If you were king for a day, what would you change about our program?

[RF2044]

I think the issue with some of these is that it is premised upon the idea that a coach gets his first choice in recruiting each time. I am sure that Jim wants to recruit the best basketball players that fit his criteria. Sometimes, you gotta take who will have you.

No, that isn't the premise at all.

Getting our first choices or the top prospects isn't a part of any of what I discuss above-- instead, I talked about getting guys who have better basketball skills, in lieu of focusing on athletic archetype. Make that a secondary consideration instead of the primary.

 

[81South]

A UK style dorm for our players with personal chef and whatever else today’s top ballers need.

Student section near the opposing teams bench

Pro day for our elite players

Only the band plays during time outs...no more ads

No more standing until the first bucket

Bring back the dome ranger

 

[orange44]

This is an absolutely horrific topic especially in light of SU getting in another NCAA tourney.

All this is is an opportunity for the critics, whiners and frustrated coaching geniuses to tell us yet another time how the program is mismanaged.

This is just regurgitating of the same old stuff these guys have been complaining about on here for years.

Please stop!!

 

[Townie72]

Actually, your inevitably / predictably bombastic, offended, flummoxed, histrionic-laced response is what has, is, and always will be horrific.

It's hilarious [and sad] -- every one of your posts makes me think of Ignatius J. Reilly.


View attachment 124535

All that effort to try to pump life into the same old tired complaints? (Which not unsurprisingly a few “toadies” liked.)

Of course you did add in some non-actionable musing about things (e.g the need to decide on blue chippers vs. 4 year players) And you did say no assists was “unacceptable” as if you actually get a vote.

The occasional M2M suggestion has been made on here 500 times. Probably 200 times by you. It’s a dumb idea. It’s more like a southpaw fighter switching to a left hand lead to confuse a fighter who has spent his whole life fighting against left hand leads.

Few know who Reilly is so the attempted insult falls flat, I think.

 

[SoBeCuse]

the other day, providence made a run in the Big East final and their coach was on the floor clapping at the guys as they came to the sidelines during the time out. I know we will never get that at this point but I wish we would.

I was impressed with some their big men/PF guys. Making drop steps, post-moves, etc. Strong kids.

 

[Briancuse]

Bring in more shooters and start recruiting more top 25 kids.

 

[RF2044]

All that effort to try to pump life into the same old tired complaints? (Which not unsurprisingly a few “toadies” liked.)

Of course you did add in some non-actionable musing about things (e.g the need to decide on blue chippers vs. 4 year players) And you did say no assists was “unacceptable” as if you actually get a vote.

The occasional M2M suggestion has been made on here 500 times. Probably 200 times by you. It’s a dumb idea. It’s more like a southpaw fighter switching to a left hand lead to confuse a fighter who has spent his whole life fighting against left hand leads.

Few know who Reilly is so the attempted insult falls flat, I think.

I, and many others here, enjoy talking about basketball. Last time I checked, nobody appointed you the arbiter in charge of approving board topics -- if you don't like a topic, then don't open a thread.

The only thing that falls flat is your attempt to stifle board discussion. Thumbs down.

 

[SoBeCuse]

No more forwards who can't shoot a lick. It drives me nuts. The OP hit it all on the head.

Yeah, I think in other offenses if they are good passers/screeners you can play these kinds of guys. But, with Boeheim, the offense is SO iso/individual talent reliant so guys like Roberson/Moyer don’t do much for you.

 

[SoBristol]

A lot of what the OP wishes we had, we have had -- maybe not all in the same season. Not the long rotation, or the mixing of defenses, but much of that list. Then, consider what the team will be next season.

Just last season, we had an elite shooter at SF, we had a PF/C with range, and a small quick point guard. Had early chemistry issues, a hole or two on defense.

We have had several well-rounded squads with FF ability (losing our best opportunity to Arinze's injury, and another to Fab's academic miss-steps). A FF team with two excellent guards and a long-range shooter in 2012-13. A FF team in Houston that came from nowhere. We have had that PG of average size, with outstanding ability to create for his teammates -- leading to a 25-0 start and the top of the charts, if only for a week or two.

And looking forward, we may have that ideal SF in Brissett, depth in backcourt, a PF who can create, and two centers to alternate. Do we need a make-over, or just the ability to have the team we will have in 2018-19, with the possibility that Sidibe will improve and stay healthy?

 

[tbonezone]

dome dog cannon. (nachos prototype failed miserably)

 

[HOFCeluck]

Who else knew how this thread was gonna play out?

 

[HOFCeluck]

All that effort to try to pump life into the same old tired complaints? (Which not unsurprisingly a few “toadies” liked.)

Of course you did add in some non-actionable musing about things (e.g the need to decide on blue chippers vs. 4 year players) And you did say no assists was “unacceptable” as if you actually get a vote.

The occasional M2M suggestion has been made on here 500 times. Probably 200 times by you. It’s a dumb idea. It’s more like a southpaw fighter switching to a left hand lead to confuse a fighter who has spent his whole life fighting against left hand leads.

Few know who Reilly is so the attempted insult falls flat, I think.

Actually since we all have tiny computers with us I looked up CoD and yeah I'd have to say it fits you to a tee.

So I learned something today. Thanks RF.

 

[newmexicuse]

All that effort to try to pump life into the same old tired complaints? (Which not unsurprisingly a few “toadies” liked.)

Of course you did add in some non-actionable musing about things (e.g the need to decide on blue chippers vs. 4 year players) And you did say no assists was “unacceptable” as if you actually get a vote.

The occasional M2M suggestion has been made on here 500 times. Probably 200 times by you. It’s a dumb idea. It’s more like a southpaw fighter switching to a left hand lead to confuse a fighter who has spent his whole life fighting against left hand leads.

Few know who Reilly is so the attempted insult falls flat, I think.

Please Townie, get your facts straight. I will take credit alone for having made the occaisional M2M suggestions at least 500 times. The board in it's entirety has probably made it tens of thousands of times.

You are missing the point, it is something that we do not do that we should be doing.

Yes, it needs to be re-iterated time and time again until maybe some of the paleontologists on the board can communicate the concept successfully to the HC.

 

[Townie72]

Actually since we all have tiny computers with us I looked up CoD and yeah I'd have to say it fits you to a tee.

So I learned something today. Thanks RF.

You would have to read the book to get the character. And there are no Cliff Notes.

But that shouldn't be a challenge for you if you can tear yourself away for the forum (13,808 posts?)

 

[Townie72]

Please Townie, get your facts straight. I will take credit alone for having made the occaisional M2M suggestions at least 500 times. The board in it's entirety has probably made it tens of thousands of times.

You are missing the point, it is something that we do not do that we should be doing.

Yes, it needs to be re-iterated time and time again until maybe some of the paleontologists on the board can communicate the concept successfully to the HC.

JB isn't listening to you, NewMexico.

Why do you think that is?

 

[HOFCeluck]

Post count smack? Savage.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Lol. Death. Taxes. Townie.

 

[newmexicuse]

JB isn't listening to you, NewMexico.

Why do you think that is?

never said he was, that is why i called upon help from the paleontologists !!!

 

[orangehomer]

Please note, this is not a thread intending / designed to bash Jim Boeheim. But if your preferences would be taken into account, what systemic changes would you like to see made for Syracuse University basketball?

Here's my list:

• Recruit more basketball PLAYERS -- we've had a lot of success recruiting a certain profile of athlete to maximize their fit for the zone defense. But this strategy [while it can certainly optimize the defense] is directly responsible for some of the offensive struggles we've had in recent years. Especially with respect to the backcourt / wing positions. My opinion only, but I believe that there is a direct correlation to the poor offense we've seen some seasons, and having a deficiency of guys who can pass, dribble, and shoot. Guys like James Southerland are great defensively in the zone, but being limited with respect to perimeter versatility hamstrings the offense, especially when we face good defensive teams. By no means am I advocating going back to a situation where we have a 6-3 guy like Josh Pace manning the back line of the zone. But I'd much rather have wings who can shoot, put the ball on the floor, set up teammates, etc. -- a 6-6 or 6-7 guy who can do those things [like Theo Pinson or the guys Villanova seems to have manning the 3 seemingly every year] would offer adequate size on the back line [a la Kris Joseph]. We have lots of athletes, we need more guys who have high levels of basketball skill -- especially on the perimeter positions.

• Expanded use of the bench -- Jim Boeheim isn't the only coach who uses a 7 player rotation, but this is one area where I philosophically differ, and would prefer to see a more expanded use of the bench. I'm not suggesting that we have to run platoons of 10-12 players like some teams. But given my druthers, I'd like to see our players NOT leading the nation in minutes played. Beyond getting a bit more rest, playing more guys would help develop the bench and also enable us to get after it defensively more aggressively. Which segues into my next point...

• Defensive diversification -- I have no problem whatsoever being a heavy base zone team. In fact, I wouldn't care if we play zone 95+ percent of the time. But there are times when teams either get into a groove playing against the zone, or we allow them to dictate game tempo. Being able to switch out of zone to force the opposition to adjust would be disruptive and force the other team to react instead of just settling into a comfort zone [pun intended]. We use a press as a situational option, but generally only when we're trailing by a substantial amount. My strong preference would be to see us switch it up more often, while still employing the zone as a differentiating base package that is challenging for most teams to prepare for / simulate in practice. Mixing things up would also facilitate the two previous bullets above, without having any square peg / round hole situations.

• Recruit true lead guards -- this correlates with my first bullet above, but takes it a step further. College basketball is a heavily guard-driven game, and if there is one position where you shouldn't sacrifice skill for size, it's at point guard. Combo guards might provide bigger targets for the opposition to shoot over up top, but what we sacrifice in terms of running the team isn't worth the trade off. And please note that JB has shown a willingness to recruit smaller point guards [examples--Flynn, GMac, Green last year], so it isn't unprecedented. But we shouldn't make trade offs with respect to the most important position on the floor.

• Recruit a full roster -- JB generally eschews recruiting a full roster -- in all likelihood, due to the fact that he doesn't play a ton of guys. Keeping an open scholarship [or two] also enables him to elevate walk ons to scholarship status, which has a beneficial effect on boosting our team's APR rating. But the sanctions dug deep, and provided us with an extreme glimpse of what happens when we don't have a full compliment of scholarship players, and have unanticipated attrition and / or injuries [or both]. If we used the bench more, then it wouldn't be difficult to have 11 or 12 guys on scholarship, and keep the majority of them happy. Having 6 or 7 guys playing due to injuries and other factors these past two seasons has been absurd, putting it mildly.

• Pick a recruiting style and COMMIT to it -- our program's success has long been tied to getting quality system fits who end up being "better" than their rankings most of the team. And true to form, some of our best teams have blended high quality four-year program types with a sprinkling of higher rated players. But it seems as though we've deviated from that strategy a bit since 2012. The type of athletes we recruit are attractive to the NBA, which is why we've had guys jump to the league -- even those that don't seem "ready." Further complicating the situation is that we rarely land blue chippers -- so the guys we bring in that jump early generally aren't dynamic enough to put the team on their backs and take us to the next level. So we get the worst of both worlds -- decent but not transcendent play for the most part, and then many of them bail before actualizing their potential. I believe that we're suffering from our in-between recruiting approach. We're never going to recruit like the UK,'s Duke's, Arizona's, or Kansas's of the world that land classes full of blue chip prospects every year. And our younger guys often appear perpetually disadvantaged playing against teams that recruit four year players and retain those guys for the full duration of their careers [examples of teams successfully deploying that strategy are Virginia, Villanova, and Notre Dame]. This ties to the previous bullet -- we need more four year program guys to balance out the ebbs-and-flows of attrition, to enhance depth, and to step into bigger, more important roles when they become upperclassmen. We've lacked that stability for several seasons [with the exception of the 2016 backcourt], to the detriment of team performance. We need to decide whether we're going all in on blue chippers, or all in on guys who stick around for a few seasons. Because being in the middle and failing to accomplish either of those things isn't getting the job done.

• Lighten the mood -- college basketball is serious business, and these coaches face a lot of stress. One of JB's strengths as a coach is to not wear his emotions on his sleeves, and to avoid ranting and raving on the sidelines like many coaches do. This calm demeanor rubs off on the team, even when things are going poorly. But JB can also be acerbic, with a sharp tongue. And his lack of filter can wear on the team -- especially without a "good cop" to balance him out. Seeing the video clip of our team reacting to making the tournament was incredible -- and a marked contrast to seeing a positive kid like Matt Moyer sitting on the bench sullen these past 10 games, while JB rips into him on the sidelines. Sometimes the people who are the best in their field make it to that level because they are relentless -- and JB is clearly no exception. But I wish that he would lighten up a bit on the players. I think it is costing him the close relational tie that he clearly has with guys from the 70s, 80s, 90s, and early 2000s teams -- that's why those players return in droves and follow the team around the nation during tournament time. I hate to see him lose touch with an entire generation of players from our program who've had a different experience than their predecessors. Let the kids have fun out there.

• Dictate tempo to the opposition, not the other way around -- too often, we settle into games and let the opponent dictate tempo while we sit back in zone. This is especially problematic when we face strong rebounding teams, who might miss a shot or two or three, but retain possessions by hitting the offensive boards hard. We used to run teams off of the floor -- I hate letting inferior teams hang around and shorten the game, which mitigates the talent difference. Even against teams that are better [on paper], I'd like to see us take it to them more, look to force turnovers that lead to run-out opportunities and easy scores in transition. ESPECIALLY given that we've been offensively challenged. At one point late in the conference tournament game against UNC, they showed a graphic that indicated that late in the game, we had ZERO fast break points. Zero. That's unacceptable.

Curious to hear what other ideas some of you might have.

good post, I like the last two especially. the recruiting stuff I don't know the answer to because you can recruit who you want but if they don't want to come here there isn't much you can do about it. lighten the mood 100% agree with. dictate the tempo I also agree with, but what I think you are saying is that you want to play faster. to play faster I think you need to be more talented. having said that, we have been god awful slow the last 5 years or so.

to answer your original question about being king for a day (although i'm not really answering it but my answer is retroactive), I would've played fab melo and won the title. let the ncaa explain vacating it later, we got the hammer for it and none of the positives.

 

[81South]

Jesus, why are there always pissing matches on here? I thought this would be a fun thread but man was I wrong.

 

[orangehomer]

Actually, your inevitably / predictably bombastic, offended, flummoxed, histrionic-laced response is what has, is, and always will be horrific.

It's hilarious [and sad] -- every one of your posts makes me think of Ignatius J. Reilly.


View attachment 124535

it's also sad that you can't seem to reply to critics without making it personal

 

[Eric15]

But that shouldn't be a challenge for you if you can tear yourself away for the forum (13,808 posts?)

I think an ESPN 30 for 30 about Townie would surpass "The U" as the greatest 30 for 30 ever.

 

[moqui]

recruit a new fanbase

 

[Townie72]

never said he was, that is why i called upon help from the paleontologists !!!

But

I, and many others here, enjoy talking about basketball. Last time I checked, nobody appointed you the arbiter in charge of approving board topics -- if you don't like a topic, then don't open a thread.

The only thing that falls flat is your attempt to stifle board discussion. Thumbs down.

Stifle discussion? Stifle discussion? You gotta be kidding.

You obviously aren’t interested in discussion. You want sycophants and toadies to agree with you. You certainly aren’t interested in people like me disagreeing with you.

Seems to me that in 19,200 posts you’ve at least your share of the opportunity to discuss basketball.

 

[Alsacs]

But


Stifle discussion? Stifle discussion? You gotta be kidding.

You obviously aren’t interested in discussion. You want sycophants and toadies to agree with you. You certainly aren’t interested in people like me disagreeing with you.

Seems to me that in 19,200 posts you’ve at least your share of the opportunity to discuss basketball.

You want to insult me? Fine I deserve it from time to time but for you even to attempt to take a shot at RF2044 who is probably one of the top 5 posters on this board is beyond disrespectful.
If anyone is a “toadie” look in the mirror.
Ignore posts if you don’t like them.
The OP doesn’t need to justify anything to you.

Good god your post is so disrespectful. RF2044 gives more insight on the program and info than almost anyone.
I would say it more strong but I am not getting in trouble for you.