Micks Philosophy needs to change.

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Originally Posted by Scheids21

They'll continue to improve so I can't say they won't make the tournament; the problem is they'll be worse next year. I have been behind Cronin from day one for rebuilding the program, and the last couple years I've been in "wait and see" mode to determine if he can take us to the next level. I'll say this: If he doesn't get an assistant to run the offense or RSVP somehow learn a new offense he is done. It has been awful and its not getting any better. If not, we will be a borderline bubble team for the rest of eternity. I've always liked Mick and been grateful to him, but without an offense we will never take the next step and its looking more and more like he refuses to fix the offense.

don't care what offense you implement if you don't have the players it is pointless. Do you really think MC doesn't understand his team struggles offensively. You need players! Just Teaching a offensive concept means nothing if you can't execute it. After each game I read in these threads how the team needs players that can make lay ups. If MC is getting his team in position to shoot lay ups and they are unable to finish at the rim is that system or player? People wanted up tempo and pressure. We run that but when your opponent is over 60 percent from 2 and 3's and 90 percent on free throws it isn't a offensive problem. Plus it's hard to break if your not making any shots and your opponent is making everything.

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Originally Posted by UCalum08

Well said. I feel the same way. I am also concerned with the lack of player development. Its virtually non existent.

he has taken the same level of talent to the dance 3 years running. To say he doesn't develop talent is crazy. Does Calipari develop talent? He has a whole team of 1 and doners. 1 thing MC has done is get the most out of his players. The question is can he get the better players?

[JumpinJack5]

Originally Posted by Bearcat_NTS

Don't buy the first part at all. Mick definitely keeps in contact with the Huggins players that he recruited. I agree that the only player who has really gotten better is Kilpatrick and I think a lot of that was on his own pure determination.

The open post motion offense Huggy ran is the best style for this type of personal.

I didn't agree with it either, just thought it was interesting that he would say something like that. Also, I never really thought Leonard improved much himself while he was at UC. I would say SK and Dion Dixon are the best recent examples.

[Bearcat_NTS]

Originally Posted by JumpinJack5

I didn't agree with it either, just thought it was interesting that he would say something like that. Also, I never really thought Leonard improved much himself while he was at UC. I would say SK and Dion Dixon are the best recent examples.

I don't blame him, players like to romanticize the past. People like to forget, but the last two years of Huggins, Cincinnati was #14 and #34 in adjusted OFFENSE respectively...

[Bcatfollower]

Originally Posted by WAITE HOYT 2

don't care what offense you implement if you don't have the players it is pointless. Do you really think MC doesn't understand his team struggles offensively. You need players! Just Teaching a offensive concept means nothing if you can't execute it. After each game I read in these threads how the team needs players that can make lay ups. If MC is getting his team in position to shoot lay ups and they are unable to finish at the rim is that system or player? People wanted up tempo and pressure. We run that but when your opponent is over 60 percent from 2 and 3's and 90 percent on free throws it isn't a offensive problem. Plus it's hard to break if your not making any shots and your opponent is making everything.

Mick recruits these players! he wasn't stuck with them...either way you look at its on him. He needs player? then its his job to get them....

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Originally Posted by Bcatfollower

Mick recruits these players! he wasn't stuck with them...either way you look at its on him. He needs player? then its his job to get them....

I'm not arguing that. He is responsible for the talent level he brings in.

[Bearcat04]

Originally Posted by UCBearcats

Another game against a quality opponent, another game in which that opponent dictates to us how we're going to play on the offensive side of the ball. Oh well, this is just what UC hoops has become. We're mediocre and most are cool with it. I mean, we're just little old UC anyways. We shouldn't expect to be great, just be happy with what we've got because this is the best we can do. Sit back and watch us become the 2nd best basketball program in our own city. If you don't think that's true you're lying to yourself, look at the last 8 years and tell me who's better. Look at the future and the recruits that are lined up.

This is what our program has become and many of you couldn't be happier with it. Whatever, f**k it. I'll just get bashed for being negative or told that I'm being unreasonable.

I think my favorite part of last night was our head "coach" once again throwing our players under the bus in the postgame. What was yours??

I'm not sure what your definition of mediocre is, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't apply to making the tournament three straight years and advancing further in the tournament than the previous 11 years. Miss the tournament the next few years and then you might have something.

[MDW79]

Originally Posted by WAITE HOYT 2

don't care what offense you implement if you don't have the players it is pointless. Do you really think MC doesn't understand his team struggles offensively. You need players! Just Teaching a offensive concept means nothing if you can't execute it. After each game I read in these threads how the team needs players that can make lay ups. If MC is getting his team in position to shoot lay ups and they are unable to finish at the rim is that system or player? People wanted up tempo and pressure. We run that but when your opponent is over 60 percent from 2 and 3's and 90 percent on free throws it isn't a offensive problem. Plus it's hard to break if your not making any shots and your opponent is making everything.

A good portion of his responsibilities as a head coach is recruiting the players he needs for his system and/or the players he needs to win.

Let's make this a simple percentage breakdown. Let's say 50% of his job is coaching and 50% is recruiting. (I realize it is much more complex than this, but it's just for discussion's sake)

You keep reiterating that he doesn't have the talent. It's his job to get it!!!! Even if he's the best coach in world he's failing in the other 50% if what you say is true. (That he's a fine coach, just doesn't have the horses.)

The fact of the matter is the team continues to have the same struggles. You can blame this on recruiting or coaching. Personally I think it's a combination of both. While neither area is awful I think both need vast improvement.

There is simply no excuse to see what we're seeing in YEAR EIGHT. We don't have a single player on this roster that can play with their backs to the basket. We're seeing the same offensive sets we've seen all along. Recruitn a different type of player!!!! Coach them up to play a different style!!! Do something, anything!!!!

It's not working!!!! It hasn't changed!!!! Unless you're content with being a a middling team, usually ranking anywhere from the 25-60 range, and sneaking into the tourney as a 6-10 seed at about a 50-60% clip, then it might be time to consider moving on.

Year 10 will be here before you know it. Exactly how long before we can expect to see different results? At what point can we reasonably say "This is pretty much who we are and what we can expect"? I think we can say it right now. This program just isn't very good. While Mick is not a terrible coach and he did do a good job bringing this team back from nothing, a lot of people are going to want more. UC is routinely considered one of the top 20 programs of all time. This isn't good enough. These type of results would coaches fired at plenty of places with similar or lesser resources than us, and with way less of a history and pedigree. So why is it acceptable here? Because of what happened damn near a decade ago?

I'm so tired of the excuses. I don't know how saying he doesn't have the talent isn't a knock on the job he's doing. What else could it be?

Rant over....

[MDW79]

Originally Posted by Bearcat04

I'm not sure what your definition of mediocre is, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't apply to making the tournament three straight years and advancing further in the tournament than the previous 11 years. Miss the tournament the next few years and then you might have something.

That is mediocre for a program like ours. Leave getting excited about just making the tourney to the Xavier's and St. Mary's of the world. Is this what we've become? Being impressed with simply making the tourney?

Sad.

[Bearcat04]

Originally Posted by MDW79

That is mediocre for a program like ours. Leave getting excited about just making the tourney to the Xavier's and St. Mary's of the world. Is this what we've become? Being impressed with simply making the tourney?

Sad.

When you have only been to the 2nd weekend of the tournament ONCE since 1996 there is nothing mediocre about making the Sweet 16 two years ago.