jleves
Awesomeness
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 4,311
- Reaction Score
- 15,521
I've done something I tend to avoid after a bad loss (or two) and I went ahead and clicked on a few threads. I've seen Ollie blamed, Napier blamed, Brimah blamed, Olander blamed and even Jim Calhoun blamed. Blaming JC for a team two years removed is kind of silly - I've heard the arguments, but do you really think the team would be playing like this under JC? (yes, I know it's hard to replace a legend, more on that later).
Anybody who is not worried about Ollie's ability to coach needs to watch the game a little closer. A year and a half in, he still hasn't learned how to use timeouts effectively. Part of this may be an adjustment from the NBA where late game timeouts are far more valuable than the college game (being able to advance the ball to half court). But he's really got to learn to use them to stop runs and make adjustments and sometimes just give the two guards who play 65 minutes a breather. Doesn't help much using a bunch of them in the last two minutes of a blowout.
Next, I'm tired of hearing that he can't really be judged until he gets 'his guys.' This is doubly flawed. First, he recruited a lot of these guys directly when JC was the coach, so they are at least 50% his guys to begin with. Second, what makes you think 'his guys' going forward are going to be better than the guys a hall of fame coach was able to recruit? Don't tell me he'll get guys to fit his system. His system is basically JCs system - it's where he started from. He's got way better players sitting on his bench than Houston or SMU has. And I don't want to hear how the front court was left bare. Olander hasn't improved in two years - he's probably gotten worse. Nolan is not a stitch better than he was last year. DD is 6'9 and is a couple boards a game behind Napier. He's down a rebound a game from last year. I'll give Brimah and Facey a pass for now. But none of the bigs have gotten appreciably better and some have regressed. You have to put some of that on the coaching.
How do you have your two best shooters take two shots combined in the first half? Don't tell me the players aren't executing or not shooting. It's his job to get them shots and if they aren't taking them, to correct that situation and get them shooting the ball. There are 4 TV timeouts in a half plus the extra you're going to take - at some point you get in Napiers and Giffeys face and tell them to shoot the damn ball. It's just not acceptable to let them go an entire half with two shots between them.
Finally, I know UConn teams under JC would take at least half a season before you saw a solid 40 minutes. But at this point, he'd have them focused for at least 30 minutes a game. We are seeing maybe 15 minutes of real focus, 15 minutes of interest and 10 minutes of looking totally lost and bewildered. That again is on the coach.
OK - I've ripped him enough. I am just giving examples that a good part of how the team is playing is on the coaching staff. That said he's only in his second year and experience is underrated. He just doesn't have a lot yet. I've reiterated this in the chat room but how many of you were as good at your job in your second year than in your 5th or 10th? I don't want to hear he was the coach on the floor for years in the NBA. He wasn't. He wasn't deciding who played, he wasn't deciding when to call a timeout, he wasn't designing game plans or deciding who was going to guard players on the other team. It's like a solid accountant getting promoted to manage a group of accountants. It takes a while to learn how to be a good manager.
I do think he will be a good coach in the long run. It's just a matter of how long that will take. Hopefully sooner than later, obviously. It may just be that he would be a great NBA coach and not a great college coach. Hopefully he turns into a great coach, but right now, there are lots of things he has to do better.
Blindly saying 'ten toes in' and arguing that none of the way his team is playing is his fault is short sighted and dishonest.
I started the season with my husky blue glasses thinking we had a potential final four team. I've readjusted my lenses and realized we're probably a good 5 years from a sweet 16 elite 8 team from a coaching and player development perspective.
Anybody who is not worried about Ollie's ability to coach needs to watch the game a little closer. A year and a half in, he still hasn't learned how to use timeouts effectively. Part of this may be an adjustment from the NBA where late game timeouts are far more valuable than the college game (being able to advance the ball to half court). But he's really got to learn to use them to stop runs and make adjustments and sometimes just give the two guards who play 65 minutes a breather. Doesn't help much using a bunch of them in the last two minutes of a blowout.
Next, I'm tired of hearing that he can't really be judged until he gets 'his guys.' This is doubly flawed. First, he recruited a lot of these guys directly when JC was the coach, so they are at least 50% his guys to begin with. Second, what makes you think 'his guys' going forward are going to be better than the guys a hall of fame coach was able to recruit? Don't tell me he'll get guys to fit his system. His system is basically JCs system - it's where he started from. He's got way better players sitting on his bench than Houston or SMU has. And I don't want to hear how the front court was left bare. Olander hasn't improved in two years - he's probably gotten worse. Nolan is not a stitch better than he was last year. DD is 6'9 and is a couple boards a game behind Napier. He's down a rebound a game from last year. I'll give Brimah and Facey a pass for now. But none of the bigs have gotten appreciably better and some have regressed. You have to put some of that on the coaching.
How do you have your two best shooters take two shots combined in the first half? Don't tell me the players aren't executing or not shooting. It's his job to get them shots and if they aren't taking them, to correct that situation and get them shooting the ball. There are 4 TV timeouts in a half plus the extra you're going to take - at some point you get in Napiers and Giffeys face and tell them to shoot the damn ball. It's just not acceptable to let them go an entire half with two shots between them.
Finally, I know UConn teams under JC would take at least half a season before you saw a solid 40 minutes. But at this point, he'd have them focused for at least 30 minutes a game. We are seeing maybe 15 minutes of real focus, 15 minutes of interest and 10 minutes of looking totally lost and bewildered. That again is on the coach.
OK - I've ripped him enough. I am just giving examples that a good part of how the team is playing is on the coaching staff. That said he's only in his second year and experience is underrated. He just doesn't have a lot yet. I've reiterated this in the chat room but how many of you were as good at your job in your second year than in your 5th or 10th? I don't want to hear he was the coach on the floor for years in the NBA. He wasn't. He wasn't deciding who played, he wasn't deciding when to call a timeout, he wasn't designing game plans or deciding who was going to guard players on the other team. It's like a solid accountant getting promoted to manage a group of accountants. It takes a while to learn how to be a good manager.
I do think he will be a good coach in the long run. It's just a matter of how long that will take. Hopefully sooner than later, obviously. It may just be that he would be a great NBA coach and not a great college coach. Hopefully he turns into a great coach, but right now, there are lots of things he has to do better.
Blindly saying 'ten toes in' and arguing that none of the way his team is playing is his fault is short sighted and dishonest.
I started the season with my husky blue glasses thinking we had a potential final four team. I've readjusted my lenses and realized we're probably a good 5 years from a sweet 16 elite 8 team from a coaching and player development perspective.
