when you make 7 three pointers but shoot 10,000,000,you can at least say you made 7 three pointers….
Good game plan coach. 👏
Good game plan coach. 👏
Men’s basketball game
- Thread starter goherdorgohome2
- Start date
The false Prophet strikes again. It's one thing to get boatraced by a somewhat decent team, but this was against a winless team in arguably one of the worst conferences in America.
Kudos to the Herd for hiring a young, aggressive, winning coach in Kim Caldwell.
Meanwhile, the men's squad continues to go through the motions with another 'token effort' season, led by a 76 year old high school/AAU coach.
Of course, they have clowns out in the concourse passing out crackerjacks to the kids, so that will bring in an extra 26 fans to the next home game.
Kudos to the Herd for hiring a young, aggressive, winning coach in Kim Caldwell.
Meanwhile, the men's squad continues to go through the motions with another 'token effort' season, led by a 76 year old high school/AAU coach.
Of course, they have clowns out in the concourse passing out crackerjacks to the kids, so that will bring in an extra 26 fans to the next home game.
Our whole basketball philosophy is idiotic... And has been since Elmore graduated.
If you are not good at shooting 3's (and we are not). You shouldn't shoot so many F'n 3s... We have all heard Dan's now infamous analytics speech about how the corner 3 is the best shot other than a dunk, and how 3 point shooting is the key to winning games. That's all fine and good, but we don't have good shooters.
It's like opening a restaurant, and thinking "I know the key to this is having great food" and then rolling out frozen chicken nuggets and canned green beans.
With the gameplan we run out there every night, and our overall lack of talent, we are going to keep treading water like we have been. If we get hot (and that's a big if) we can beat anyone in our pathetic conference. If we are cold we can lose to any team in the country, including previously winless teams in the league who are in the bottom 50 programs in America.
If you are not good at shooting 3's (and we are not). You shouldn't shoot so many F'n 3s... We have all heard Dan's now infamous analytics speech about how the corner 3 is the best shot other than a dunk, and how 3 point shooting is the key to winning games. That's all fine and good, but we don't have good shooters.
It's like opening a restaurant, and thinking "I know the key to this is having great food" and then rolling out frozen chicken nuggets and canned green beans.
With the gameplan we run out there every night, and our overall lack of talent, we are going to keep treading water like we have been. If we get hot (and that's a big if) we can beat anyone in our pathetic conference. If we are cold we can lose to any team in the country, including previously winless teams in the league who are in the bottom 50 programs in America.
Quotation from Dan "I don't care if we win or lose, we just need to start playing good basketball" in the first minute of video. As dshoe use to say, you can't this stuff up.
Article by Chuck Landon dated December 26, 2020. “It’s Time For Doc To Walk Away.”
In all fairness, he was specifically talking about the game at JMU on Saturday, but yet it isn't a good comment. While I'm hoping his time here is shorter than longer, sometimes his honesty burns him to the 2nd 3rd degrees.
This is a token effort. Keeping DD as long as DD wants to be here (and is able) and then allowing him to name his successor and remain around the program after that in some sort of grandfatherly elder statesman role, was the price CS paid to get this job.
We are fast learning the costs of having a non-leader as AD.
We are fast learning the costs of having a non-leader as AD.
I politely disagree. I also I don't think he should be throwing the players under the bus. I stopped watching the video after about five minutes since Dan never accepts any blame. I guess Dan doesn't understand that coaching matters.
It’s like Bill Legg would say, “we have to start doing better on first and second downs so converting on third down becomes easier”.
Maybe that’s better idea than telling someone to “just stand up”…
The protection and coddling of DD goes deeper than Christian Spears.
This started long ago.....more than just this week.
(A) Who at the D1 level redshirts two juniors that aren't injured?
(B) Why not work with guys that have never played in three to five seasons to get them a scholarship opportunity at a D2/NAIA school so that we can free up scholarships for better players than will actually play in the game?
(C) He has clearly time and time this season says he got his defensive philosophy for this season from Mike where he switches every thing. That may work when you can get PJ Tucker or Eric Gordon or Tyson Chandler off free agency. But we just don't have the overall talent on the roster to do that. At the age of 76, he should have a defensive philosophy of his own and adapt as necessary, not rely on Mike who wasn't that great with defense in the first place.
(D) I have heard him all season blame every thing and every one but himself: earlier in the season, it was the non-conference was too tough; then it was the assistants doing the planning; now it is the players. That is bad leadership. He is the head man in charge. He picked the assistants. He picked the players. I have enough with him spreading the blame on every one but himself.
(E) And as far as last night is concerned, why let your team in the second half constantly jack up three-pointers when you were 2 of 18 from beyond the arc for a whopping 11%. Run something different on offense. You are the head man. Call the shots. Why let a fifth-year senior that is 7'1" and 240 pounds sit on the bench in a debacle? Let him work some on the block when your other players are jacking up three-pointers at a 11% make rate. How about let a guy work 2 to 4 feet from the basket? It is called an in-game adjustment by a coach.
(A) Who at the D1 level redshirts two juniors that aren't injured?
(B) Why not work with guys that have never played in three to five seasons to get them a scholarship opportunity at a D2/NAIA school so that we can free up scholarships for better players than will actually play in the game?
(C) He has clearly time and time this season says he got his defensive philosophy for this season from Mike where he switches every thing. That may work when you can get PJ Tucker or Eric Gordon or Tyson Chandler off free agency. But we just don't have the overall talent on the roster to do that. At the age of 76, he should have a defensive philosophy of his own and adapt as necessary, not rely on Mike who wasn't that great with defense in the first place.
(D) I have heard him all season blame every thing and every one but himself: earlier in the season, it was the non-conference was too tough; then it was the assistants doing the planning; now it is the players. That is bad leadership. He is the head man in charge. He picked the assistants. He picked the players. I have enough with him spreading the blame on every one but himself.
(E) And as far as last night is concerned, why let your team in the second half constantly jack up three-pointers when you were 2 of 18 from beyond the arc for a whopping 11%. Run something different on offense. You are the head man. Call the shots. Why let a fifth-year senior that is 7'1" and 240 pounds sit on the bench in a debacle? Let him work some on the block when your other players are jacking up three-pointers at a 11% make rate. How about let a guy work 2 to 4 feet from the basket? It is called an in-game adjustment by a coach.
The rumor of him picking his successor was floating around long before Spears got here. If Hammy hadn't screwed up the search, we may not have been in this predicament. Everyone knew MH gave a very lax and token effort in the coaching search since he was all in for football.
But, you are correct, allowing a coach who's had limited success to pick his successor, is a recipe for continued poor results. I hope Spears and Smith do not allow this to happen.
If they do, we know exactly where mens b'ball falls on the athletics priority list. Not good.
You are not wrong, but I'm sure that every prospective AD was told what the deal was, and I'm sure some leaders turned down giving over control of the MBB program for life to some retired HS coach. We will never know how many, but we certainly know non-leader CS took the deal.
The saddest part is just how bad the SBC is in MBB. Like CUSA before it, these are programs brought together to play football at a certain level. Each brought MBB, and whatever else, along because they had to. Each are at different levels, most very low. Most, particularly the ones way down south, have no basketball history, no basketball interest, and make no basketball effort. Many simply do not have the resources to make an effort at MBB. We do, and we aren't.
Is anyone really excited to turn off the NFL and watch this token effort this evening?
I am in the same corner as you. I desperately want a change. But I do disagree with one thing. I do not feel Hammrick screwed up the search.
Now he took a gamble. One that everyone wanted. He went after Mike. The timing was screwed up because the Lakers season was not finished.
We had to wait what, something like 6 weeks? Because Mike was waiting for the NBA season to finish and see what the Lakers to fire him, he knew he was going to be out, but if he quit he was out the buyout. Eventually he agreed to resign and they gave him the compensation package.
So Mike must have been interested. Or there would not be the wait. But the wait went so long, Mike was stuck.
So he hired Dan. Even with Dan’s lack of college experience, it was a good, risky but good hire.
We were in tough shape. Dan, a home town hero comes home and fires up a fan base, especially the big donors from his era.
Yes it was an experiment, but a good move. Now it should not have gone on as long as it did. That’s the problem. They should have let him fire everyone back up, have his run in 18 and moved in. But hard to do after what happened in 18.
But you couldn’t fire him after that run. Then he won the podunk post season tournament. Couldn’t fire him after that. Then when was time to pull the trigger, he was too entrenched.
He needs to be gone. Should have been gone 3 years ago. But as for the hire, MH played a risky game and took a chance. One he had to do and we all wanted him to do. Unfortunately it did not work out. But give him credit for taking the gamble. Something a lot of us give Marshall hell for not trying.
Last edited:
Certainly good points and can see where you are coming from.
"But ya best darn tootin' believe that son of a Tudor's biscuit Dan is just a ball of fire! Have ya heard his analytics story?"
The problem is, everyone gave Dan many more passes for inexcusable actions than they did with other coaches.
The whole belief that his experience from being on the NBA sidelines (and we really don't know if Mike would have been any better), just his name, and having played at MU alone was enough to give fans other reasons to keep him around:
"Oh we lost, but gosh darn how exciting our basketball has looked! At least it's not boring like Doc ball. Even if he wins more than Dan does."
"Oh we blew a huge lead early in the 2nd half and had to battle back, but these guys got a ton of fight in them!"
"I love Dan at the pressers, he's so fan friendly!"
People wanted MU to just win games. Then they did. Then the fans wanted MU to "be exciting, but also winning." Then MU fans wanted "MU to be exciting, winning, and playing for championships." Then MU fans wanted "MU to be exciting, winning, playing for championships, winning championships, and not losing anymore, ever."
Yeah, the fans literally demanded a Dan type, the MU AD listened, and they got him...now it's the AD's fault for not getting rid of him.
I don’t think anyone is disagreeing with any of this.
MH screwed up the whole hiring process. He was looking at the EKU head coach, but I remember the details. MH put all his eggs in one basket trying to get Mike. When HM finally realized that Mike wasn't interested he hired Dan and got Mike's donation. MH has a lackluster history of hiring coaches, especially basketball coaches.
I will give Dan credit for his one magical season. But he had no experience at the college level and recruiting. I think like 0-16 against the P5 programs.
One of Dan's main problems is that he isn't interested in recruiting. He lives and dies with Mike's system and doesn't do much floor coaching. Dan seems to think that being at Marshall is like coaching at the high school level. He is not worth the $700,000+ yearly salary. Dan only worked for his brother in the NBA and no other NBA coach. He spent four of his years in the NBA in an administration job, not floor coaching.
I will give Dan credit for his one magical season. But he had no experience at the college level and recruiting. I think like 0-16 against the P5 programs.
One of Dan's main problems is that he isn't interested in recruiting. He lives and dies with Mike's system and doesn't do much floor coaching. Dan seems to think that being at Marshall is like coaching at the high school level. He is not worth the $700,000+ yearly salary. Dan only worked for his brother in the NBA and no other NBA coach. He spent four of his years in the NBA in an administration job, not floor coaching.
I don't recall the fans demanding a Dan type. In fact, I think many wanted a young up and comer.
Everyone talks about Dan loving Marshall along with the rest of his family. If he really loved Marshall he would acknowledge that he isn’t getting it done and step aside instead of being selfish. He could simply say he enjoyed it and it’s time to give someone else an opportunity.
100%!!! Anyone that watches and supports Marshall can see that and ask the same question. Very stale program right now. If he really loves Marshall he’ll retire.
Well, everyone says that MIKE gives BIG money to keep Danny at MU. Got to wonder what Kathy "gives"!!
When Mike was mentioned as being a possibility, the fans immediately jumped on it.
His resume and name was what they wanted.
According to HerdgradinFL, MH screwed it up and regardless, the fans got Dan, who, while not Mike in terms of resume, was someone they immediately annointed to sainthood before the first game.
That's the problem, I think.
How are you going to handle leaving a program that the fans all said, "because of you, history has been made!" ??
I think higher ups feel that BOTH Dan and Mike may not financially contribute or support the program if MU fired one of them.
Petty? Absolutely. Par for the course in college athletics? Absolutely.
One of the big problems has been. Dan hasn't been held to the level of expectations DESPITE WINNING. Fans are quick to blame the history of MU basketball and how underachieving it has been.
Dan erased that sentiment in a week yet, it has become an excuse for his lack of achievement since then, and a reason for keeping him.
The program is in very bad shape. I don’t think anyone is saying the standard is to make the NCAA every year. Simply truth is this team would get boat raced by every Jones and Herrion squad. Can you see these guys playing against Pitts or Kane bringing the ball up?
He’s only recruited a handful of real D1 talent in 10 years and none of those guys are on this year’s team. OAK is maybe the 5th or 6th best player on a competitive G5 team. Kinsey was a good player, but nowhere near great, but he looked great here because we had nothing to compare him to on the team. His stats were inflated because they weren’t many guys to share the load and he had to play away from his true strengths.
We have 7-8 guys on the team that shouldn’t even have D1 scholarships. We could be better next year with a completely new roster put together by someone who has a concept on how to actually put together a team.
Greg Marshall is still available.
We have a kid that starts every game here that's D1 walk-on level at his very best and several coming off the bench that get minutes that should be playing NAIA.
No other schools have hired Gregg Marshall.....is this a case of his severance agreement with Wichita being more lucrative than some schools can pay or are the underlying issues too egregious? Still worth a hard look if or when we man up to the Dantoni politicos and make an overdue change.
