we should up by 10 if we ever blocked out!!

hard to believe that we are so bad at blocking out!!! its what has kept them in this game…makes me sick because that is desire!

Bad switches and traps after the first 10 minutes left us out of rebounding position as well.

everyone knows we don’t block out. remember the Ms St forward who said Howland told them that before the game in Stark

why we will not make a legit run for title under CMA,no man to man fundamentals in stopping the dribble,all the trapping is getting us killed!! we hardly even get a hand on a ball much less steal it…too stubborn to teach a zone defense to help us on the glass…same ole junk every time…wide open shooters! not going to happen under CMA.

Truth is spoken by youdaman

I understand your frustration and yes, Arkansas is 12th in rebounding so that is indeed a big weakness.

As Coach Caliapari said the other night, the way to improve rebounding is to recruit great rebounders.

There are none on this team, although there are a few good ones.

But Arkansas is sixth in the conference in steals and averages some 12 deflections a game - best I can tell around 3rd in the league so the data doesn’t match the frustration.

Arkansas has played about 50 percent zone since the opening of SEC play. Some nights the defense has been good, some it has been horrible.

Your assertion it is not coached is inaccurate.

Arkansas leads the SEC in field goal percentage at 48.1 percent per game while being fourth in field goal defense at 42.1

Arkansas leads the SEC in 3-point shooting, but is 12th in 3-point defense.

So one could argue they do a decent job of stopping the drive - over the course of the season - but not recovering on defense and getting out on shooters.

They are second in the league in scoring (82.4) while seventh in points allowed at just over 75 per game.

During my time working for Coach Sutton and Coach Richardson, I learned there were two very different ways to win.

While I am a very big fundamental guy, I am also a motion offense, press guy - especially since the shot clock came into being in Coach Richardson’s first year at Arkansas in 1985-86 and has been brought down twice since.

Arkansas has won 88 games in the last four years with at least four more left and likely more, have played in the SEC Tournament Championship title game 2 of the last 3 seasons and are on the verge of making the NCAA Tournament for the third time in four years after not making it 7 of 10 years before Coach Anderson came back and none in his first three years - making it missing the Big Dance 10 out of 13 years.

As for competing for the championship, Arkansas finished second in 2014-2015, tied for third last season and is tied for third this season with three games to go after being picked sixth.

Arkansas has not won a regular season championship since the 1994-95 team.

So this is neither the Glory Days or the Lanny Van Eman days.

Thank you DD. You are one of the reasons I subscribe to this board. Great info.

Our bigger problem on defense is not doing well in those areas that we are trying to excel at. CMA has always had a bias of challenging shots and disrupting the offense. There isn’t one way to play good defense, and plenty of defenses excel by emphasizing those areas. He just hopes to rebound well enough to not give it all back on the boards, though he tweaks gameplans to the opponent.

We can’t let a team rebound 50% of their misses under any circumstances without it hurting a lot, but UK is a mediocre shooting team that shot 50% on deuces and 38% on treys against us. They are a mediocre ballhandling team that had only 11 TOs. If it were easy to challenge shots, challenge passing lanes, and stay in rebounding position, defense would be easy. If we had forced more misses and more TOs, we could have had a comfortable lead at half even with the poor rebounding. They are much longer and are one of the better offensive rebounding teams in the nation. Hence, getting killed on the boards was entirely predictable. A lot of other stuff had to go wrong to give up the offensive efficiency that we did against UK.

So what is the explanation for why we win so many games? Why we have been the second best team in the SEC over the last three years. Why we have the second best SEC road record over the last 3 years? Why the Hogs are one of the two SEC teams to make NCAAs twice over the last 3 years? Why are Hogs one of two teams to make it twice to SEC Championship game in the last three years? Why did Mike take his team to Elite Eight?

Pure Luck? Or does he have more talent than everyone else? Why do opponents dread coming to BWA? Is it just because of us fans who actually attend the games and enjoy the style we play?

It is easy to focus on the losses only and the stats we don’t win and ignore the wins and the stats we win.

They are fundamentals to every style of play. You just focus on fundamentals of the old school style you cannot leave behind. That is okay if you just don’t like the style. If not, you two should attend a practice and see what they teach.

What do you think?

The SEC has been mediocre for the last 5 years until this year. Some of our fans are satisfied with where this program is ranked in the season standings. We are behind a lot of other SEC schools over the years. UF has taken our role at the top with UK over the last 10 years. A 13 man roster and 5 starting positions is easy to quickly improve in 2-3 years. Some of our fans are so convinced we can’t find someone to replace Mike they are scared to do anything. There are some fans that are so crazy in love with Mike they believe we are some great program. The blind lovers attack anyone who says anything critical about Mike.

This year’s team should be better after starting out like we did through Nov and Dec. Mike made good adjustments last year after Vandy loss but not this year. In the 7th year of Basketball under Mike we should be better. A 13 man roster and 5 starting positions is easier to quickly improve than a 85 man roster with 22 starting positions. We fired a coach in his 5th year at the FB helm after he cleaned up the Petrino mess. He hit his ceiling too and it needed to be dealt with.

Mike has turned the program around but we are just above average with 2 NCAA appearances in 7 years. He won’t adapt and change to take us to the next level. Keep in mind that I am asking for Mike to adapt and change because I would rather keep Mike, but he needs to go if he won’t adapt. Very few if any, elite teams use Mike and Nolan’s scheme. Why?

Look below to see that we have fallen hard in spite of what some of you want to say about being 2nd best in SEC for a few years.
It is well documented the SEC has been mediocre for the last 5 years until this year.

Arkansas Season By Season Results
2017\t1-1\tDefeated Seton Hall in first round, 77-71
Lost to North Carolina in second round, 72-65
2015\t1-1\tDefeated Wofford in first round, 56-53
Lost to North Carolina in second round, 87-78

2008\t1-1\tDefeated Indiana in first round, 86-72
Lost to North Carolina in second round, 108-77
2007\t0-1\tLost to USC in first round, 77-60
2006\t0-1\tLost to Bucknell in first round, 59-55

2001\t0-1\tLost to Georgetown in first round, 63-61
2000\t0-1\tLost to Miami (FL) in first round, 75-71
1999\t1-1\tDefeated Siena in first round, 94-80
Lost to Iowa in second round, 82-72
1998\t1-1\tDefeated Nebraska in first round, 74-65
Lost to Utah in second round, 75-69
1996\t2-1\tDefeated Penn State in first round, 86-80
Defeated Marquette in second round, 65-56
1995\t5-1\tDefeated Syracuse in second round, 96-94
Defeated Memphis in regional semifinal, 96-91
Defeated Virginia in regional final, 68-61
Defeated North Carolina in National Semifinal, 75-68
Lost to UCLA in National Championship, 89-78
1994\t6-0\tDefeated North Carolina A&T in first round, 94-79
Defeated Georgetown in second round, 85-73
Defeated Michigan in regional final, 76-68
Defeated Arizona in National Semifinal, 91-82
Defeated Duke in National Championship, 76-72
1993\t2-1\tDefeated Holy Cross in first round, 94-64
Defeated St. John’s in second round, 80-74
Lost to North Carolina in regional semifinal, 80-74
1992\t1-1\tDefeated Murray State in first round, 80-69
Lost to Memphis in second round, 82-80
1991\t3-1\tDefeated Georgia State in first round, 117-76
Defeated Arizona State in second round, 97-90
Defeated Alabama in regional semifinal, 93-70
Lost to Kansas in regional final, 93-81
1990\t4-1\tDefeated Princeton in first round, 68-64
Defeated North Carolina in regional semifinal, 96-73
Defeated Texas in regional final, 88-85
Lost to Duke in National Semifinal, 97-83
1989\t1-1\tDefeated Loyola Marymount in first round, 120-101
Lost to Louisville in second round, 93-84
1988\t0-1\tLost to Villanova in first round, 82-74

1985\t1-1\tDefeated Iowa in first round, 63-54
Lost to St. John’s in second round, 68-65
1984\t0-1\tLost to Virginia in second round, 53-51
1983\t1-1\tDefeated Purdue in second round, 78-68
Lost to Louisville in regional semifinal, 65-63
1982\t0-1\tLost to Kansas State in second round, 65-64
1981\t2-1\tDefeated Mercer in first round, 73-67
Defeated Louisville in second round, 74-73
Lost to LSU in regional semifinal, 72-56
1980\t0-1\tLost to Kansas State in first round, 71-53
1979\t2-1\tDefeated Louisville in regional semifinal, 73-62
Lost to Indiana State in regional final, 73-71
1978\t4-1\tLost to Kentucky in National Semifinal, 64-59
Defeated Notre Dame in third place game, 71-69
1977\t0-1\tLost to Wake Forest in second round, 86-80

Mike is giving us the 90’s style and scheme BUT we are not getting anything close to 70’s, 80’s or 90’s performance. The rules and game have left it behind with the hand check changes that happened about 20 years ago, TV timeouts, and the recent impact of the Cylinder violation that keeps you from being physical on traps.

I don’t want the disruption of a coaching change so it would be much better for us if Mike would adapt his scheme for today’s rules. I don’t mind being the guy that points out the problems when the lovers flood the board with Rick Schaefer inspired sugar coating. I fought to protect CBB from the nasty disrespectful comments but NOBODY is being Nasty with Mike. Mike is not a scared cow that can’t be subjected to criticism. The fans that don’t like my critiques don’t have to read 'em, but I will counter post as long as you try to brain wash everyone that we can’t question Mike.

I don’t want the slow style. I like the fast paced styles that UF, UK, AU, OU, UNC, etc run because they are usually a balance of fundamentals and schemes that stabilize performance. If we are not shooting well it blows up in our face because we don’t rebound consistently. Some of the blind CMA lovers want to blame the players instead of admitting that numerous issues are recurring and not being fixed from year to year with Mike.

Treat I think you’re half right. I do believe there are some guys on here that support Mike, and I think their are people on here that support the players. Then I think there are some on here that support the Razorbacks.

Now having said that, yes, I see some of the same issues year after year, but I also see players that might not be up to playing that style. I made a comment on here about the 94 team. It also happened with the MayDay team. We had a second wave that was just as good as many other teams first waves. They could hang with another team, not let the other team run away from them, or let a team cut into their lead. Then when the starters got their wind back, they’d come in and pull away. We don’t have that. This year’s second wave gives up leads, let’s team make runs on them. Then our starters play catch-up the rest of the game.

Now, that is on the coaches, they need to get the players for this system. This is something I’ve talked about since the beginning of this season. I think next year we will have that second wave we’ve been missing. I also understand they’re going to be young and it may take a year to get rollin. I also believe it’ll be around 20/21 before we get to where many of us want to be. In the NC conversation.

Baked I appreciate you responding without incendiary attitude or childish comments like so many others. Why can’t Mike adapt in those years when he doesn’t have the players for his system? If we are not shooting well it blows up in our face because we don’t rebound consistently. It is even worse against the good teams that rebound well and have good guards. If we played more zone we would reduce fatigue, reduce the amount of open 3s from switches and rotations, and our rebounders would stay around the basket. I am fine with the trapping man and press at times for disruption if you have the roster to support it.

He does change defenses. Maybe not as much as some of us like, but I’ve seen him play full court trapping, half court trapping, full court man, half court man, and half court trapping zone. I know others have mentioned they’ve seen other defensive schemes (I have an issue with the offensive schemes), but he does change them. Sometimes I think he waits too long to change them or “switch” then there are times he doesn’t and I think he should, but at the end of the day he is the HC, he is WAY better at coaching than I am, and the players are WAAAAY better than I am at basketball. It’s easy for all of us to nitpick (and I’m guilty of this as much as anyone, but there is an old saying, hindsight is 20/20. I’m sure Mike could tell you he has seen some of those mistakes, but maybe he sees stuff we don’t?

It is a slippery slope to use the logic that we can’t say anything since we are not the coach. I know you don’t see it that way because you and I had interactions about CBB. I think part of the problem is that fan base has some knowledgeable BB types that can see the problems and the problems are recurring problems… but we don’t have the wins to make us look the other way as in the past.

I agree if we were expected to be a Sweet 16 team every year (90-96) I don’t think as many mistakes would be noticed. But, and I have said this a couple times, both Nolan and Eddie got lucky, they both got MayDay and the Triplets around their 3/4th years. Mike hasn’t got that yet. I think Gafford is really that first person that could be in that category (I like Bobby, but I didn’t consider him that type of player). I also believe the next few years has those type of guys in it. The question is do we land them? If we do, I think we will get to where all of us want to be (Glory Years), if we don’t I think the question of is Mike the Right Man for the job, will continue. I caution though, I remember the years between Nolan and Mike. Changing coaches may not be a good thing (and I’m worried about football, we changed coaches, but is Morris really the right guy? To me personally, I don’t see a lot about Morris or his staff to be excited about. Just my 2 cents)

You didn’t really answer my question on what is the reason for Mike winning so many games. But that is okay.

You did focus on style. FWIW, I think AU, OU and UNC pretty much play like us except less trapping. I don’t see these teams block out in the pure sense. They just go for the rebounds like we do. With our style it is hard for us to block out. But when afforded opportunity and in position, we do block out except few players like Trey.u

UK and UF do not play a real fast game. They only fast break when fast break is available, for example from a trap or a turnover and such things. They mostly walk it up the court.

As far as things blowing up if you don’t shoot well, that is a common cause of most clear losses. You know what is going on with your favorite UF right now. Their guards and mainly KeVaughn Allen are throwing up bricks.

I am not a blind lover of Mike but I am a blind lover of that style. I hate thevterm a blind lover, which suggests a cult following but you can call that if you want. I have studied the style quite a bit and know exactly what the players did wrong and where. It is not the scheme that does not work when we have a clear cut loss. It is either being outtalented or players not executing the scheme properly.

And as Bake pointed out Mike does change things. Of course he is stubborn about how quickly he changes certain core things. But what coach isn’t. They all want players do what they believe in and keep trying, because if you don’t use it in game situations, you never can.

One reason we have not seen this style flourish at Arkansas under Mike like it did at UAB and Missouri is that for whatever reason he has not recruited a true PG except for Durham and Harris. It took Durham a year to get gong and by that time our talent level was down. And Harris has not played yet.

I answered your question in great detail and also included NCAA tourney history. The reality is that the SEC has been down for more than 5 years and has seriously been talked about on ESPN for years…until this year. What is interesting is this isn’t a Hog Treat opinion it is a well founded view from around the USA.

On everything else we disagree.

we are winning so many games because we play in a weak conference,The Sec is decent this year but for the most part its nowhere near as good as the ACC or big 10 .We are good at home like most teams .The point I’m trying to make is this style is not going to win the NCAA,we give up WAY!! too many wide open shots because we always trap(which only really affect the teams OOC) and defensive rebounds and contrary to what Dudley said we get blow by off the dribble about as bad as I’ve seen which leads to 2 on 1 around the goal and they Alley oop us to death.I don’t see CMA making strategic moves in the game and never ever seen him draw up a play,he just talks a little and we go back on the floor.

I just too many defensive flaws/rebounding and nowhere near good enough in our half court offense.I’m not sure we have any plays!! I like the man seems like a nice guy probably too nice!

The SEC is actually quite a bit deeper than the Big 10 this season. The SEC has 9 teams in the Pomeroy top 50 to 6 for the B10. The SEC has no 100+ teams. The Big 10 has 4. Most computer polls rank the B12 as the #1 conference, and the SEC is 10 - 6 against the Big 12. Claiming the SEC is just decent is ignoring the facts on the ground.