"Bare" Wisdom...

[C0|dB|00ded]

I SWOMO fan posted this over on ValleyTalk. I think it is an interesting hypothesis and also quite frightening:

I believe Marshall got Winthrop to a point where they had the best players night in and night out in their league and they just beat teams that were less talented. I know you have to recruit well to do that but the difference in players from one Valley team to the other will never be that drastic so it comes down to coaching in this league.

This doesn't account for GG winning right away but... Did he have ample time to recruit before his first year with Winthrop? Perhaps he brought in some really good kids his first year?

I remember Winthrop having exceptional athletes for a school out of that conference. They were able to play with anybody...

Discuss...


T


...8)

[vancedave56]

I don't like comparison's, but I have to say I like GM x's and o's much better than MT. I can't count the number of losses we had up until the sweet 16 run where we had some very flawed strategies, especially at the ends of games.

MT and GM are both great coaches and individuals in their own rights, and I believe each will continue to be successful.

I also believe coach Marshall is bringing in better players, but it isn't a quick fix. This year's team is "cut and paste." :wsu_posters:

[pinstripers]

Well, Cold, I think that is an interesting thought. Perhaps has some merit.

[Capitol Shock]

Which explains how he could come to Missouri State and absolutely paste a team with an rpi in the low 30's. Interesting theory coming from a MSU fan?

[RoyalShock]

What TNMSUFAN's theory doesn't take into account is how competitive Winthrop was out of conference in Marshall's last two years there.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/teams/schedule?teamId=2737&year=2006

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/teams/schedule?teamId=2737&year=2007

[WstateU]

I don't like comparison's, but I have to say I like GM x's and o's much better than MT. I can't count the number of losses we had up until the sweet 16 run where we had some very flawed strategies, especially at the ends of games.

MT and GM are both great coaches and individuals in their own rights, and I believe each will continue to be successful.

I also believe coach Marshall is bringing in better players, but it isn't a quick fix. This year's team is "cut and paste." :wsu_posters:

:good: :good: :good: :good: :good: :good: :good: :good: :good: :good:

[capnkirk]

For what it's worth. When GM was hired here I remember him saying that he knew alot of players that were in the valley because he had been recruiting them for Winthrop. And his Winthrop teams had the same caliber of players that the valley has, but he felt there was no reason WSU couldn't get even better recruits.

[BenWSU]

Nobody has mentioned a football program as a reason for attracting recruits.

Not a factor at Winthrop???

[Ricardo del Rio]

Nobody has mentioned a football program as a reason for attracting recruits.

Not a factor at Winthrop???

Haven't you ever heard of the Winthrop Twinkies?

[ShockTalk]

Some here were greatly disappointed that we didn't beat an equally inexperienced MSU team who also happens to have a new coach and were also 0-5 in the valley at the time. This is not an excuse, but I did want to point out that MSU has 4 Seniors who average between them almost 28 minutes per game. This is not inexperienced. Their first year coach takes on a team who has a lot more players that have played together, for a longer period, than HCGM had his first and second year here. Going into this year, they have players with 11 years of D1 experience. At the start of this year, WSU had 7 years of D1 experience. Oh by the way, on their home floor, MSU did beat Arkansas who was good enough to beat both Oklahoma and Texas this year.

[mattdalt]

If some of the schools, e.g. WSU Creighton, did not think they could get better athletes than the rest, why the expense on facilities and head coaching salaries. I guarantee that WSU thinks that HCGM can out coach and out recruit his peers in the valley, otherwise the athletic department could save a bundle of money oh the head coaching salaries.

Here is another discussion point:

If we are who we think we are, tradition rich, great facilities, excellent head coach, great strength trainer, etc., how has WSU not been more dominant throught the years? In fact, they have been the opposite of dominant.
I went to school in the early 80's. Great time for a basketball fan. WSU has basically sucked since the late 80's with a noticeable exception of a couple of years recently. What is/are the fatal flaws that have kept WSU from being what we wish they were. And are these flaws being addressed? A head coach making $750,000-$1,000,000, how many millions on Koch arena, and we stand at the bottom of the valley, for the 3rd straight year? I am not pointing at the coach, but at the system in place that would allow this to happen.

Dissappointed, yes, hopeful yes, but wondering if it will be another 20 or so years before lighting strikes and we luckily recruit a MVC POY!

[RoyalShock]

Some here were greatly disappointed that we didn't beat an equally inexperienced MSU team who also happens to have a new coach and were also 0-5 in the valley at the time. This is not an excuse, but I did want to point out that MSU has 4 Seniors who average between them almost 28 minutes per game. This is not inexperienced. Their first year coach takes on a team who has a lot more players that have played together, for a longer period, than HCGM had his first and second year here. Going into this year, they have players with 11 years of D1 experience. At the start of this year, WSU had 7 years of D1 experience. Oh by the way, on their home floor, MSU did beat Arkansas who was good enough to beat both Oklahoma and Texas this year.

Only three of those seniors played against us, and two of them are juco transfers (similar experience to Ramon and Mantas). Only Shane Laurie (4.2 ppg) has more than one year of experience. Now, you could add Fuehrmeyer who's a 4th year junior.

If you look only at the Bears who played against us, (minus the two who got 3 mop-up minutes each), they brought 7 years of D1 experience, just like us. And they were without a senior guard for just the 2nd time who was averaging 31 minutes, 10 points and 3 assists before he got hurt.

[SB Shock]

Here is another discussion point:

If we are who we think we are, tradition rich, great facilities, excellent head coach, great strength trainer, etc., how has WSU not been more dominant throught the years? In fact, they have been the opposite of dominant.

Bad decisions one after another by the athletic department and the school

1. First they got rid of football
2. They fired Smithson (older) and hired Fogler (fogler lived off of Smithson recruits)
3. When folger left they hired Cohen

Those 3 decisions started the ball rolling...

[ShockTalk]

Don't get me wrong. Going into that game, it was one we should have won, but lost badly. But from a "team" stand point, whether one was in the lineup or others played limited minutes, in practices they benefit as a group. I also believe Cook, as a Senior, is more important to MSU overall than Ramon is to the Shox.

[pinstripers]

Well, let's see, he scored 20..........