What’s next part 3

Well I think that it is clear that there will be no dancing this year. This looks like the football team. Are there any expectations that this team will be competitive again this year and does it really matter? The haters and naysayers were right. This team looks lost.

Hunter Yurachek has to make a decision and he needs to make it now. If he makes the move to keep Anderson, he needs to do it now. The only way Anderson has any hope to regain the team is a strong statement of support from the AD and a commitment for his future employment.

Most of the fans probably think that it’s time for a change. I think that there will have to be a lot of wins to save his job. Either way, we need to make that decision ASAP.

Mike Anderson was hired to be the savior of the basketball team. It hasn’t worked. He has done a great job on a lot of things, but he has failed to win enough games.

Arkansas Basketball is no longer an elite job and it will be hard to find a coach that will be more successful than Anderson. It is really hard to swallow that a program that was a nation contender and a fixture in the polls and a regular and respected participant in the NCAA tournament is an average program that struggles to make the NCAA tournament, much less make a run to the second weekend. The resolution of this will make or break our AD. I hope he gets it right.

It’s time for a change. WPS

Don’t disagree, but we need to change a lot more than a coach to get where we want to be in this league. We are either going to go all in to be a major player in football and basketball or we aren’t. It’s a new time unfortunately. You are correct though, it will make or break him. It’s a high end business decision. Get to the Dance, or be a major player, get to a bowl, ( not close to that yet) or be a major player? Go all in or be a participant on a stage from time to time. Reload program or a rebuild program? He has a rough decision.

I agree. Keep a coach or not I don’t care.

Arkansas basketball should have high expectations.

Either we are playing and recruiting for national title or we aren’t.

Program deserves so much more.

I’ll say this, if he does make a change, you’ll know pretty quick if he’s all in or not. It’s really not bad business to keep doing what we are doing, do the best you can, get to the dance a few times, rebuild get to the dance a few times, rinse and repeat, win 6 go to a bowl a couple years, run in the ditch, rebuild try to get to .500 and go to a bowl, rebuild, and in both cases rake in the incredible millions , thank you TV, not a bad gig.

Mike Anderson is very well liked despite his middling level of games won and lost. The question is not about Mike Anderson the man. It’s about winning basketball games. It’s about studying all the pre tournament brackets and see who we matched with. For many years, a sweet sixteen was the bottom expectation for the team. Now, we sweat out a high seed or even a trip to the NIT. The sense of excitement is no longer there.

Can Mike Anderson get us back to a respected program that no one wants to play? I believe that the Coach has to make major changes in his game plan and coaching philosophy. Every team in the SEC hmows how to beat us. The “” Nolan” system requires at least 10 skilled, athletes to make his system work. All players on the floor have to be savvy on defense and a legitimate offensive threat. There is no problem to use the pressing trapping defense as a change of pace. Looking to run on offense is fine as long as there are plays in a organized structured system when the break is not there. .Right now, we don have the talent or depth to play an all or nothing game against top programs or in SEC play. A disciplined team that runs set plays coupled with an aggressive defensive team playing both man and zone look like a better approach than our current system. If something is not working, try something different. :

A change is needed in men’s basketball. If Anderson wants to modify his system to better match his talent, Hunter Yuarachek will have a tough decision to make. At this point, all we can do is cheer for the Hogs and wait to see what happens. WPS

Geez, I can’t believe people still believe we don’t run plays, our problem is not plays , our problem was we ran to many last night. It’s not the days gone by anymore. Everyone is trying to score as much as possible. Everyone shoots 3’s by the truck load, everyone gets open 3’s whenever they want, everyone plays fast, everyone has a system, the notion coach’s are calling every play on every possession is comical. That has happened in 40-50 years. It not granddaddy’s basketball anymore and never will be, and hasn’t been in forever.
Cramming the ball into the most defended area on the court doesn’t work anymore. For anyone. It’s a athletes making plays game. It has been for a long long time. Playmakers in a system that lets them make plays wins games, not coaches making them run a play.
my gosh I can’t believe people still have such a tainted view and not realistic view. Just watch games. Nobody plays that way.

Gas, you have beaten this drum for years now, and it’s been a while since we’ve debated this point, mainly because I think we just agreed to disagree.

But, let’s fire it up again. Can you describe the “plays” they ran last night?

RazorAg, no need for anyone to describe any plays. That’s seriously weak. Bad Razorback basketball is like pornography. As Justice Stewart said about pornography, “I know it when I see it.” I suspect Gas feels the same. People are mad about this, and no amount of spin and propaganda can convince that this basketball program is not irreparably doomed.

Again, lol, just go watch the game. I could, and could equally describe the plays our opponent didn’t run at a incredible clip with great success, usually because we were trying run a play, but not always. But I’m not a play by play guy.

I’m not sure what you think I’m getting at. In no way am I defending this team’s results. What I don’t like to see is people using what I think are incorrect takes on the team or the coach.

Arkansas runs a Motion Offense.
This doesn’t necessarily look like set plays, like you would see in a out of bounds siituation or where time is a factor.

The problem is we don’t run the motion offense effectively. And our motion offense is frequently motionless

You can laugh, but that doesn’t help the fact that you’ve said things about style of play and scheme for years without backing it up without much (if any most times) description, data, evidence, etc. Your general take of playing fast, I’ve always suspected, is rooted in nostalgia from our teams in the 90’s.

You know I watch games. You know I study this topic. You know I have season tickets. I watch the games…very closely.

Let’s get something straight in case other folks want to chime in here. I prefer fast paced basketball. I understand the advantages of getting shots up, spacing and spreading floor and shooting a lot of three’s. I prefer all of those things.

I also prefer making adjustments when things aren’t working, scouting and game planning.

99% of the time, we only run plays out of dead balls, mostly out of timeouts or the first play of the second half, as we did last night for Gafford, which resulted in points from the FT line. What may be confused are our offensive base sets. Sometimes, we go to horns set, which is the stacked screens at the elbows. That isn’t a play. That’s just an offense, like our base motion, which hasnt been very successful this year due to lack of discipline in screens and spacing and our PG not being a shooter, so teams have sagged off of him, which clogs the middle. As always, if our base offense doesn’t work in a possession, whoever is handling the ball calls for an on-ball screen at about 10 seconds left in the shot clock and we try to make something work off of the pick and roll.

On average, and I’ve counted a few times this year, we run about 3-5 plays per game, and often, they are the same play, either to free up Gafford or a shooter. That is not too many, especially for a struggling offense.

The bigger issue is that CMA doesn’t (and hasn’t) adjusted for his talent. For example, overload sets to create more space on one side of the court, pick and roll with Joe, whom the defense can’t sag off of, or pin-downs that create mismatches.

Last year, we had shot-makers that could overcome this deficiency of CMA’s. Macon and Barford played hero ball effectively most times, making incredibly difficult shots. And, that’s ok, as long as it works. I defended our offense countless times last year because of the results. This year, we don’t have that type of talent. Again, I look at outcomes. Our outcome this year is 14-11 and the 93rd rated adjusted offensive efficient offense.

What you and I agree on here is that a lot of fans believe that it takes a play every possession to be successful. I debate that point sometimes, too. But, in my opinion, which I’ve provided justification for, is that you’re too far on the other end of the spectrum when it comes to what’s successful on offense in college basketball.

You are correct I agree to disagree with pretty much all that.
The only thing I have to prove is that I don’t have anything to prove.

You’re right. You don’t have to do anything. This is a message board, though. So, when we state something strongly, especially challenging others, we should expect to be challenged back. If we don’t back up what we say over and over , we also risk credibility.

All good.

Watch Duke and North Carolina play Thursday night. Then let’s talk about designed in bounds plays. Watch the ball end up in a shooters hand. Watch hard screens and strong cuts to the basket. On defense, watch how 3 point shots are defended. Watch players block out for rebounds .

Yes the athletes are bigger , stronger and more skilled, but they operate in a system that lets their stars take most of the key shots. Then compare that with what you see at Auburn Wednesday.

I don’t think that we are on the right track. I would love to see us get hot and have a major winning streak. The past performances of this team don’t give me much hope. WPS

I just read this whole thing, and I missed the part where he was risking his credibility. Everything he said made sense.

And FYI you answered your own question that you asked him. You asked him to describe the plays they ran last night, then you told us you counted them running 3-5 plays, and even gave an example of a play they ran by mentioning the Gafford play to start the second half. And if you read what he said, he didn’t say we were a team that runs a lot of plays, he actually said the days of coaches calling a play on every possession is over, which is true, most teams, and even at the pro level are transitioning towards faster paced basketball, more 3 pointers, and freedom of movement on offense. Nobody wants to see people walk the ball down floor, hold up 2 fingers, wait for everyone to setup, then run the play…that type of basketball is a dying breed.

I cant’ speak for others, but when I read Gas post the point he was trying to make was last night they were trying to hard to get Gafford the basketball and posting him up, rather than just playing, and running plays wasn’t the problem as the poster he quoted was suggesting. And I think you know that is what it meant as well, it appears like you were just trying pick at him from an old argument, which I can understand right now it’s a frustrating time, people are venting and any little thing is setting them off, I was feeling like that last night lol.

All I hear out of announcers and play by play guys is get it in to Gafford, Gafford has to get touches and so on. Gafford can’t find the open people when doubled, we have 2 players that are threats and 2 that the opposition is begging for them to shoot which means we play into their hands. Joe can’t create and Jones is not a great finisher but at least he can make a play sometime. Other 2 spots are easy to guard. It seems as much like a talent issue as a scheme issue. Our motion offense with 2 dead spots is just never going to be effective.

I’m too old for another change. A change would result in loss of players/recruits and we would be looking at another “Let’s give him 3-4 years”. By that time, I might be either in a nursing home or pushing up daisies. I like Mike. I like Mike’s style of play. I don’t like Mike’s substitution at all costs strategy and I don’t like the results. But, given that I don’t want to do this again in my lifetime, I say keep him.

Glad that your age isn’t going to influence our AD or the PTB to make a change or sit tight.

Your post reads incredibly self-serving. It is as if you don’t care about the long term direction of the program, because you might not be around to see it.

Definitely self-serving. I do care about the long term health of the program. I’m just not convinced that a change of coaches would gain us anything other than turmoil and angst. And, then, we’d be having this same conversation about another coach in a few years. There may be a prized coach out there that our AD could get, but I just don’t see much of a positive improvement without a complete change in players + recruiting targets and that would take a lot of time and luck. I believe we have a better chance of improving with the current crop of players than wishful thinking. And, while I hope to be around for a long time, I would much rather avoid the pain of a coaching change right now. Yes, that is a self-serving answer.