ISU - KU postgame. We won the 2nd half!

[snowcraig2.0]

Ah yes, character...is that what Mike Taylor has?

Mike was a good kid. This comment again shows that you have absolutely not clue what you are talking about.

The bottom line is Gmac had to start over with 4 players coming back. He deserves three years before any judgments are passed on him. Anything before that is pure idiocy.

 

[Clone_12]

I think some people don't understand that talent is the #1 thing that determines winning and losing, not coaching...coaching is crucial for what it does with that talent...that's why no matter who coaches, teams that feature 7 future nba players (kansas), or michael beasley and bill walker, or antoine wright and a.c. law...are going to beat teams that don't have near as much talent (us right now)...some people tend to think that regardless of how much (or little) talent there is on a team, they should be winning...I would be curious as to what kind of success these people expected out of this ISU team...btw, those teams in the 80's that Manning lost to, had way more talent than this team. It's not even comparable...you can still be a good coach despite not winning a lot...now if in a couple years McDermott hasn't brought in the talent necessary to win, or has brought in the talent, but hasn't performed-it will be another story...but as for now, you just don't know much about basketball if you're expecting this team to achieve too much.

 

[isucyfan]

Any decently coached team can run a secondary break...my son's HS team did and had great success against many more talented teams.

Yeah, but the success of your son's HS team probably doesn't translate to college like playing at a small Nebraska school doesn't translate to playing in the Big 12.:biggrin:

 

[snowcraig2.0]

I think some people don't understand that talent is the #1 thing that determines winning and losing, not coaching...coaching is crucial for what it does with that talent...that's why no matter who coaches, teams that feature 7 future nba players (kansas), or michael beasley and bill walker, or antoine wright and a.c. law...are going to beat teams that don't have near as much talent (us right now)...some people tend to think that regardless of how much (or little) talent there is on a team, they should be winning...I would be curious as to what kind of success these people expected out of this ISU team...btw, those teams in the 80's that Manning lost to, had way more talent than this team. It's not even comparable.

This is a bold statement. I think you could say talent and coaching are equally important and necessary. Great coaching and mediocre talent is just as good as mediocre coaching and great talent.

 

[cycloneG]

Any decently coached team can run a secondary break...my son's HS team did and had great success against many more talented teams.

You can coach how to run a secondary break against equally talented opponents. Kansas and other talented teams take that away with their speed and athleticism. We can't run with talented teams with our current roster.

 

[Clone_12]

That's true...that's why i said coaching is crucial for what it does with the talent...but right now we just don't have the talent to beat the top-tier programs on a regular basis...talent is #1 though...bad coaches will win with great talent more than great coaches will win with no talent.

 

[coachdags]

The APR is really a pretty new advent.

Just so you realize, that ISU no longer has any room for error. What Mac was left with..... he needs to recruit basketball players that are students 1st, basketball players 2nd, or ISU will be penalized with scholarship reductions.

 

[Clone_12]

I completely agree that both are necessary to achieve at the highest level.

This is a bold statement. I think you could say talent and coaching are equally important and necessary. Great coaching and mediocre talent is just as good as mediocre coaching and great talent.

​

 

[jdoggivjc]

Just so you realize, that ISU no longer has any room for error. What Mac was left with..... he needs to recruit basketball players that are students 1st, basketball players 2nd, or ISU will be penalized with scholarship reductions.

But yet somehow people believe our APR magically got better with Morgan at the helm :wacko:

 

[cybsball20]

Like Purdue?

Missouri, Oklahoma State, Nebraska are all ahead of us in the standings so we probably "shouldn't have" won those either.

Purdue would be a BAD example, especially for the people using excuses about no expereince, new system, etc. Purdue starts four freshmen and no upperclassmen (junior or senior) seeing more than 18 minutes per game.

 

[Clone_12]

Definately young and new system...far more talent than us though, and they were still supposed to beat us. They are a definately a different team now though.

 

[cybsball20]

Definately young and new system...far more talent than us though, and they were still supposed to beat us. They are a definately a different team now though.

Why? Why do they have more talent? They are all Freshmen... They are getting NO contribution from upperclassmen. Bringing in talent is 80% of college coaching.

 

[cycloneG]

Why? Why do they have more talent? They are all Freshmen... They are getting NO contribution from upperclassmen. Bringing in talent is 80% of college coaching.

I agree bringing in talent is a coaches responsibility and McD didn't bring in as much talent as Purdue, but look at the talent Purdue brought in this past season. They were all highly rated prospects from Purdue's backyard. Iowa State doesn't have that luxury.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

Why? Why do they have more talent? They are all Freshmen... They are getting NO contribution from upperclassmen. Bringing in talent is 80% of college coaching.

I agree with baseball guy. If you are just talking about raw talent, our team is not that bad. It's the distribution and maturity of that talent that is the problem. Our talent in the guard court isn't mature right now. You can have a freshman come in who is mature and ready to play, but ours just isn't right now. It's getting there, but it's not where it needs to be right now. Last night was very encouraging though from that aspect.

 

[Clone_12]

I agree with you that bringing in talent is obviously the coaches responsibility...and I think Greg is bringing in talent. But that Purdue class is a top 10 class in the nation, and they ARE more talented than us...do you think they aren't??? Do you think we have the talent to be 13-2 in the Big 10?

 

[jdoggivjc]

I agree with you that bringing in talent is obviously the coaches responsibility...and I think Greg is bringing in talent. But that Purdue class is a top 10 class in the nation, and they ARE more talented than us...do you think they aren't??? Do you think we have the talent to be 13-2 in the Big 10?

Don't tempt me to answer that :wink:

 

[Clone_12]

Haha...well, we are 2-1 against the Big 10...

Don't tempt me to answer that :wink:

​

 

[cybsball20]

I agree with you that bringing in talent is obviously the coaches responsibility...and I think Greg is bringing in talent. But that Purdue class is a top 10 class in the nation, and they ARE more talented than us...do you think they aren't??? Do you think we have the talent to be 13-2 in the Big 10?

No, I think they have alot more talent than us and will continue to. We didn't bring in anyone last year that was ready to step right in and we probably won't have anyone next year ready to come right in with Buckley being a possible exception. It bothers me that we are recruiting like an MVC team HOPING guys develop by the time they are juniors where our peers are getting more talent and passing us up...

 

[Clone_12]

You're entitled to your opinion...I personally believe Wesley, Brackins, and Garrett are going to be FAR better than this supposive "mvc level" player. I also think Lucca and Buckley will be, but you could definately debate that since they have yet to see the hardwood here.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

The thing is if we get these guys to STAY, we can bring in guys that need to develop. the bottom line is winning at ISU isn't going to be achieved on the back of 'instant stars', its going to be because of upperclassmen that know the system. Maybe after some sustained success we will get these top-tier talent kind of players, but it just isn't going to happen right away. Quite frankly, I don't want it to happen that way. I would rather see us with teams that rely on upperclassmen, with the occasional super frosh or soph thrown in.