Mismanaged game

[Billy Don]

The defense has already been talked about a lot and what a joke it was. What I want to point out is something about the offense. Against an undersized team (Marquette) Gates was one of the best weapons UC had on offense. Yet only with 3 fouls he got 23 minutes. If I'm coach Gates stays in the game until he fouls out! Sitting him on the bench with 2 fouls shut down UC's offense and let Marquette go on a run. With Vaughn not looking to score per the coach or whatever, with Gates on the bench who is going to score? I have yet to figure out what Micks game plan ever is. I think the players have the same problem.

[ralph1950]

The defense has already been talked about a lot and what a joke it was. What I want to point out is something about the offense. Against an undersized team (Marquette) Gates was one of the best weapons UC had on offense. Yet only with 3 fouls he got 23 minutes. If I'm coach Gates stays in the game until he fouls out! Sitting him on the bench with 2 fouls shut down UC's offense and let Marquette go on a run. With Vaughn not looking to score per the coach or whatever, with Gates on the bench who is going to score? I have yet to figure out what Micks game plan ever is. I think the players have the same problem.


All I can say is that I am glad that you are not the coach.

[Billy Don]

All I can say is that I am glad that you are not the coach.

Ha! Well at least at 6 foot 4 I'd be taller than some of the players so it wouldn't be all bad.

[dxnation]

The defense has already been talked about a lot and what a joke it was. What I want to point out is something about the offense. Against an undersized team (Marquette) Gates was one of the best weapons UC had on offense. Yet only with 3 fouls he got 23 minutes. If I'm coach Gates stays in the game until he fouls out! Sitting him on the bench with 2 fouls shut down UC's offense and let Marquette go on a run. With Vaughn not looking to score per the coach or whatever, with Gates on the bench who is going to score? I have yet to figure out what Micks game plan ever is. I think the players have the same problem.

Yup very true statement. Ray Charles could have saw that why cant Mick? Cant keep blaming the kids for for not following a game plan that doesnt exist

[Mick's Da Man]

I have yet to figure out what Micks game plan ever is.

That's nothing new. You can never figure anything out. That's why you come on here. To seek the advice of those much smarter than you. :D

[bearcatbilly6225]

That's nothing new. You can never figure anything out. That's why you come on here. To seek the advice of those much smarter than you. :D


Mick is not the man and the way his team performs is a good example of that. If you think this team is a well coached team, then you need a new set of glasses, or a head examination. I never once in my 14 years of watching Bob Huggins seen a team look completely lost!!!! I will not accept it and you homers just keep saying oh this year is the year, oh next year is the year, and so on. I do not see the light at the end of the tunnel, next year ok we get Cash he has no experience you depend on some with no experience to bring you out of the gutter NEXT year...nah dont see that happening, and then guess what happens the following year, we lose our only offensive threat in Vaughn..... This is a joke, and I don't accept 34 pt losses, and I dont accept piss poor coaching, and I dont accept my alma mater being embarrased, because of a troll thats in over his head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bearcatbilly6225]

UC basketball use to be the highlights of my week, for years and years and years. I don't know how many games I just turn off now, because I know we are not coming back. **** back in the day I never turned a game off even if we were down 20 cause I knew Huggins had those kids hearts and souls, and would get the most out of whoever was on that court. He demanded respect, and demanded winning and I no longer see this AT ALL with my UC Bearcats

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

I never once in my 14 years of watching Bob Huggins seen a team look completely lost!!!!

Is there a reason that you choose to stop watching the NCAA tourney after the 1st round?

[BearcatAlum1]

Ha! Well at least at 6 foot 4 I'd be taller than some of the players so it wouldn't be all bad.

I dont accept my alma mater being embarrased, because of a troll thats in over his head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's up with the comments knocking Mick's height? That just validates my point that there is an axe to grind, or that some people don't respect others because of his or her appearance. Personally, attacking someone's physical attributes (especially an attribute that is not controlled; i.e. height) is wrong. Now, if Mick was extremely overweight and a slob, then sure, give him grief.

Alum1

[bearcatbilly6225]

Is there a reason that you choose to stop watching the NCAA tourney after the 1st round?

At least we made it to the first round!!! OH yeah and did you forget about the final four, the elite 8, and sweet 16's dont give me ur bs about losing in the first round sh**. And I never seen us look completely lost like a lost puppy, in the second round either!!!! 34 pt loss give me a break!!!!

[bearcatmark]

Is there a reason that you choose to stop watching the NCAA tourney after the 1st round?

That's just a stupid comment. UC lost some second round games certainly, but also had 4 sweet 16s, 3 elites eights and a final four. Also it was not like they looked lost in their second round game. The UCLA/Cincinnati battle was an absolute classic, both teams performing at exceptionally high levels. UCLA got a few more breaks and made a few more plays for their what was it double OT? That UCLA team beat UC by having more talented players and actually getting them to perform like they were capable of. UC was the 3rd number 1 seed UCLA beat that year...the problem was they were inconsistent.

Cincinnati was the model of consistency that season. They played very well for a team that really had two guys who could score with any consistency (Logan and Stokes)...UCLA played slightly better.

The bank-three loss to WVU...did we really look lost in that game?

Come on... when you say a team looks lost you are not talking about losing hard fought, highly contested basketball games. You are talking about being clueless on certain aspects of the game. UC teams of the past were well schooled. They consistently played tight defense, rebounded the basketball and forced the opposing team out of what they wanted to do. They were as consistent game in and game out as any team in the country. Give me a break.

(i really hate rehashing this...not want this topic is meant to be about, but it does relate in that there are expectations of discipline, effort, and knowledge of how to play that have not been instilled on this team)

[bearcatbilly6225]

and one more thing, don't forget the year Kenyon went down, we probably had a national championship waiting for us that year!!!! Forgive me for having passion about my team and not accepting the horrible coaching job that I have seen thus far out of MC. How come Huggins goes to WV, and guess what they just roll on and guess what they are winners, you know why?????? Cause they Have a winning respected big name, **** of a coach..

[bearcatbilly6225]

That's just a stupid comment. UC lost some second round games certainly, but also had 4 sweet 16s, 3 elites eights and a final four. Also it was not like they looked lost in their second round game. The UCLA/Cincinnati battle was an absolute classic, both teams performing at exceptionally high levels. UCLA got a few more breaks and made a few more plays for their what was it double OT? That UCLA team beat UC by having more talented players and actually getting them to perform like they were capable of. UC was the 3rd number 1 seed UCLA beat that year...the problem was they were inconsistent.

Cincinnati was the model of consistency that season. They played very well for a team that really had two guys who could score with any consistency (Logan and Stokes)...UCLA played slightly better.

The bank-three loss to WVU...did we really look lost in that game?

Come on... when you say a team looks lost you are not talking about losing hard fought, highly contested basketball games. You are talking about being clueless on certain aspects of the game. UC teams of the past were well schooled. They consistently played tight defense, rebounded the basketball and forced the opposing team out of what they wanted to do. They were as consistent game in and game out as any team in the country. Give me a break.

(i really hate rehashing this...not want this topic is meant to be about, but it does relate in that there are expectations of discipline, effort, and knowledge of how to play that have not been instilled on this team)



very very good post... Was I mad when we went out in the second round so much? YEs but we were never embarrased!!!! Did I get mad at Huggins some times, for stale offenses, but in the big picture I knew he mad UC basketball, and that he was one **** of a coach, and demanded winning

[BeastUC]

And I never seen us look completely lost like a lost puppy, in the second round either!!!![/QUOTE]

Does the game vs Illinois ring a bell?

[bearcatmark]

when you consistently belittle the former coach over a few second round losses it makes you sound stupid. how many times has mick cronin even been to the second round of the ncaa tourney? how about the second round of the NIT then? ok not the NIT...surely the CBI?

Mick faced a tough situation and still has a fair amount of time to prove himself. That being said there are some clear issues with this basketball team that he has failed to address and it is fair to call him out on it. I hope Mick is 10 times the basketball coach Huggins was...but he has much to do to get there

[bearcatmark]

And I never seen us look completely lost like a lost puppy, in the second round either!!!!

Does the game vs Illinois ring a bell?[/QUOTE]

That and the loss to Canesius in Wingfield's season were probably the two worst performances of the Huggins era.

[Oldtimer_UC_fan]

What's up with the comments knocking Mick's height? That just validates my point that there is an axe to grind, or that some people don't respect others because of his or her appearance. Personally, attacking someone's physical attributes (especially an attribute that is not controlled; i.e. height) is wrong. Now, if Mick was extremely overweight and a slob, then sure, give him grief.

Alum1

Do you mean like Rick Majerus?

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

LOL... I love it. A dozen threads on the front page ripping the current coach because he couldn't spin Cedric McGowan and an empty roster into gold inside 3 years, but dare to mention that things may have not been all sunshine and lollypops under the current WVU coach (see: constant underachieving in the NCAA tourney and a terrible academic reputation) and even more Mick Bashers make their way out of the woodwork.

[Brooklyn Bearcat]

The thing is, though, that if you really think about it, Huggins was NOT a great situational coach. I'm sorry, but it's true, and I DID see times when his teams looked lost. He recruited very athletic players, who were good ballers, and were very strong, and he gave those indiviudals stability in their lives. Yet, the fact remains, his players were not the brightest bulbs in the cupboard, this we know, and he had a very hard time getting them to adjust in the big spots. This is a combination both of those players' intellectual capacities as well as his inability to really change up the game plan as needed. Yes, UC won a lot of close ones in those days, too. But, let's face it, C-USA was not the toughest conference in the world, and the team's weknesses really showed in the tourney, especially. It just seemed that with the game on the line in the NCAAs, for example, Huggins just stood around and yelled. Never called a timeout, never told the PG to reset the play. Bad situational coaching, and it is why the team unerachieved in the tourney and each time it was ranked very highly.
I was never in love with Huggins. I don't think he was ever good enough to get us to a particular level that we could have gotten to. I acknowledge his hard work at UC and think he is doing great work at WVU. But, when I think about mismanaging games. Huggins is as guilty as anyone.
If anything, Cronin just did not have a good gameplan yestreday. A separate problem in and of itself. There is nothing you can say in terms of mismanagment in a 40-pt blow out. You just have to pick up and try and regroup. I'm not sure what I think about Mick right now. He may not be the answer. I think we need t take his body of work holistically, each year, and after this season. If overall progress is made, then we can deem him a success. But we all also must realize that Huggins' coaching was very flawed as well, in a lot of areas, particularly in game managment/adjustments.

[BeastUC]

Does the game vs Illinois ring a bell?

That and the loss to Canesius in Wingfield's season were probably the two worst performances of the Huggins era.[/QUOTE]

That Canisius team was pretty good,as they had also went to UNC-Charlotte (who won the metro that year) and won.A good friend of mine knows about them,that was when John Beilein was there.
We lost two games vs Illinois where we looked out of sync in the ncaa and scared in the other one.The 2005 blowout at Depaul i think was a bad game.

[bearcatmark]

I forgot that was a Beilein coached team.. All i remember is we were up about 30 in the second half and let them come back. Good or not that was as poor a half as i can remember.

[BeastUC]

I forgot that was a Beilein coached team.. All i remember is we were up about 30 in the second half and let them come back. Good or not that was as poor a half as i can remember.

LOL,yep the only Canisius fan i know told me that.I also know that year UC lost to Illinois in the ncaa,was the same year i seen the worst half of basketball under the former coach by getting blown out by UL in the second half.Even the former coach said after the game nobody has ever beaten them that bad.

[Mick's Da Man]

West Virginia sure looked lost last year when we were cleaning their clock.......on WVU's floor, nonetheless!!!!

I guess Huggs didn't look lost coaching that game either?

BWAHAAAAAAAA!!!!!

Owned.

[Mick's Da Man]

LOL,yep the only Canisius fan i know told me that.I also know that year UC lost to Illinois in the ncaa,was the same year i seen the worst half of basketball under the former coach by getting blown out by UL in the second half.Even the former coach said after the game nobody has ever beaten them that bad.


My favorite was losing to UK in one of Huggs last years. That was a pitiful display of basketball I've ever seen UC put on. Embarrassing. All the big talk from Huggs always wanting to play UK and then his wonderful pathetic coaching takes over and they blow it in the tourney as usual.

Hilarious.

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

My favorite was losing to UK in one of Huggs last years. That was a pitiful display of basketball I've ever seen UC put on. Embarrassing. All the big talk from Huggs always wanting to play UK and then his wonderful pathetic coaching takes over and they blow it in the tourney as usual.

Hilarious.

Hold your tongue!

If this site's esteemed posters can start 8 or 9 more threads ripping Mick, BH might come back and be our coach again!

[Forsure21]

My favorite was losing to UK in one of Huggs last years. That was a pitiful display of basketball I've ever seen UC put on. Embarrassing. All the big talk from Huggs always wanting to play UK and then his wonderful pathetic coaching takes over and they blow it in the tourney as usual.

Hilarious.

There was like 70,000 at that game. UC was winning at halftime like 34-32 or something. They just didn't make plays down the stretch, but UC played tough, physical, and with all the EFFORT IT TOOK TO Win.

[cincycpaw]

My favorite was losing to UK in one of Huggs last years. That was a pitiful display of basketball I've ever seen UC put on. Embarrassing. All the big talk from Huggs always wanting to play UK and then his wonderful pathetic coaching takes over and they blow it in the tourney as usual.

Hilarious.

Nice. UC ran out of gas in that game for sure. It was close most of the way...really wasn't pitiful at all, just disappointing. BUt hey, it was great to actually get to play in the NCAA tournament!!!

It just stupid for idiots to downplay what Huggs did for UC. Shows a lot of ignorance.

[bearcatmark]

My favorite was losing to UK in one of Huggs last years. That was a pitiful display of basketball I've ever seen UC put on. Embarrassing. All the big talk from Huggs always wanting to play UK and then his wonderful pathetic coaching takes over and they blow it in the tourney as usual.

Hilarious.

Frankly i doubt you even watched the game if that was your impression. UC started off terribly, but Huggins made some early adjustments and UC came back to take the lead. The second half was a battle for much the half, but UC did not have the size to handle UK's big men and UC's outside players missed too many shots.

Seriously what a joke. UC battled hard and played tough defense that entire game.

[Mick's Da Man]

Nice. UC ran out of gas in that game for sure. It was close most of the way...really wasn't pitiful at all, just disappointing. BUt hey, it was great to actually get to play in the NCAA tournament!!!

It just stupid for idiots to downplay what Huggs did for UC. Shows a lot of ignorance.


Yeah, no more stupid than listening to posters worship the ground the drunk puking coach walked on, on his way home from probably sleeping with one of the boosters wives.

Yeah, like he had nothing to do with the downfall of this program. Screws it all up and leaves it up to others to pick up the pieces.

Typical.

Yeah, he sure is worthy of praise. :rolleyes:

[Mick's Da Man]

Frankly i doubt you even watched the game if that was your impression. UC started off terribly, but Huggins made some early adjustments and UC came back to take the lead. The second half was a battle for much the half, but UC did not have the size to handle UK's big men and UC's outside players missed too many shots.

Seriously what a joke. UC battled hard and played tough defense that entire game.


I've seen 99% of the games UC has played since 1985. I seriously doubt you can claim anything close to that.

Shaggie Alleyne owned our low post guys. Shaggie never amounted to anything at UK and transferred. He was a top 50 recruit and 7 foot tall. Never amounted to anything, but yet Huggs couldn't figure out how to beat a third string center. Hilarious.

[cincycpaw]

Yeah, no more stupid than listening to posters worship the ground the drunk puking bastard walked on, on his way home from screwing one of the boosters wives.

Yeah, like he had nothing to do with the downfall of this program. Screws it all up and leaves it up to others to pick up the pieces.

Typical.

Yeah, he sure is worthy of praise. :rolleyes:

Again, you are truly a great contributor and a really great representative for what a UC fan is...Nancy must be very proud of you.

[cincycpaw]

I've seen 99% of the games UC has played since 1985. I seriously doubt you can claim anything close to that.


Oh, then you know how great Huggs was for UC. Nevermind.

[Mick's Da Man]

There was like 70,000 at that game. UC was winning at halftime like 34-32 or something. They just didn't make plays down the stretch, but UC played tough, physical, and with all the EFFORT IT TOOK TO Win.

BS. Typicial Huggins UC team, choked/laid down when it matters most. They always did that. They beat Duke in the Alaskan Shootout and everyone points to that. I'd say 80% of the time in a close game, Huggs teams would choke. Never failed.

[cincycpaw]

BS. Typicial Huggins UC team, choked/laid down when it matters most. They always did that. They beat Duke in the Alaskan Shootout and everyone points to that. I'd say 80% of the time in a close game, Huggs teams would choke. Never failed.

I'll take that bet.

Still, it shows nothing more than complete ignorance to discount Huggs so easily. I know you think it will make Mick love you, but it won't.

Huggs is a great coach.

Mick could be a great coach, we'll soon find out.

[BeastUC]

Oh wow this is really getting off topic too much.My post was to pojnt out that there was times we looked lost and non-competitive and the 2 Illinois game and the second half of the UL game the same year we lost to Illinois in the NCAA came to mind.

But there is a difference between losing and giving up and fighting once you're down.
I'm sure UC knows that Marquette is not EKU and you can't just comeback against better teams as easily cuz the good teams will try to keep you down down once they have you down.

[Mick's Da Man]

I'll take that bet.

Still, it shows nothing more than complete ignorance to discount Huggs so easily. I know you think it will make Mick love you, but it won't.

Huggs is a great coach.

Mick could be a great coach, we'll soon find out.

I'd take that bet too. Huggs teams always lose. They lost to Davidson when they had it in the bag. Choke city baby. They lost to Xavier last year when they had it in the bag. Another choke city baby.

Just remain clueless. It suits you fine.

[HotSizzle]

Wow another thread tearing Mick a new hole and questioning his ability to do the job. Here's a thought...start a thread questioning the desire, heart, etc. of the players. We already know they lack the ability but you cant put all the blame on the coach for the team coming out flat and basically not giving two nuts. I didnt need my coach in college to get me up for any games...it was automatic, especially when we went on the road!! If you cant get yourself ready to play your Beast opener on someone else's floor...then you have no business lacing them up that night, period! And please let Huggs go...great coach but it's starting to get psycho crush like.

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

BS. Typicial Huggins UC team, choked/laid down when it matters most. They always did that. They beat Duke in the Alaskan Shootout and everyone points to that. I'd say 80% of the time in a close game, Huggs teams would choke. Never failed.

IMO that is because he never really HAD to coach in the GMC and CUSA. He always had the athletes to physically beat down inferior conference foes. However, when it came to NCAA time and he was up against teams which could match or come close to matching UC's athleticism, it became obvious that his in-conference experience failed to prepare him or the team to make adjustments. Plus the fact that, after Keith Legree, he could never recruit a PG who could feed the post.

I give him all the credit in the world for being able to recruit all those superior athletes, but he definitely leaned too heavily on his physical advantages in conference play and neglected some of the details that needed to be in place for postseason success.

[cincycpaw]

I'd take that bet too. Huggs teams always lose. They lost to Davidson when they had it in the bag. Choke city baby. They lost to Xavier last year when they had it in the bag. Another choke city baby.

Just remain clueless. It suits you fine.

I'm the clueless one? Umm...ok.

You state 2 instances...to make up 80%...if Huggs has coached in only 2.5 games then you are correct.

I'll never understand why people who support Mick so unconditionally can't see the reality of how important Huggs was to the UC program and can't recognize that he is a good coach.

[Mick's Da Man]

I'm the clueless one? Umm...ok.

You state 2 instances...to make up 80%...if Huggs has coached in only 2.5 games then you are correct.

I'll never understand why people who support Mick so unconditionally can't see the reality of how important Huggs was to the UC program and can't recognize that he is a good coach.

I don't support Mick unconditionally. I made that name up when Mick first got hired.

Mick doesn't walk on water. Neither did either of his predecessors.

I know all the secretive stuff as to why Huggins was fired, but people in the know are not allowed to post it openly on message boards or they get banned/censored or whatnot.

Huggs was far from a saint, yet people worship him like one. It's so disgusting to listen to when you know the truth.......seriously.

[cincycpaw]

Wow another thread tearing Mick a new hole and questioning his ability to do the job. Here's a thought...start a thread questioning the desire, heart, etc. of the players. We already know they lack the ability but you cant put all the blame on the coach for the team coming out flat and basically not giving two nuts. I didnt need my coach in college to get me up for any games...it was automatic, especially when we went on the road!! If you cant get yourself ready to play your Beast opener on someone else's floor...then you have no business lacing them up that night, period! And please let Huggs go...great coach but it's starting to get psycho crush like.

It's 1 game. We'll know what kind of coach Mick is by how he and his team responds to that terrible effort.

If players continue to not give effort, it is certainly on the coach as well. He recruits them, he leads them. If he can't get them to play, to care, that is his fault as well as theirs. I'm not saying this is the case with Mick yet, just a general comment as I disagree with your statement.

[Billy Don]

I hate to bring Huggins name up again but anyone on here think Huggins would play a zone against Marquette? Ha! He hasn't won over 600 games because he's that stupid. Example: He beat a great coach in Mike Krzyzewski and Duke, who had more talent, in the NCAA last year because he's also a great coach. We as UC fans are stuck with what we have and other than bitch there isn't much we can do about it. Carry on please.

[HotSizzle]

It's 1 game. We'll know what kind of coach Mick is by how he and his team responds to that terrible effort.

If players continue to not give effort, it is certainly on the coach as well. He recruits them, he leads them. If he can't get them to play, to care, that is his fault as well as theirs. I'm not saying this is the case with Mick yet, just a general comment as I disagree with your statement.

Agreed. Coach does have some responsibility but as the cliche goes...you cant coach heart or hustle. Im not sitting here trying to say that Mick is a godsend..he's not. But i have seen too many people in this forum talk up our team/coach one game then stomp their feet in a tantrum about them the next game. It really is amusing. Cant wait to see when UC beats Prov. I bet we'll get a bunch of "solid contender" threads again and give Mick ideas on where he can put his coach of the year trophy.

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

other than bitch there isn't much we can do

QFT :)

25252525252525

[Mick's Da Man]

I hate to bring Huggins name up again but anyone on here think Huggins would play a zone against Marquette? Ha! He hasn't won over 600 games because he's that stupid. Example: He beat a great coach in Mike Krzyzewski and Duke, who had more talent, in the NCAA last year because he's also a great coach. We as UC fans are stuck with what we have and other than bitch there isn't much we can do about it. Carry on please.

WHOMP! THERE IT IS!!!! Someone pulling the ole Alaskan Shootout win out of their butt!!!! I love that one.

How about those terrible losses in the NCAA Tournament???? How about losing to Davidson this year when they had it in the bag??? How about WVU losing to Xavier last year in the tourney when they had it in the bag???? How about losing to Canisius when UC was up 20 at halftime?????? The list is so long, I don't have time to type it!!! Woo-hoo!!!!

[carolinacatfan]

Another thread that has been turned into a Huggins vs. Mick supporters battle.

It's really not even a fair comparison. Mick bashers can't expect him to have the attributes of a veteran coaching legend and Huggins bashers can't really try to claim Mick is on the same level.

I am of the hope that some day MC will be of that stature and that accomplished. Mick has had a tough road, but I definitely have grown tired of the lack of desire by his teams at times. If being honest I don't think anyone can question the difference in effort and intensity between Huggins or even Kennedy coached teams and the ones of the last couple years.

Huggins definitely had a stagnant offense at times but there was never an issue of not throwing the ball into the dominant player on the floor.

I'm not wishing for Huggins to be back, but I am wishing for the success of those teams. I also know you can't expect to win the BEAST this year or even the next, but competing shouldn't be an issue with good coaching and the current talent. It's been mentioned that we have MAC talent on this team. That's a ridiculous statement. I'm guessing Charlie Coles would swap talent levels.

This isn't an issue of Huggins v. MC though, just an issue of questioning the current coaching.

[Mick's Da Man]

Another thread that has been turned into a Huggins vs. Mick supporters battle.


I can't wait to go to the tourney again and put the past behind us. Until then, I will battle the those on here that love the past because it wasn't as great as things could be. This program can be so much more in b-ball. Is Mick Da Man to do it? I don't know yet. I made my username around the time he was hired. His past at Murray State was equal or better than Huggs at Akron. I had every reason to believe he could get the job done. Maybe he is just being tested by his players right now. They are young.......and if you've ever had little kids, you know they will test you because they don't want to do what you want, but what they want. I think there's alot of individual play going on, and the team concept has been lost..........not to mention alot of confidence. There is always a turning point with young teams like this. Hopefully it comes soon.

[cincycpaw]

WHOMP! THERE IT IS!!!! Someone pulling the ole Alaskan Shootout win out of their butt!!!! I love that one.

How about those terrible losses in the NCAA Tournament???? How about losing to Davidson this year when they had it in the bag??? How about WVU losing to Xavier last year in the tourney when they had it in the bag???? How about losing to Canisius when UC was up 20 at halftime?????? The list is so long, I don't have time to type it!!! Woo-hoo!!!!

Pretty sure he was referring to West Virginia beating Duke last year in the NCAA tournament, not the Alaskan shootout.

[Billy Don]

Pretty sure he was referring to West Virginia beating Duke last year in the NCAA tournament, not the Alaskan shootout.

Ha! You think reading skills might be one of his problems? Woo Hoo

[bearcat81-84]

I changed the location of this post...It needed to be placed under coaching...

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

The defense has already been talked about a lot and what a joke it was. What I want to point out is something about the offense. Against an undersized team (Marquette) Gates was one of the best weapons UC had on offense. Yet only with 3 fouls he got 23 minutes. If I'm coach Gates stays in the game until he fouls out! Sitting him on the bench with 2 fouls shut down UC's offense and let Marquette go on a run. With Vaughn not looking to score per the coach or whatever, with Gates on the bench who is going to score? I have yet to figure out what Micks game plan ever is. I think the players have the same problem.

Nah, really just a bad effort (no TERRIBLE effort) by the team and coaches.

It was a lousy day. UC can't have many worse than that game. Not possible.

[Billy Don]

Nah, really just a bad effort (no TERRIBLE effort) by the team and coaches.

It was a lousy day. UC can't have many worse than that game. Not possible.

The only thing good I can see out of that game is it could be a wake up call for the team and coach. Find out the first few minutes of the Providence game. I expect or at least hope UC comes out fired up and plays some tough basketball at home. If it doesn't happen that way then oh oh

[jeffto]

with all the EFFORT IT TOOK TO Win.If that were true they would have won. Do you understand scoring and how they keep it.

[jeffto]

I hate to bring Huggins name up againThat is probably the most outrageous, bald-faced lie ever posted on any forum anywhere. Low class!

[Pie Hole]

IMO that is because he never really HAD to coach in the GMC and CUSA. He always had the athletes to physically beat down inferior conference foes. However, when it came to NCAA time and he was up against teams which could match or come close to matching UC's athleticism, it became obvious that his in-conference experience failed to prepare him or the team to make adjustments. Plus the fact that, after Keith Legree, he could never recruit a PG who could feed the post.

I give him all the credit in the world for being able to recruit all those superior athletes, but he definitely leaned too heavily on his physical advantages in conference play and neglected some of the details that needed to be in place for postseason success.

Yeah, you're right. Memphis, Louisville, Marquette, UC, Depaul, UNC Charlotte, and UAB made up a horrible conference. He really never had to coach in that conference. Maybe they should have just let Keith Legree play and coach at the same time. I'm sure that UC would have made the tourney and advanced to the sweet 16 every year if that were the case. Damn.... our coach was horrible back then! I still can't figure out why the Big East wanted so many teams from CUSA to join their conference. They should have targeted the MAC or the A-10. Think of all the great schools they could have taken from those conferences.

[joe]

UC basketball use to be the highlights of my week, for years and years and years. I don't know how many games I just turn off now, because I know we are not coming back. **** back in the day I never turned a game off even if we were down 20 cause I knew Huggins had those kids hearts and souls, and would get the most out of whoever was on that court. He demanded respect, and demanded winning and I no longer see this AT ALL with my UC Bearcats


I know what you are saying and it sad....err actually pathetic. I don't go down there no more till you know who is gone but I do watch them. Every time they are televised I do watch and more often than not I just shake my head. But even if Himpher left today there is no way I would go down there and watch that. Bearcat basketball was something I could always count, it always delivered. It didn't matter if four of the starting five graduated or went pro, UC won, bottom line. In a town where the pros suck and continue to suck (even though the Reds are trying) UC hoops was the time to feel good again. I hope that whatever the personal vendetta was.....that whatever he did equals the pain in the fans of the UC faithful. There are only a handful (coaches)...more than likely no more than ten that year after year for fifteen years no matter what just simply win, no excuses. According to the majority in here and on other boards MC was crowned as savior incarnate and within 4-5 years we weren't going to miss a beat. I hope this is true. I don't see it yet though.

gregg

[joe]

Is there a reason that you choose to stop watching the NCAA tourney after the 1st round?

<rolling my eyes> I suppose this is better basketball then? This is better hoops.....nevermind. Sad IMO.

gregg

[Billy Don]

I can't wait to go to the tourney again and put the past behind us. Until then, I will battle the those on here that love the past because it wasn't as great as things could be. This program can be so much more in b-ball. Is Mick Da Man to do it? I don't know yet. I made my username around the time he was hired.

Somehow this reminds me of the username chatter. Had one gear missing. Would make several good posts in a row that made sense then all of a sudden hit that missing gear and the posts would go goofy. Probably something related to childhood and something a little couch time in an office would take care of. I agree with you can't wait to go to the tourney again. It would be nice to have some idea when we could expect this.

[Bearcat Jeff]

The thing is, though, that if you really think about it, Huggins was NOT a great situational coach. I'm sorry, but it's true, and I DID see times when his teams looked lost. He recruited very athletic players, who were good ballers, and were very strong, and he gave those indiviudals stability in their lives. Yet, the fact remains, his players were not the brightest bulbs in the cupboard, this we know, and he had a very hard time getting them to adjust in the big spots. This is a combination both of those players' intellectual capacities as well as his inability to really change up the game plan as needed. Yes, UC won a lot of close ones in those days, too. But, let's face it, C-USA was not the toughest conference in the world, and the team's weknesses really showed in the tourney, especially. It just seemed that with the game on the line in the NCAAs, for example, Huggins just stood around and yelled. Never called a timeout, never told the PG to reset the play. Bad situational coaching, and it is why the team unerachieved in the tourney and each time it was ranked very highly.
I was never in love with Huggins. I don't think he was ever good enough to get us to a particular level that we could have gotten to. I acknowledge his hard work at UC and think he is doing great work at WVU. But, when I think about mismanaging games. Huggins is as guilty as anyone.
If anything, Cronin just did not have a good gameplan yestreday. A separate problem in and of itself. There is nothing you can say in terms of mismanagment in a 40-pt blow out. You just have to pick up and try and regroup. I'm not sure what I think about Mick right now. He may not be the answer. I think we need t take his body of work holistically, each year, and after this season. If overall progress is made, then we can deem him a success. But we all also must realize that Huggins' coaching was very flawed as well, in a lot of areas, particularly in game managment/adjustments.Bob Huggins was a good coach and is a good coach. The whole "one and done" thing is not entirely accurate but they did have a rep of underachieving. Fact is, when at U.C. Huggins never beat a higher seeded team in the NCAA and lost consistently to lower seeded teams. On the flip side the team made the tournament.

[LongTimer]

The thing is, though, that if you really think about it, Huggins was NOT a great situational coach. I'm sorry, but it's true, and I DID see times when his teams looked lost. He recruited very athletic players, who were good ballers, and were very strong, and he gave those indiviudals stability in their lives. Yet, the fact remains, his players were not the brightest bulbs in the cupboard, this we know, and he had a very hard time getting them to adjust in the big spots. This is a combination both of those players' intellectual capacities as well as his inability to really change up the game plan as needed. Yes, UC won a lot of close ones in those days, too. But, let's face it, C-USA was not the toughest conference in the world, and the team's weknesses really showed in the tourney, especially. It just seemed that with the game on the line in the NCAAs, for example, Huggins just stood around and yelled. Never called a timeout, never told the PG to reset the play. Bad situational coaching, and it is why the team unerachieved in the tourney and each time it was ranked very highly.
I was never in love with Huggins. I don't think he was ever good enough to get us to a particular level that we could have gotten to. I acknowledge his hard work at UC and think he is doing great work at WVU. But, when I think about mismanaging games. Huggins is as guilty as anyone.
If anything, Cronin just did not have a good gameplan yestreday. A separate problem in and of itself. There is nothing you can say in terms of mismanagment in a 40-pt blow out. You just have to pick up and try and regroup. I'm not sure what I think about Mick right now. He may not be the answer. I think we need t take his body of work holistically, each year, and after this season. If overall progress is made, then we can deem him a success. But we all also must realize that Huggins' coaching was very flawed as well, in a lot of areas, particularly in game managment/adjustments.

Exactly what level couldn't he get us to? He got us to the Final Four. He got us to the elite 8 three times. If you are referring to National Championships, then he has an awful lot of company there, including many coaches who are currently in the Hall of Fame. If you are calling him a failure for that, then you are slightly narrow-minded. I happen to feel that had he had a chance to recruit and coach us in the Big East, he would have achieved that ultimate result. Remember, Lute Olsen and Jim Boeheim and many others were given the exact same label as Huggins for 25 or 30 years until they finally won their titles. Now, suddenly they are great coaches...but for a long time, people called them chokers and overrated as coaches.

[bearcatmark]

Exactly what level couldn't he get us to? He got us to the Final Four. He got us to the elite 8 three times. If you are referring to National Championships, then he has an awful lot of company there, including many coaches who are currently in the Hall of Fame. If you are calling him a failure for that, then you are slightly narrow-minded. I happen to feel that had he had a chance to recruit and coach us in the Big East, he would have achieved that ultimate result. Remember, Lute Olsen and Jim Boeheim and many others were given the exact same label as Huggins for 25 or 30 years until they finally won their titles. Now, suddenly they are great coaches...but for a long time, people called them chokers and overrated as coaches.

Nail on the head right there. Huggins had what 16 years at a school who was at a distinct recruiting disadvantage by virtue of not being in a power conference. Olsen and Jimmy B won titles eventually but it took a long time, in far better situations. Huggins built UC from nothing. It was much harder to get the top notch talent to a CUSA school like Cincinnati. I have no doubt that Huggins, with job stability and being in the Big East, would have brought a national title back to clifton. We will never know, but Huggins has a pretty damn good NCAA record overall. He had not been there the years of some of those other coaches that finally broke through. Winning a national title most of the time comes down to have the best players or pretty friggin close to the best players. There was only one year where i would argue Huggins had that and it was the Kenyon Martin season... that was a fluke. People who get on Huggins for not winning a national title in 16 years simply do not understand college basketball.

[Aerosmith]

Somehow this reminds me of the username chatter. Had one gear missing. Would make several good posts in a row that made sense then all of a sudden hit that missing gear and the posts would go goofy. Probably something related to childhood and something a little couch time in an office would take care of. I agree with you can't wait to go to the tourney again. It would be nice to have some idea when we could expect this.


Next year, definitely.

Atleast, that's when Mama Kin says we will.

[jkwuc89]

Thread has gotten off topic.