ladyhusker

THANK YOU. I keep seeing his name pop up and as much as I like what he's done at South Dakota and doing at Utah State, I can't believe for a second that a., Bill Moos would bark up the same tree, and b., Smith would do anything besides hang up the phone. I'm pretty confident in saying that ship sailed. Lee Barfknecht actually printed Eric Musselman's name two years ago as someone we had "reached out to" to gauge his interest. Say what you want about Lee as a reporter, he's not dumb enough to actually run someone's name if he wasn't dang sure that happened -- and if he wasn't interested then, and has only increased his stock since, why on earth would he be interested now? The Pierre Pierce thing at Iowa is enough to make me never want to live in the same DMA as Steve Alford. Seriously, if you haven't looked that up, do it, and please please please reconsider if that's the type of leadership you want here. Using an alleged "prayer meeting" to try to intimidate a rape victim into silence -- to protect a player who would go on to be a repeat offender -- is more despicable than I can even find words for, and personally I would rather lose every game for the rest of time than bring someone on board who is willing to do that in exchange for maybe a few more wins.

Thanks, @hhcmatt -- super interesting to look at! (I'll admit, I don't honestly get into a ton of the more detailed analytics like this -- like my primary concern is "did we score" and "was it more than they did".) So it would make some sense to attribute poor shooting performances, in part, to the defenses we played, but I still don't know that I see that our habit of missing bunnies/putbacks has happened recently vs spread out over the course of the season. Am I looking at the wrong thing? Is it even possible to determine that without going through a play-by-play of each game? Apparently it has to come from somewhere, for the quoted tweet to have season-long information, but I don't know how that was determined.

Very well could be the case and I'm just not remembering it being as big of a problem -- but this also doesn't take into account a game-by-game basis, just the season as a whole. If we started out 20-30 (67%) and then went 14-43 (32.5%), for instance (and I'm just pulling those numbers out of nowhere, I have no idea if I'm close or not), that would still result in an aFG of 47 for the season but would demonstrate a recent problem rather than a season-long one. It's an interesting stat but an incomplete one. Anyone have the ability to look on a game-by-game basis that feels so inclined to do so?

I guess I would counter that our players this year have demonstrated that they do have the ability to execute those basics. The tendency to miss bunnies at the rate we're currently seeing has appeared in more than one game, but certainly hasn't been a season-long thing. If that's the case, it seems to me that's more of a bad habit forming with the players -- lack of focus, lack of effort, something. It isn't that they're unable to do it, they're just unable to do it recently. And these aren't just random dudes pulled from the audience -- these are supposed to be some of the most skilled players in the nation. That skill should be a given. I see it more as the coach's job to scout the game, be able to understand what's coming, and select plays that have the biggest chance of success. The player's job is to execute that. You can knock some of the game plan last night in the latter stages of the game, and there's probably some fair criticism there, but if the coach called plays that end with the player directly under the basket, holding the ball, and the only thing to do is put the ball into the hoop, and the player isn't able to do that -- that's the player's responsibility, not the coach. And there was an interesting study conducted, conveniently dating back to 2012, that analyzes trends in college basketball transfers. Nationally, the average is that 33% of players will transfer at some point, and in the time period studied, the average among teams who have not had a coaching change was 10.4 transfers out, with that rate increasing when a coaching change is involved. Sure enough, in that time period, we've had 11 players transfer -- which puts us smack in the average range. So if you ding Miles for players transferring out of the program at that rate, you should probably be dinging a heck of a lot more coaches as well because he's no different than the average D1 college coach in that regard. However, the study went on to examine how transfers affect the quality of roster -- which is the only area where we actually stand out as an outlier in all of D1 basketball. It goes on to show us with a cumulative 9.5 percentile change -- to the positive -- over the time period studied. So essentially it's showing that, while our transfer-out number is right at the national average, our transfer-in number has shown a pretty outstanding improvement in our roster quality. Seems as though that would be a good thing, then? If you want to look for yourself, check it out here: https://athleticdirectoru.com/articles/investigating-college-basketballs-transfer-movement/ Last thing: I don't doubt your friend's account that he knows guys who haven't liked playing for Miles. But that's anecdotal, and there appear to be plenty who don't mind it either (heck, Brandon Ubel is pretty much at every game now, and Benny Parker's parents come back for games without Benny even being in town -- surely if he was universally hated, they'd keep their distance rather than show up by choice to support the current team?). The players you've kind of "especially"-ed here were sort of odd circumstances -- Andrew White was pretty much lambasted both locally and, to some extent, nationally; Walt Pitchford was kind of a head-scratcher (but did wind up playing in Europe, and still comes back pretty frequently too -- which would seem to indicate he doesn't really hate Miles all that much either); Terran Petteway probably should have gone the year before, if we're being honest, but his leaving to try for the NBA was a surprise to no one. Interestingly, the consensus here seems to be that the players played harder last night than they had been -- if that's the case, I'm lost as to how last night's performance would indicate that the players dislike playing for him; it seems kind of the opposite to me, if what others have pointed out is true that they were giving more effort than less. Ultimately people see what they want to see here. I like Miles. I think he's been put in some awkward spots and made the most of it, and I tend to expect a little more of the players to hold up their end of the deal too. If you don't like him, you'll see those player deficiencies as a lack of coaching, and transfer numbers higher than we've seen under previous coaches as an indictment of the coach rather than a national trend. I think the coaches put together a good game plan last night, and had the players been able to execute some pretty simple basics, we win. Unfortunately that didn't happen, and while yes, the head coach is responsible for the overall state of the program, I just think the onus of the problem last night had to do a lot more with the players' responsibility than it did with the coaches'.

Maybe I'm unfeeling, but I have no sympathy for the players. This habit of missing bunnies has been around for a couple games now. That shouldn't have to be a coached skill at this level. Get your ass in the gym and give the extra 20 minutes to work on your deficiency in that, and then practice your free throws after that when you're tired. They played harder this game than the previous two, and that was nice to see (and yes, I think things VERY much changed on that horrible Davison flop call) but the skills that are killing is right now are things that really shouldn't need to be addressed in practice at this level. That falls on the players and if they want to succeed the way they say, they would be wise to put in the extra effort accordingly and until that happens, I personally think it's entirely appropriate to question their want-to. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Said it earlier, will say it again. If you have a high major college basketball team, in position to score with the ball literally next to the basket, and you fail to do that 15 times in a single game, that's not a problem with being outcoached, that's a problem with your players. At some point there has to be some sort of personal responsibility from them, no? A layup is a fairly basic skill and I guess I feel like should be an assumed given. If we make 7 of the 15 we missed tonight, we win. And as we know layups are in fact in these players' skill sets, since they made them in bunches earlier in the season, I don't think the problem is recruiting guys who can make easy buckets. When is it fair to call out the players who appear to lack the discipline to do the most basic thing in all of basketball? Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Legitimately what would it take to not have Keith Kimble ref another game for us? He's frighteningly terrible. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

You beat me to it, I was about to say the same thing. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

That's the thing, they're in good position to score...they just aren't making the easy shots. Quite frankly if you're playing for a high major college basketball program and you have the ball four feet away from the rim you should probably be able to make it. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Am I seeing things or is Thor our best player tonight so far? His hustle is impressive and he'd have a couple assists if the shots actually went in. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Far be it for me to call out a player in-game but from where I'm sitting, I'm not entirely sure Brady realized there was a game in progress. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

No thank you. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2013/04/11/ucla-steve-alford-sexual-assault-pierce-iowa-2002/2074995/

Seems a little revisionist...the "uneasy feeling" was on the board here, but the team reportedly welcomed him back with open arms, after a locker room "heartfelt speech" (I actually went back and looked at the board and the articles published at the time). I would also think that there was some conversation between Miles and Jordy both at the time of allowing him back AND at the end of the season about his commitment to the team -- thus we didn't even try to recruit a big to be a possible Jordy replacement during the time that it would have been possible, in the event that he decided to leave...and once we cleared April and May, that news is pretty much wrapped up if it's going to happen anyway. Isn't it just as plausible that we are in this situation (playing a 6-8 superathlete who struggles to post up to bigger dudes at the center position, backed up by a former walk-on who has turned out to be fairly decent in stretches and a true freshman toothpick) because a selfish, weak-minded kid decided to listen to the wrong voices, go back on his word to his coach, and take a very visible dump on his team? Bringing up Ed right now -- whatever. Maybe he could help, maybe not, I don't really care. But I think our roster this year is VERY much affected by Jordy, it's appropriate to bring him up at this point, and I don't think it falls on Miles at all.

Ed is whatever. Square peg, round hole, wanting to shoot threes, blah blah blah. But Jordy, I have no problem being HIGHLY critical of when it comes to his choices. This was the guy who, despite getting more minutes than his play probably deserved at the time, left his team high and dry midseason, apparently realized what a terrible choice that was, and was actually welcomed back...only to turn around and crap all over them again, leaving a 6-11 hole in our roster (which has now been exploited pretty well) too late to really find much of a serviceable replacement. Had he left in April or May it's one thing, but he left in late July. I'm not saying he's some amazingly skilled center (he had his moments, though) but if literally nothing else he was a big body with five fouls to give who people at least had to dribble around, and that's something we have desperately needed as of late. Had he actually spent the summer working to improve instead of listening to his handler brother and chasing greener grass, I do wonder sometimes what we would have this year. But instead he quit on his team AGAIN, in astonishingly poor timing AGAIN. If you want selfish, look no further. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Whatever it is, I like it. Dark HB kind of bummed me out. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

? Is there an option to upvote via groan?

I may be making this up but I thought I saw once that Justin Costello was our strongest player, weights-wise. If that's true, I wouldn't be all that sad to have him play the Mike Peltz "hitting people is fun!" role... not that I'm advocating violence but if we're going to foul, let's make it memorable, not the Roby-style "I stood still and that guy ran near me" kind. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Yaaaaaaas I'm not alone anymore!!!!!!!! Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I don't disagree with wanting college sports to get back to amateurism, but there is one person on the staff of most high-major college programs making 7 figures, usually 3 making 6, and a handful probably making less than most of us on the board. Most have families who support their coach, but that doesn't make it any easier to be told at work or at school or at the grocery store that your dad/mom/husband/wife doesn't deserve a job (especially without understanding the sacrifices the whole family makes for it...birthday parties, holidays, long nights, no weekends, going to events by yourself, counting pennies because you dream of an HC salary but you've got a whole bunch of years until you get there, wondering if you'll have health insurance or how you'll pay for COBRA...) Of course this is a choice, and we would back our family members (and their coaching dreams) 100% of the time, but that shouldn't excuse insensitivity from people who aren't publicly scrutinized in every aspect of their professional lives. At the risk of sounding elitist, it's something you can never really understand until you live it, and there are some really high highs, but it can also be really rough and "well, you chose it" should never be an excuse for unkindness. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Ok, I'll bite. I could be very very wrong, but I'm one who still has hope. January 23, 2014, we kicked our own tails at sad, sad Penn State. During our run to the tournament we would also get shellacked by Michigan, and lose a headscratcher at Illinois. It's January 28. We have 11 games left -- literally a third of our season. That's a LOT of games. As of this morning we're still sitting at #24 in the NET rankings and #18 in KenPom. Making the tournament doesn't mean becoming something we aren't, it means doing something we did for the first third of the season (and a little into the second). Literally two weeks ago we were talking about a 4-seed in the tournament. I don't see that happening, but it's not like weirder things haven't happened. But THIS is why I was so critical of the decision not to give more of an extension last year. A rough stretch happens -- as it does for many, many good teams -- and suddenly the wheels are coming off. Why does that need to be the narrative? Why is it such a foregone conclusion that the last few games are now what defines this team, and not the several before them? I'll 100% admit that I'm the anomaly here and that's ok. (Gotten used to being the only chick, might as well get used to being one of a couple sunshine pumpers too.) But I guess it just seems unnecessary to me to just assume it's all over, and makes things a whole lot less fun. If we were down to a couple games, sure, but I don't even have enough fingers to count the ones we have left. At the risk of an Animal House moment here, there's still something to play for and contrary to the media's headlines this weekend, it isn't even that much of a long shot yet. Is it too much to ask to just wait and see what happens in these next 11 games (and actually cheer for good outcomes, not cheer to be right) before assuming there will be a coaching change? Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Getting into the minutiae here -- yeah, he used a lot of juco and transfer guys at CSU to start out, but I'd probably argue the heart of his rosters once he got through the first couple years (and I think anyone would agree that was a MASSIVE rebuild that required some hole-plugging right away) was four-year players complemented by a couple transfers. Yes, Wes Eikmeier and Colton Iverson were transfers, but Greg and Dwight Smith, Dorian Green, Pierce Hornung, and Jesse Carr were all four-year players who played a pretty important role on his last couple teams, and Wes was a transfer after a single year at Iowa State (so a 4-to-play-3 guy, not exactly a one-and-done to fill a gap). Iverson didn't even actually play for him, did he? (Google says he sat out in 11-12...) All that to say -- I don't know that I'd say this his how he's operated his entire career. (Granted, I haven't paid any attention to the pre-CSU days, so I could be wrong on that.) I think the nature of recruiting is different now than it was in 2011, and the prevalence of transfers has changed a lot of things, too. I can understand wanting to criticize... but I don't think it's exactly accurate to say that Colorado State, at least after years 1-2, was built around transfers like Wes and Colton either.

For the sake of debate -- isn't this potentially a byproduct of the past three years' cycle of one-year "prove it this year" extensions? Without the administrative backing to focus on developing four-year players (or making the attempt, considering the prevalence of transfers nationally), the focus would necessarily HAVE to be bandaids for the next year because future years are dependent on immediate success. Seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.

I can't upvote this enough. Thank you for your perspective. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Is this like normal desperate or Creighton game desperate?

Callous but true -- I worked with a guy who told me he got the best, cheapest seats by approaching the fans whose team just lost and asking if they wanted to sell any of their next game's tickets. Sure enough, I've been to both the Big Ten Tournament and the NCAA and had someone approach me about buying my subsequent tickets. I kinda wanted to punch him (and I personally only had single-day) but I'm pretty sure others around me had future games they unloaded and cut their losses. If you have some nerve and don't mind a little bit of a gamble, that can be one way to get decent seats on the cheap. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk