats coaching style. I think there is a lot to be said for it, but it was one that could not be sustained as the WCBB landscape changed. One only has to look at the increasing amount of transfers taking place.

In respect to her adjusting her offense moving forward, I am not as convinced as you that she would have done so. Her strength in coaching was her force of will. Her do it my way or no way approach. That was a major part of her personality. It is aspect of her personality that also makes her less adaptable. Does anyone really believe that she would mimic or copy anything that Geno did? She wouldn't based on principle alone. Even though the early stage symptoms of AH might include rigidity , that was already part of her personality so it does not follow that it was what kept her from changing her offense. A persons strength is usually also their weakness.

 

[Bayareahusky]

A coaches system is not exclusive to the offense or defense that they run. It also involves how they relate to players. The WCBB landscape has been changing at an excelerated rate on many levels and in many area's. This is not just in the level of skills that the players bring out of high school but also their attitudes.

John Wooden, some time after retirement, once stated that he would not be able to coach that present crop of college players. Pat was an old school disciplinarian. With her it was her way or the highway. It was not just her technical approach to the game that was going out of style but her relationship to her players. The choices available to players today in respect to excellent coaching and top programs has increased. Along with an increased level of Prima Donna attitudes our to high school, most players are less likely to put up with a Pat Summit approach as they were during her day.

It was not so much that Pats coaching ability declined, rather the level of coaches around her got exponentially better. She was competing against coaches like Vivian Stringer, not only in recruiting but also in the NCAA's. I am not criticizing her coaching style. I think there is a lot to be said for it, but it was one that could not be sustained as the WCBB landscape changed. One only has to look at the increasing amount of transfers taking place.

In respect to her adjusting her offense moving forward, I am not as convinced as you that she would have done so. Her strength in coaching was her force of will. Her do it my way or no way approach. That was a major part of her personality. It is aspect of her personality that also makes her less adaptable. Does anyone really believe that she would mimic or copy anything that Geno did? She wouldn't based on principle alone. Even though the early stage symptoms of AH might include rigidity , that was already part of her personality so it does not follow that it was what kept her from changing her offense. A persons strength is usually also their weakness.

Good post Willtalk.... Yes Pat was a great one... even though she did not keep up with the advancement of particularly the offensive schemes..... and one of the great mysteries is why (seemingly) Holly has not sought help on the offensive side of things..... when she had Mercedes it was..... "get the ball in to Mercedes".... and there seems to be no idea of how to run a productive and efficient offense in Holly's reign....

Added to that.... Pat - even in her later years - could impose her will on her players to improve performance... and it seems that Holly is devoid of this ability.... but with a lunch bucket squad now with no particular stars.... perhaps they will find a way.... ... as with the start of each year I am curious as to the offensive plan in Knoxville

 

[BroadwayVa]

A coaches system is not exclusive to the offense or defense that they run. It also involves how they relate to players. The WCBB landscape has been changing at an excelerated rate on many levels and in many area's. This is not just in the level of skills that the players bring out of high school but also their attitudes.

John Wooden, some time after retirement, once stated that he would not be able to coach that present crop of college players. Pat was an old school disciplinarian. With her it was her way or the highway. It was not just her technical approach to the game that was going out of style but her relationship to her players. The choices available to players today in respect to excellent coaching and top programs has increased. Along with an increased level of Prima Donna attitudes our to high school, most players are less likely to put up with a Pat Summit approach as they were during her day.

It was not so much that Pats coaching ability declined, rather the level of coaches around her got exponentially better. She was competing against coaches like Vivian Stringer, not only in recruiting but also in the NCAA's. I am not criticizing her coaching style. I think there is a lot to be said for it, but it was one that could not be sustained as the WCBB landscape changed. One only has to look at the increasing amount of transfers taking place.

In respect to her adjusting her offense moving forward, I am not as convinced as you that she would have done so. Her strength in coaching was her force of will. Her do it my way or no way approach. That was a major part of her personality. It is aspect of her personality that also makes her less adaptable. Does anyone really believe that she would mimic or copy anything that Geno did? She wouldn't based on principle alone. Even though the early stage symptoms of AH might include rigidity , that was already part of her personality so it does not follow that it was what kept her from changing her offense. A persons strength is usually also their weakness.

Interesting hypothesis. See your last sentence: What then is Geno's strength?
One comment, if you will allow: If Pat's coaching ability didn't decline and others improved "exponentially" doesn't that infer a decline, i.e. not keeping up with the "game"? My belief of Geno's success is he not only kept up with the "total" changes in the game and led in the technical aspects/performance of the "game". Sorry, I guess that is 2 comments.

 

[Justavisitor]

1. "We've got to make layups." - This is something that each player should take care of outside of practice. A waste of practice time

2. "We've got to make free throws." See above answer

3. "We've got to cut down on turnovers, That comes from perfect execution that comes from repetition in practice. Time wasted on layup drills and free throw shooting takes away from execution.

4. We've got to play solid defense. - Tenn's defense hasn't changed since at least 1995, when I first watched. Pressure the ball full court and overplay passing lanes. The changes in rules against contact hurt that defensive strategy. But Warlick is wedded to Pat's style.

5. The rebounding aspect is huge. Sure is. I remember a time when late in games Tenn got as many offensive rebounds as it needed to score and opponents got 1 shot at their end. The days of physically dominating front lines is gone at Rockytop.

1. She didn’t say they’d utilize practice time to practice layups. Emphasis could quite possibly mean punishment for misses. Players have and are using extra time outside of practice to polish up skill sets.

2. See above and replace lay ups with free throws.

3, cutting down turnovers will be assisted by not relying on so many freshmen. UConn freshmen weren’t ready last season either, Thus the short rotation.


4. Defense has been solid at TN but not in years where freshmen were heavily relied on..see above. UConn doesn’t have to expose those freshmen to that reality.


5. Rebounding was a weakness last season. Needs fixing, but having more experience and maturity, off season strength that’s added, helps.


All 5 things above were weaknesses last year and need more improvement.

 

[Rocket009]

1. She didn’t say they’d utilize practice time to practice layups. Emphasis could quite possibly mean punishment for misses. Players have and are using extra time outside of practice to polish up skill sets.

2. See above and replace lay ups with free throws.

3, cutting down turnovers will be assisted by not relying on so many freshmen. UConn freshmen weren’t ready last season either, Thus the short rotation.


4. Defense has been solid at TN but not in years where freshmen were heavily relied on..see above. UConn doesn’t have to expose those freshmen to that reality.


5. Rebounding was a weakness last season. Needs fixing, but having more experience and maturity, off season strength that’s added, helps.


All 5 things above were weaknesses last year and need more improvement.

But you omitted the last part "If we focus on those things, everything else will take care of itself."

I think we all saw many other things last year that needed a lot of attention and will not just take care of themselves - unless your goal is finish in the top half of the SEC and to only win 1 game in the tournament.

 

[willtalk]

Interesting hypothesis. See your last sentence: What then is Geno's strength?
One comment, if you will allow: If Pat's coaching ability didn't decline and others improved "exponentially" doesn't that infer a decline, i.e. not keeping up with the "game"? My belief of Geno's success is he not only kept up with the "total" changes in the game and led in the technical aspects/performance of the "game". Sorry, I guess that is 2 comments.

No that would not indicate a decline. She just ran the system and it had the same effect. The coaching just got better around her. Geno for one. Also today there are so many good coaches in the college ranks. Tara for example used to dominate the Pac 12. Now she has competition from both Oregon's and a couple other schools have improved their programs. The coaches that both of them competed against were mostly ex women basketball players who got their foundations from their own coaches. The game is constantly changing and older coaches will have to change with the times as well.

Strengths might not have been the optimum term to use. It would be better say that the qualities that define a person can manifest in either a positive or negative way. Pat for example was strong willed.
Well a strong will can manifest itself in stubborness.

Geno is in the process of making changes in respect to his program as well. Allowing Stevens to transfer in was an example. The types of players coming out of high school has changed so much that it has impacted the Uconn way. He, unlike Pat is far more able to make the transition. However it is more a matter of does he really want to do it at the cost of what he believes is a better developmental program for his players. Stevens opted out and I believe it was a shock to him. In some cases the old way is actually better.

 

[BroadwayVa]

No that would not indicate a decline. She just ran the system and it had the same effect. The coaching just got better around her. Geno for one. Also today there are so many good coaches in the college ranks. Tara for example used to dominate the Pac 12. Now she has competition from both Oregon's and a couple other schools have improved their programs. The coaches that both of them competed against were mostly ex women basketball players who got their foundations from their own coaches. The game is constantly changing and older coaches will have to change with the times as well.

Strengths might not have been the optimum term to use. It would be better say that the qualities that define a person can manifest in either a positive or negative way. Pat for example was strong willed.
Well a strong will can manifest itself in stubborness.

Geno is in the process of making changes in respect to his program as well. Allowing Stevens to transfer in was an example. The types of players coming out of high school has changed so much that it has impacted the Uconn way. He, unlike Pat is far more able to make the transition. However it is more a matter of does he really want to do it at the cost of what he believes is a better developmental program for his players. Stevens opted out and I believe it was a shock to him. In some cases the old way is actually better.

1:37 AM? when you posted this, wow! Most humans i.e coaches/players evolve. Strong willed Pat (isn't that a synonym for stubborn) and also a symptom of Alzheimer's? Assuming that to be the truth, isn't it conceivable that without being afflicted with the disease she too would have evolved her program?
In terms of accepting 2 transfers: Geno is a winner and will make those changes he feels he needs under certain conditions. Last couple of years he needed an effective post and both Azura and Batouly appeared to be capable of being an effective post. I have posted often when one may say Geno "won't" do something (i.e. take a transfer, play UT, loosen the reins,etc) Never say Never about Geno; he will do whatever it takes to win. The one thing about Geno you can put in the bank: Geno hates to lose.

 

[willtalk]

Broadway: You take my post out of context and and assume conclusions that I never reached or stated. Yes in is conceivable that Pat could have evolved. I never said she couldn't have. I just stated that it was also as possible that she wouldn't have evolved. Considering her background and personality I just think it is more likely that she would not. I was not just referring to her offense, but the basic principles by which she ran her program. How she related to her players. etc. Only part of that had to do with her will although that was a major factor in what contributed to her success.

I also never said said that she was stubborn, rather that a quality of strength that she possesses ( her strong will ) could also negative manifest as stubbornness. I just used her will as an example of how each each quality we possess can have either a positive or negative side. It was just an example I used to clarify the use of the term strength in my previous post.

As to Gino- You totally did not not understand where I was going with my remarks in respect to him. I was referring to a decision he might have to make in respect to if he wants to continue to coach or not. we shall see in time what direction he chooses to take. I suspect it is not as clear as you are assuming. Give it a few more years and then we can continue this conversation.

Your remark about my remarks being posted at 1: 37 AM is reflective of your centric perspective of what I posted. You saw it from what you assumed I was posting rather than taken in context of my other posts and my actual intent. You see what is 1: 37 AM to you is actually 10:37 to me at PST.