tyrese is probably my favorite Iowa State player since maybe Tinsley.
But he has to be more assertive. Last night he needed to go get the ball when we got buried in the first half.
INSTANT REACTION: Iowa 84, Iowa State 68
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
tyrese is probably my favorite Iowa State player since maybe Tinsley.
But he has to be more assertive. Last night he needed to go get the ball when we got buried in the first half.
You have to put blame on the players for that then - they didn't look very fierce either. We need to recruit competitors, even if they're ranked a star or two lower...
Agreed on players having skin in that game. I was just trying to figure out what coach’s reaction was.
Imo there was no point in the coach being pissed, screaming, yelling and acting a fool. They spent 3 days going over a game plan that the players failed to execute, if they couldn't pick it up in 3 days of practice a timeout of a coach acting like a moron isn't going to get them to magically execute it.
Not to mention that at the college level especially playing a rival if you need a coach to pump you up and motivate you then you've already lost the game. I went 4-0 in my time playing football against Iowa and I can say that we players knew it was a big game and were pumped to kick their ass.
4 was objectively true. Nobody is saying 2 or 3.
1-So you’re hanging your hat on 3 games?
I'd like to see more of those SO good games. So far in his senior season it's 1/10.
He presses so hard it's painfully obvious. I feel he - of all our players - bleeds cardinal and gold and wants to please the fans so badly... I do love that kid and everything he tries to do.
CSP has won too many games at ISU, from behind, from in front, back to back games, road games, tourney games, short-handed, players on discipline, players hurt, etc... to say he's not a good coach.
1. He's also won on the road at a previously unimaginable rate. He should get credit for that, as troubling as the home record is.
2. The program was arguably at it's zenith when he took over. Again, tough to even maintain that let alone build on it.
3. His last year at Murray he went 31-2 and was ranked in the top 25. At Murray.
4. Matt Painter lost to a team Prohm beat on the way to the Sweet 16. Is he not a competent basketball person?
5. Definitely something that needs to change.
6. Much of this is patently false.
1/6. That's about as good as our 3 point shooting, which is terrible.
That's what I was thinking. They came out of the gate and let a team whose main strength is shooting just get off easy threes they can step in to during transition. Is he supposed to get a spray bottle with water and just squirt them likes they are bad cats?
I was disappointed with the effort on D but they turned it around. Ultimately two things happened - Bolton had his worst game by far, and we couldn't hit shots. Iowa is a good team. Again, it's a frustrating loss and the slow starts for both Prohm and Campbell need cleared up.
Somebody who was a better athlete or coach than me - how do we get the slow starts thing fixed? Just seems weird.
I realize our guys didn't execute the game play, but my main issue is the lack of fire for playing a rival. You could see it, our guys looked scared and tentative, Iowa was out for blood. Iowa played with confidence and aggression. We didn't. In Hilton, our guys need to have the attitude that no one, NO ONE!!! comes into our house and pushes us around, especially a rival, especially freaking Iowa. Well our guys for whatever reason don't have it. There is no excuse for that.
Part of it is I just don't think Prohm is a guy that gets crazy jacked up. I think he treats the season like a baseball manager or an NBA coach - never too high or too low. You can not like that about him and it's a reasonable thing, but he's not going to change.
Plenty of things can be attributed to slow starts.. Sometimes teams come out to start the game doing something completely different than what was scouted for and it can take time to figure it out. In this particular game, it seemed as if at the start of the game we did not follow the scouting report and got burned because of it. It happens in high intensity games because guys are so amped up that they forget what they've been practicing and getting taught for the last few days.
Iowa gets a ton of their threes in transition when the defense is not set.. Last Thursday, we got killed in the first 5 minutes of the game by letting them do exactly that. We also let Iowa get a few easy 2nd chance opportunities which cannot happen. We were playing from behind the entire game and when we started to climb back into the game, we allowed multiple wide open threes and got beat numerous times for layups and a couple of those were and-1's. Obviously we were bad offensively but I think we were bad offensively due to our poor defensive performance.
Dude, if you’re going to debate, you gotta bring it better than that.
1. Prohm is 14-30 (.318) in true road games during his tenure at ISU. Throw out Niang’s last season when the team coached itself, and that drops to 10-23 (.303). Far from “previously unimaginable”. In fact, in the 3 seasons prior to Prohm ISU was 14-18 in true road games (.438) further discrediting your statement.
2. Sure it’s tough to maintain a program doing well, but that’s what he’s paid to do - and would be doing, if he were a good coach. This is simply an excuse for why the program is not a) the same or b) better than when he took over.
3. What you are describing is his first year at Murray (not his last season as you claim) which was the team he inherited from Kennedy. In his next 3 years at Murray the team never made it back to the NCAA Tourney or sniffed relevance. Prohm took over and the program did not get better or stay the same. Your counterpoint actually reinforces my original point.
4. Painter has proven himself on the national stage by improving a program from what he inherited (24-35 in Keady’s last two seasons). He has beaten a Power 6 team in the NCAA Tourney. Perhaps if Prohm does these things we can look at losses as blips vs trends. He has not, to date.
5. Agreed.
6. Scholarship players did leave this year shortly before the season began. That’s not
something we’ve seen at ISU. We’re you not there for McKay’s seasons with Prohm? Why didn’t we see that with previous coaches? THT shot 30.8% from 3, 9th best on the team but took the 3rd most 3 point attempts on the team, many which were unquestionably not good shot selections. No repercussions from the bench. And yes there was a rumor that Wigginton would transfer much like Lard had he stayed in college.
6 for 6. Let’s hope we can shoot that well in a game this year.
1. Prohm is 14-30 (.318) in true road games during his tenure at ISU. Throw out Niang’s last season when the team coached itself, and that drops to 10-23 (.303). Far from “previously unimaginable”. In fact, in the 3 seasons prior to Prohm ISU was 14-18 in true road games (.438) further discrediting your statement.
2. Sure it’s tough to maintain a program doing well, but that’s what he’s paid to do - and would be doing, if he were a good coach. This is simply an excuse for why the program is not a) the same or b) better than when he took over.
3. What you are describing is his first year at Murray (not his last season as you claim) which was the team he inherited from Kennedy. In his next 3 years at Murray the team never made it back to the NCAA Tourney or sniffed relevance. Prohm took over and the program did not get better or stay the same. Your counterpoint actually reinforces my original point.
4. Painter has proven himself on the national stage by improving a program from what he inherited (24-35 in Keady’s last two seasons). He has beaten a Power 6 team in the NCAA Tourney. Perhaps if Prohm does these things we can look at losses as blips vs trends. He has not, to date.
5. Agreed.
6. Scholarship players did leave this year shortly before the season began. That’s not
something we’ve seen at ISU. We’re you not there for McKay’s seasons with Prohm? Why didn’t we see that with previous coaches? THT shot 30.8% from 3, 9th best on the team but took the 3rd most 3 point attempts on the team, many which were unquestionably not good shot selections. No repercussions from the bench. And yes there was a rumor that Wigginton would transfer much like Lard had he stayed in college.
6 for 6. Let’s hope we can shoot that well in a game this year.
I believe it was Tyrese of all people that said "they wanted it more and played harder". I love Tyrese just like everybody else does, but I do really dislike that quote. In Hilton, vs. a rival, a needed high major win, and we didn't want it enough? Sometimes I think a player just says that so they don't have to admit they sucked, etc. Solomon's quote saying "we practiced everything, we just didn't execute it". Guess I prefer that response better. Regardless, Iowa played well (used their strength vs. our weakness, namely Garza opening up shooters and to nobody's surprise played a zone giving us plenty of open looks which we struggle making).
Different year, same excuses on behalf of Steve from the same apologist types of the past - the same types that were thumping their chests in defiance of criticism against Chewy and Paul Rhoads. Those types exist that can't let go until a thing is beyond untenable. They're all over Facebook and they're all over this message board.
Steve's position isn't quite untenable but it's clear he lacks the things that make a strong coach: in-game strategy, strategy in general, lighting a fire in guys. The hope was that Steve would improve given time, and Scott Drew provided a roadmap for the possibility. After five years, it looks to be false hope. Steve is "first couple years" version of Scott Drew. He has not improved and seems clueless on what to do to fix things - or even worse, doesn't realize that anything needs fixed. What's worse, the fanbase is gaslighted by sporadic strong performances and press conferences that sometimes do suggest he's aware of issues that need correction.
In general, if a thing leads to constant questioning and requires repeated defense, that thing in all likelihood isn't functioning the way it should and requires correction.
Steve's position isn't quite untenable but it's clear he lacks the things that make a strong coach: in-game strategy, strategy in general, lighting a fire in guys. The hope was that Steve would improve given time, and Scott Drew provided a roadmap for the possibility. After five years, it looks to be false hope. Steve is "first couple years" version of Scott Drew. He has not improved and seems clueless on what to do to fix things - or even worse, doesn't realize that anything needs fixed. What's worse, the fanbase is gaslighted by sporadic strong performances and press conferences that sometimes do suggest he's aware of issues that need correction.
In general, if a thing leads to constant questioning and requires repeated defense, that thing in all likelihood isn't functioning the way it should and requires correction.
A great coach like Beilein added Yaklich to improve on his weakness. Perhaps a Prohm can find a complementary assistant.
You only get 20-25 games a year against good competition, not 82 or 162 like baseball or the NBA.
