I have to say....

[Matt1982]

I have to say, being one of the more vocal anti- Mick campaigners.... looking at the current schedule if this team takes care of business by beating SH, USF, SJ, that would mean they would have to sneak out 2 upset victories, my guess is beating WVU at home and possibly knocking off UL at home... honestly I think UL is the best there is in the BE this season and my hopes are that they come into 5/3 smoking hot and undefeated in the BE. Perfect setup for a trap game for those arrogant redbirds. Regardless, I will be impressed with the job Mick has done if he can somehow manage to get this team to finish 5-5 the rest of the way. That happens, then we're sitting at 19-12 heading into the BE tourney... wishful thinking upon my part, but if we get anywhere near that tally, kudos to Mick and bags of coal for me... but let's see what happens, I'm still not entirely convinced this team can pull it off, but one thing is for sure, getting to the 19 win mark and possibly winning a game in the BE tourney to reach 20 would be HUGE heading into next season.

[CincyBeerCo]

I have to say, being one of the more vocal anti- Mick campaigners.... looking at the current schedule if this team takes care of business by beating SH, USF, SJ, that would mean they would have to sneak out 2 upset victories, my guess is beating WVU at home and possibly knocking off UL at home... honestly I think UL is the best there is in the BE this season and my hopes are that they come into 5/3 smoking hot and undefeated in the BE. Perfect setup for a trap game for those arrogant redbirds. Regardless, I will be impressed with the job Mick has done if he can somehow manage to get this team to finish 5-5 the rest of the way. That happens, then we're sitting at 19-12 heading into the BE tourney... wishful thinking upon my part, but if we get anywhere near that tally, kudos to Mick and bags of coal for me... but let's see what happens, I'm still not entirely convinced this team can pull it off, but one thing is for sure, getting to the 19 win mark and possibly winning a game in the BE tourney to reach 20 would be HUGE heading into next season.


Matt, good post and the honest "self assessment " is appreciated. I think Shaun elude to this in another thread that if more people just took an objective look at things we wouldn't have such great polarization of views on the matter. Those that are overly critical of Mick, spawn those like myself (and Shaun) to be overly supportive. I truly do believe Mick is doing a phenomenal job, but that doesn't mean I don't have questions or concerns about it at times...I just find myself voicing the negatives much less for the feeling of needing to "defend Mick's honor" and balance out the negativity.

If the season plays out (or even close to) the way you have stated, there really wont be much (if any) room for complaints of either Mick's coaching ability or our players efforts. We'll see.....

[Mick's Da Man]

If this team wins 5 games, I will be shocked. Brutal remaining schedule.

If they do win 5 more games in the regular season, and then 1 in the Big East Tournament, I see them Dancing. Why? Because if they win 5 remaining games, they will have beaten 3 teams (including G'town) that will look good on their resume'. Also, it will mean they finished their last 15 games 9-6 in a very tough Big East, and I'm guessing their rpi could be top 30, since their SOS is top 30 right now.

[behrlezt]

Yea i agree...the schedule is extremely tough and to be honest i don't think anyone should expect to win that many. I love the optimism but i don't want everyone to be disappointed and blame everything on Mick if it doesn't happen. Just remember, the BEAST is absurd this year...the Cats are definitly improving though!

[CincyBearcat95]

Matt, good post and the honest "self assessment " is appreciated. I think Shaun elude to this in another thread that if more people just took an objective look at things we wouldn't have such great polarization of views on the matter. Those that are overly critical of Mick, spawn those like myself (and Shaun) to be overly supportive. I truly do believe Mick is doing a phenomenal job, but that doesn't mean I don't have questions or concerns about it at times...I just find myself voicing the negatives much less for the feeling of needing to "defend Mick's honor" and balance out the negativity.

If the season plays out (or even close to) the way you have stated, there really wont be much (if any) room for complaints of either Mick's coaching ability or our players efforts. We'll see.....

Agreed. Matt, I have been one of your criticizers on here and I do very much appreciate the honesty. I find myself defending Mick more to people on here than anywhere else. I find myself mostly getting drawn into posting when someone makes volatile or very emotional statements.

As for Mick, I myself always question things he does. But, I (and I think we all did) questioned things that Huggs did too. Its easy to forget that.

For me its not as much about supporting Mick as it is supporting UC Basketball. In my eyes, if we have to remove another coach, it sets us back 5 more years. Which means 5 more years of complaining, 5 more years of kids questionning whether they should go to UC for basketball because maybe it'll never come back. I hope to God Mick is the next great up and coming coach so UC (and all of us) does not have to go through this again.

In the end, getting back to a winning dynasty is what we all want. We all just have our own agendas and timelines (which really don't matter to Mick's timeline.) And we have many varying degrees of what is acceptable progress and what is not.

Again, great post and thanks for kicking the thread off.

[catscratchfever]

This may be the best UC basketball thread in a long time. Legitimate objective discussion. Please don't screw it up!

[LongTimer]

I have to say, being one of the more vocal anti- Mick campaigners.... looking at the current schedule if this team takes care of business by beating SH, USF, SJ, that would mean they would have to sneak out 2 upset victories, my guess is beating WVU at home and possibly knocking off UL at home... honestly I think UL is the best there is in the BE this season and my hopes are that they come into 5/3 smoking hot and undefeated in the BE. Perfect setup for a trap game for those arrogant redbirds. Regardless, I will be impressed with the job Mick has done if he can somehow manage to get this team to finish 5-5 the rest of the way. That happens, then we're sitting at 19-12 heading into the BE tourney... wishful thinking upon my part, but if we get anywhere near that tally, kudos to Mick and bags of coal for me... but let's see what happens, I'm still not entirely convinced this team can pull it off, but one thing is for sure, getting to the 19 win mark and possibly winning a game in the BE tourney to reach 20 would be HUGE heading into next season.

Matt, you're getting a lot of love today. :) You may have to change your ways. I think they are liking the kinder gentler Matt. Before you know it, you may be the next Ralph!

[BasketBySteveLogan]

How can you be anti-Mick? The guy knows exactly what it takes to win ballgames, he just hasn't been playing with a full deck of cards yet...

and despite being extremely short-handed... he has beaten Xavier, NC State, Pitt, Nova, Syracuse, Louisville, West Va, and Georgetown (and had a 12 pt lead with 6:00 to go vs UConn)....

You're of course entitled to your opinion, but to be anti-Mick is basically just being impatient and having unrealistic expectations.

The man knows how to win games. And he's doing it with tough odds. Wait til he has a stacked hand next year....

[Matt1982]

I am not being impatient, my major complaint with Mick's team this year is the inability to play solid fundamental basketball. So often we've dug ourselves into giant holes simply due to bad passes, stupid shots, etc... Those problems were happening too often every single game and didn't seem to be improving, that is when I began to fault Mick for the progress. I'm not so much concerned about the W/L totals, but rather how we win or lose games, and we were/are losing games due to playing like 4th graders, but as you saw last night, when they play solid basketball, we have a shot to knock off a few teams with superior talent.

[BearcatAlum1]

And he's doing it with tough odds. Wait til he has a stacked hand next year....

I don't know how "stacked" it will be, but it will be improved.


Alum1

[Joe_Pong]

I think 3-7 down the stretch is the best we can hope for. I really don't see them being able to beat any of the teams that don't have a poor or losing record in the conference. I don't see any way we could upset teams like ND, WV, or Louisville

[BeastUC]

I think 3-7 down the stretch is the best we can hope for. I really don't srr them being able to beat any og the teams that don't have a poor or losing record in the conference. If we could upset teams like ND, WV, or Louisville

We have 5 games left with teams who currently have losing records in the conference.

[icehole3]

I think this team is much different than last years bunch that lost several games down the stretch, 3-7 is saying they will fold the tent and quit, I think if they roll up their sleeves and play 40 minutes of solid defense they can upset 1 of the top teams that will visit 5th 3rd, so I see at least 4 more wins and if they stay on this roll they are on, 5 to 6 wins, Dixon, Mitchell and Bishop are balling right now at both ends, those 3 stay on the roll theyre on and Im going say 5 to 6 wins.

[shaunsimpson]

That is the post I like to see Matt. You don't have to like the coaching, but I often feel that some are rooting against the team.

I will also say this. If we don't end up with fewer than 18 wins I will be disappointed and if we end up with fewer than 17 wins I will throw a fit at Mick's expense.

The reasoning......last year we were 8-5 in the conference. It is easy to throw away the beginning of the season due to Vaughn playing PG for the first time in college and Warren not being in. On Feb 20th last year we were 13-12, but 8-5 in conference. Not just that we had 2 games vs. the bottom 5 in the conference at home. With two more wins we would have been 15-15 and would have faced Villanova or Syracuse to make the NIT instead of a Pitt team that was better than Syracuse and Villanova in my opinion (even though nova made it to the 2nd round). Then take the Bradley loss and that made me disappointed, but I chalked it up to a learning experience.

Fast forward to this year. We are sitting with a much better record, but we need to finish. I will be disappointed without 18 wins now since I know we have the talent. I will be very upset without 17 wins and a birth anywhere besides the NIT.

Like mentioned I tend to be very defensive over our team and coach since I don't think that he can fully be judged now either way so when I see the negative posts I go on the offensive.

I think we can all agree that this season is yet to be judged and if the team ends up with 18 wins going into the Big East tournament would be hard to call a bad year and 19 would be a very good year.

[LongTimer]

That is the post I like to see Matt. You don't have to like the coaching, but I often feel that some are rooting against the team.

I will also say this. If we don't end up with fewer than 18 wins I will be disappointed and if we end up with fewer than 17 wins I will throw a fit at Mick's expense.

The reasoning......last year we were 8-5 in the conference. It is easy to throw away the beginning of the season due to Vaughn playing PG for the first time in college and Warren not being in. On Feb 20th last year we were 13-12, but 8-5 in conference. Not just that we had 2 games vs. the bottom 5 in the conference at home. With two more wins we would have been 15-15 and would have faced Villanova or Syracuse to make the NIT instead of a Pitt team that was better than Syracuse and Villanova in my opinion (even though nova made it to the 2nd round). Then take the Bradley loss and that made me disappointed, but I chalked it up to a learning experience.

Fast forward to this year. We are sitting with a much better record, but we need to finish. I will be disappointed without 18 wins now since I know we have the talent. I will be very upset without 17 wins and a birth anywhere besides the NIT.

Like mentioned I tend to be very defensive over our team and coach since I don't think that he can fully be judged now either way so when I see the negative posts I go on the offensive.

I think we can all agree that this season is yet to be judged and if the team ends up with 18 wins going into the Big East tournament would be hard to call a bad year and 19 would be a very good year.

Shaun, I can feel a response coming from Ralph soon....it'll be a doozey.

[shaunsimpson]

Shaun, I can feel a response coming from Ralph soon....it'll be a doozey.

I would be interested to see what Ralph thinks about the coaching job IF the team falls apart at the end? We have seen we have the talent and we can hopefully see the team perform.

I think Mick has done a very good job, but I have now built up that we are a good team with a good coach. I will be critical if the team doesn't get to 17 wins for sure, but I think Mick gets this team to 18.

I am a big fan of Mick's since he is our head coach and support the team more than the head coach, but think he has developed these players to a point where they can win. Getting PG play out of others than Vaughn and developing the defense is what has impressed me most lately.

[ralph1950]

I would be interested to see what Ralph thinks about the coaching job IF the team falls apart at the end? We have seen we have the talent and we can hopefully see the team perform.

I think Mick has done a very good job, but I have now built up that we are a good team with a good coach. I will be critical if the team doesn't get to 17 wins for sure, but I think Mick gets this team to 18.

I am a big fan of Mick's since he is our head coach and support the team more than the head coach, but think he has developed these players to a point where they can win. Getting PG play out of others than Vaughn and developing the defense is what has impressed me most lately.

Losing games in the Big East does not mean you fell apart, UC will probably be favored to win only 2 games the remainder of the season, St. John's and Seton Hall. A 16-15 regular season record in year 3 of what may be the most difficult rebuiding project ever attempted in the history of college basketball, would far exceed anyone's reasonable expectations.

[Matt1982]

It's safe to say we have more talent than last year, but last night was the first time I saw some players show some emotion, Bishop and Mitchell in particular, waving their arms to get the crowd up... even Biggie was clappin' his hands a bit, and from what I've seen out of Biggie he's been a stick in the mud with showing any fire. And FINALLY we have guys driving to the basket and creating shots or drawing the D to get someone open for a 3... however, there was a brief 5-7 minute span in the first half where the entire offense was standing still, I mean absolutely nobody was moving, can anyone explain what the heck that is all about????

[juckerrules]

I am not being impatient, my major complaint with Mick's team this year is the inability to play solid fundamental basketball. So often we've dug ourselves into giant holes simply due to bad passes, stupid shots, etc... Those problems were happening too often every single game and didn't seem to be improving, that is when I began to fault Mick for the progress. I'm not so much concerned about the W/L totals, but rather how we win or lose games, and we were/are losing games due to playing like 4th graders, but as you saw last night, when they play solid basketball, we have a shot to knock off a few teams with superior talent.

point guard, point guard, point guard

I have (as long as we are collectively mea culpa-ing), been harboring doubts and expressing my frustration at the lack of progress/improvement in just the basics to which you allude. The pg position is so important to the overall function of the play - to basically not have one is a huge obstacle to overcome - How smooth would the Suns play without Nash, the Hornets without Chris Paul...or (a football analogy) how crisp would the Indianapolis Colts offense look without Peyton Manning.

I firmly believe that with a slick point (and Cashmere may have been that guy, we won't know this year - he may not have been all that - who knows?), UC may well have defeated X, Providence, maybe even UConn - it's difficult to gague the effect of one player - but a point guard is the one player who can tie it all together and make everyone on the team look better - that's the main reason the "92 team was so good - not only did they have Van Exel, a great point, they also had his running mate, A.D. Jackson, who, before Nick took over, was himself a point guard.

I think Mick has done a very solid job with what he's had to deal with - 2 years of absolutely no recruits (Huggins' and Kennedy's lame duck years) and a third with a late start.

[Kindog202]

point guard, point guard, point guard

I have (as long as we are collectively mea culpa-ing), been harboring doubts and expressing my frustration at the lack of progress/improvement in just the basics to which you allude. The pg position is so important to the overall function of the play - to basically not have one is a huge obstacle to overcome - How smooth would the Suns play without Nash, the Hornets without Chris Paul...or (a football analogy) how crisp would the Indianapolis Colts offense look without Peyton Manning.

I firmly believe that with a slick point (and Cashmere may have been that guy, we won't know this year - he may not have been all that - who knows?), UC may well have defeated X, Providence, maybe even UConn - it's difficult to gague the effect of one player - but a point guard is the one player who can tie it all together and make everyone on the team look better - that's the main reason the "92 team was so good - not only did they have Van Exel, a great point, they also had his running mate, A.D. Jackson, who, before Nick took over, was himself a point guard.

I think Mick has done a very solid job with what he's had to deal with - 2 years of absolutely no recruits (Huggins' and Kennedy's lame duck years) and a third with a late start.

I am going with the assumption that Cashmere would have been a step down from Warren on the defensive side and a few steps up on Warren on the offensive side (more of a scorer and a better distributor of the ball). So I think overall he would have been an improvement over Warren. He would be a huge upgrade at the PG over what we have this year at the point (as far as what a point guard is supposed to do on the court). He also would allow Vaughn to play the SG position where Vaughn is definitely more effective. I truly believe Vaughn's offensive numbers would be noticeably higher as he would get better looks (and less attention) due to Cash's ability both to shoot and drive and dish. In essence Cash's presence in the lineup would have made both guard positions much, much better than what they are on this team now. He also knows how to feed the post so those lazy passes to the post that get picked off and all of us get so upset with would be much less prevalent.
**
To summarize, I think Cash in the lineup would have been good for at least an additional 2-3 wins up to this point (I'm thinking Fla. St, X or Memphis and at least one, if not both of the Providence games) and maybe another 2-3 wins in these last 10 games. He also would have improved our perimeter defense tremendously as he was rumored to have been one of the better on the ball defenders on the team.

[Billy Don]

A lot of posts on here fans consider anti-Mick aren't anti-Mick at all. What hundreds of post on here do is compare Mick's coaching and teams performance to Huggins players and teams performance. Of course a lot of them don't like what they see. Doesn't mean they don't like Mick. They just want to see UC basketball played like it use to be and what they are use to. May or may not happen and that's what concerns fans. Another thing about all the posts about how tough the Big East is. Well here is something else. It doesn't figure to get any easier next year either. You can't expect the top Big East teams to come back to you. You have to move up to their standard. Believe it or not some of the top teams will be even better next year. Those that will be hurt by losing players just reload and might be off a little but not much. The top coaches in the Big East are just too good, when they get top recruits every year, not to win with them. Any coach, I don't care who he is, if he can't recruit top 25 to 50 players like the top coaches in the Big East does he will be on the outside looking in. St Johns played all sophmores and freshmen and have 10 of them. They will be better next year! Same for UC and 4 or 5 other teams that are considered young this year. The question is what is getting better next year going to get them? They get beat by 5 points instead of 10 maybe? The bottom line is even though they are better they still get beat. I think most if not all of the bottom feeders in the Big East will improve next year. The conference will tighten up at least a little. In most cases your team has to get better because if they don't you can drop down a lot in a hurry in this what they call the Big East.

[LongTimer]

Losing games in the Big East does not mean you fell apart, UC will probably be favored to win only 2 games the remainder of the season, St. John's and Seton Hall. A 16-15 regular season record in year 3 of what may be the most difficult rebuiding project ever attempted in the history of college basketball, would far exceed anyone's reasonable expectations.

lol.....why did I know exactly what Ralph would say? He will always undercut the real expectations with something sub-standard that even Mick couldn't even fail to achieve. Then he can gloat and proclaim "marvelous", "amazing", "unbelievable" and if he wins more than 16...oh my gosh!!!!.....Ralph will be creating some new adjectives that none of us have ever heard of proclaiming the coming of the "Messiah"! It's a shame that he doesn't have as much confidence in Mick as the rest of us have.

[CincyBearcat95]

A lot of posts on here fans consider anti-Mick aren't anti-Mick at all. What hundreds of post on here do is compare Mick's coaching and teams performance to Huggins players and teams performance. Of course a lot of them don't like what they see. Doesn't mean they don't like Mick. They just want to see UC basketball played like it use to be and what they are use to. May or may not happen and that's what concerns fans. Another thing about all the posts about how tough the Big East is. Well here is something else. It doesn't figure to get any easier next year either. You can't expect the top Big East teams to come back to you. You have to move up to their standard. Believe it or not some of the top teams will be even better next year. Those that will be hurt by losing players just reload and might be off a little but not much. The top coaches in the Big East are just too good, when they get top recruits every year, not to win with them. Any coach, I don't care who he is, if he can't recruit top 25 to 50 players like the top coaches in the Big East does he will be on the outside looking in. St Johns played all sophmores and freshmen and have 10 of them. They will be better next year! Same for UC and 4 or 5 other teams that are considered young this year. The question is what is getting better next year going to get them? They get beat by 5 points instead of 10 maybe? The bottom line is even though they are better they still get beat. I think most if not all of the bottom feeders in the Big East will improve next year. The conference will tighten up at least a little. In most cases your team has to get better because if they don't you can drop down a lot in a hurry in this what they call the Big East.

There are a couple issues in here. 1. Most of the people defending Mick when compared to Huggins believe he is in a totally different situation than what Huggins came into. Some say Huggs only had a few guys, etc. etc. But no coach at UC has ever had to deal with the Big East (on the other hand, the Big East probably brings a chance at better recruits.) That being said a comparison between them isn't apples to apples and has been beaten to death so much that we have enough horse meat to feed all of frozen Ohio.

2. You mention that we may get better but will that only get us losses by 5 points instead of 10. The same can be said for the other side. Maybe that get's us wins by 5 points as opposed to losses. The glass can be half full too my friend.

I'd say there are really 10% Mick Haters and 5% Huggs haters on hear. Problem is 1 polarizing statements brings all the middle of the road people (whether you are leaning toward the "I'm not sure about Mick" camp or the "I think he's going to do it" camp) and the lobbing of shells begins. Next thing you know, we have 162 posts on Mick or Huggs or each other and not on UC Basketball.

Like I've always said. This is the best place for me to connect with other Bearcats and get the UC news that feeds my habit. But, until we win, consistently, we'll always be arguing about this. Wins will bring out the best in this forum - just look at some of the threads and civility in here since last night's game. Way different than after the Marquette or Providence games.

[ralph1950]

lol.....why did I know exactly what Ralph would say? He will always undercut the real expectations with something sub-standard that even Mick couldn't even fail to achieve. Then he can gloat and proclaim "marvelous", "amazing", "unbelievable" and if he wins more than 16...oh my gosh!!!!.....Ralph will be creating some new adjectives that none of us have ever heard of proclaiming the coming of the "Messiah"! It's a shame that he doesn't have as much confidence in Mick as the rest of us have.

Funny! The job that Mick has done in rebuilding the Bearcats in such a short time is remarkable. The Big East is the most difficult conference there is. The schedule for the next 10 UC games is extremely difficult, the Bearcats will more than likely be favored to win only 2 of them. 16-15 will represent a most successful season for this years Bearcat team, better than all reasonable expections going into the season.

[ralph1950]

A lot of posts on here fans consider anti-Mick aren't anti-Mick at all. What hundreds of post on here do is compare Mick's coaching and teams performance to Huggins players and teams performance. Of course a lot of them don't like what they see. Doesn't mean they don't like Mick. They just want to see UC basketball played like it use to be and what they are use to. May or may not happen and that's what concerns fans. Another thing about all the posts about how tough the Big East is. Well here is something else. It doesn't figure to get any easier next year either. You can't expect the top Big East teams to come back to you. You have to move up to their standard. Believe it or not some of the top teams will be even better next year. Those that will be hurt by losing players just reload and might be off a little but not much. The top coaches in the Big East are just too good, when they get top recruits every year, not to win with them. Any coach, I don't care who he is, if he can't recruit top 25 to 50 players like the top coaches in the Big East does he will be on the outside looking in. St Johns played all sophmores and freshmen and have 10 of them. They will be better next year! Same for UC and 4 or 5 other teams that are considered young this year. The question is what is getting better next year going to get them? They get beat by 5 points instead of 10 maybe? The bottom line is even though they are better they still get beat. I think most if not all of the bottom feeders in the Big East will improve next year. The conference will tighten up at least a little. In most cases your team has to get better because if they don't you can drop down a lot in a hurry in this what they call the Big East.

Billy Don, you obviously missed last night's game. UC beat Georgetown 65-57. Mick has already shown he can compete with all the teams in the Big East in 2 2/3 seasons starting from scratch.

[Forsure21]

The loserville fan who called in to P-Doc tonight nailed it perfectly. He said they had 19,000 fans at their game last night. He said he wasn't a big fan of Pitino but he supported the school. The same needs to happen at UC. You have to support the school first and foremost. How is Mick going to bring in top-talent that isn't local if other schools are whispering in players ears that UC can barely get 7,000 to a game. People need to start supporting the school first!

[IAMWILLIAMSON]

i disagree with all of you i think our best chance for an upset is at syracuse, thats a team that has never scared me

[Billy Don]

There are a couple issues in here. 1. Most of the people defending Mick when compared to Huggins believe he is in a totally different situation than what Huggins came into. Some say Huggs only had a few guys, etc. etc. But no coach at UC has ever had to deal with the Big East (on the other hand, the Big East probably brings a chance at better recruits.) That being said a comparison between them isn't apples to apples and has been beaten to death so much that we have enough horse meat to feed all of frozen Ohio.

2. You mention that we may get better but will that only get us losses by 5 points instead of 10. The same can be said for the other side. Maybe that get's us wins by 5 points as opposed to losses. The glass can be half full too my friend.

I'd say there are really 10% Mick Haters and 5% Huggs haters on hear. Problem is 1 polarizing statements brings all the middle of the road people (whether you are leaning toward the "I'm not sure about Mick" camp or the "I think he's going to do it" camp) and the lobbing of shells begins. Next thing you know, we have 162 posts on Mick or Huggs or each other and not on UC Basketball.

Like I've always said. This is the best place for me to connect with other Bearcats and get the UC news that feeds my habit. But, until we win, consistently, we'll always be arguing about this. Wins will bring out the best in this forum - just look at some of the threads and civility in here since last night's game. Way different than after the Marquette or Providence games.

I respect the glass is half full opinions on here because I know a lot of them are coming from the heart and not the head. Nothing wrong with that. My glass is half full opinion is UC exactly one year from now will be in the same spot they are now in. Mid pack in the Big East and after a bottom feeder win some fans will brag on Mick and after a loss some fans will be calling for his head. The big question is will a 8 or 9 win record in the Big East next year get Mick the needed contract extension or will low attendance and fan displeasure cost him his head. I think it could go either way and we will have to wait a year to find out. For my part mid-pack in the Big East isn't good enough. My opinion of course means squat.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

13-19 to 19-13. Why not?

Tubby Smith did it at Minnesota. 9-22 to 20-14. Now 18-3 this year.

If he can do it there, why not UC?

[ME80]

13-19 to 19-13. Why not?

Tubby Smith did it at Minnesota. 9-22 to 20-14. Now 18-3 this year.

If he can do it there, why not UC?

1958, I enjoy most of your posts, but you are definitely the anti-Ralph. He sets very low goals to make Mick look successful, you set very high goals so that Mick looks like a failure. Can we put you two together in a room for a weekend and have you guys come up with a post that fairly rates Mick?

[jkwuc89]

13-19 to 19-13. Why not?

Tubby Smith did it at Minnesota. 9-22 to 20-14. Now 18-3 this year.

If he can do it there, why not UC?

Who cares what Tubby does at Minnesota?!?! To generalize it, who cares what other coaches do at other schools? It simply is not relevant to UC basketball. The only results Coach Cronin needs to compare himself against are his own. Right now, UC is better than last year and it has the potential to be a lot better.

[ME80]

point guard, point guard, point guard

I have (as long as we are collectively mea culpa-ing), been harboring doubts and expressing my frustration at the lack of progress/improvement in just the basics to which you allude. The pg position is so important to the overall function of the play - to basically not have one is a huge obstacle to overcome - How smooth would the Suns play without Nash, the Hornets without Chris Paul...or (a football analogy) how crisp would the Indianapolis Colts offense look without Peyton Manning.

I firmly believe that with a slick point (and Cashmere may have been that guy, we won't know this year - he may not have been all that - who knows?), UC may well have defeated X, Providence, maybe even UConn - it's difficult to gague the effect of one player - but a point guard is the one player who can tie it all together and make everyone on the team look better - that's the main reason the "92 team was so good - not only did they have Van Exel, a great point, they also had his running mate, A.D. Jackson, who, before Nick took over, was himself a point guard.

I think Mick has done a very solid job with what he's had to deal with - 2 years of absolutely no recruits (Huggins' and Kennedy's lame duck years) and a third with a late start.

Some interesting stats:

Devan Downey
Games 19
Points Per Game 19.6
Assists 82
Turnovers 62
***/TO 1.32
Steals 57
Rebounds 50


Deonta Vaughn

Games 21
Points Per Game 15.6
Assists 100
Turnovers 70
***/TO 1.43
Steals 32
Rebounds 88


Rashad Bishop

Games 21
Points Per Game 6.1
Assists 63
Turnovers 36
***/TO 1.75
Steals 25
Rebounds 89

[ralph1950]

1958, I enjoy most of your posts, but you are definitely the anti-Ralph. He sets very low goals to make Mick look successful, you set very high goals so that Mick looks like a failure. Can we put you two together in a room for a weekend and have you guys come up with a post that fairly rates Mick?

This season UC has won every game they have been favored to win (Providence was a 1 point favorite at 5/3rd Arena and a 6 point favorite at Dunkin Donuts), UC won the one "pick em" game (DePaul), and has upset 3 teams (UNLV, St. John's, Georgetown).

The rebuiding job that Mick has done is remarkable, one of the best rebuilding jobs ever in college basketball.

[LongTimer]

This season UC has won every game they have been favored to win (Providence was a 1 point favorite at 5/3rd Arena and a 6 point favorite at Dunkin Donuts), UC won the one "pick em" game (DePaul), and has upset 3 teams (UNLV, St. John's, Georgetown).

The rebuiding job that Mick has done is remarkable, one of the best rebuilding jobs ever in college basketball.

Not even in the top 50 all time best rebuilding jobs. Average at best. His win the other night takes a little heat off of him. The ice he is standing on still isn't very thick.

[ralph1950]

Not even in the top 50 all time best rebuilding jobs. Average at best. His win the other night takes a little heat off of him. The ice he is standing on still isn't very thick.

Name the 50 other rebuilding jobs that were better.

[Deaf_Bearcat]

First of all, I am hoping NZ will be leaving UC soon. I never stopped attending to any UC basketball games since she fired Huggins. I never wore purple/silver or blue/gold gears, but always have worn red/black ones.

IMO, I don't think it will make a big difference in the current attendance after NZ leaves UC. I believe more than 3/4 of UC basketball fans have came back to Shoe in last couple of years. I agree with someone saying about the current attendance due to UC's miserable seasons.

[Not Guilty]

Not even in the top 50 all time best rebuilding jobs. Average at best. His win the other night takes a little heat off of him. The ice he is standing on still isn't very thick.

The ice is plenty thick where it matters most. Mick's job isn't close to in jeopardy...

[LongTimer]

Name the 50 other rebuilding jobs that were better.

Give me a list of all the rebuilding jobs in history and I will tell you which ones were better. Just off the top of my head is Tony Yates, Huggs, Baylor, Bob Staak and Xavier, etc.

[Major ----de Coverley]

Give me a list of all the rebuilding jobs in history and I will tell you which ones were better. Just off the top of my head is Tony Yates, Huggs, Baylor, Bob Staak and Xavier, etc.


As Daugherty sometimes writes, I need to go lie down in a cool place. Looks like the top of someones head is arctic thick ice.

[Bp4thebest]

I have to say, being one of the more vocal anti- Mick campaigners.... looking at the current schedule if this team takes care of business by beating SH, USF, SJ, that would mean they would have to sneak out 2 upset victories, my guess is beating WVU at home and possibly knocking off UL at home... honestly I think UL is the best there is in the BE this season and my hopes are that they come into 5/3 smoking hot and undefeated in the BE. Perfect setup for a trap game for those arrogant redbirds. Regardless, I will be impressed with the job Mick has done if he can somehow manage to get this team to finish 5-5 the rest of the way. That happens, then we're sitting at 19-12 heading into the BE tourney... wishful thinking upon my part, but if we get anywhere near that tally, kudos to Mick and bags of coal for me... but let's see what happens, I'm still not entirely convinced this team can pull it off, but one thing is for sure, getting to the 19 win mark and possibly winning a game in the BE tourney to reach 20 would be HUGE heading into next season.

especially for not having a pg.. had we had cash I would say a 21-10 season would of been very possible!

[LongTimer]

As Daugherty sometimes writes, I need to go lie down in a cool place. Looks like the top of someones head is arctic thick ice.

Sorry to hear about the top of your head!!

[Bearcat John 69]

especially for not having a pg.. had we had cash I would say a 21-10 season would of been very possible!

i consider myself a pro mick person, but it is inexcusable that warren and wright are the only points he has recruited since he's had the job. hopefully he has learned from this injury that u should always have 2 point guards on your roster.

hopefully we get a chance to see vaughn playing at the 2 spot next year.

[CincyBearcat95]

I respect the glass is half full opinions on here because I know a lot of them are coming from the heart and not the head. Nothing wrong with that. My glass is half full opinion is UC exactly one year from now will be in the same spot they are now in. Mid pack in the Big East and after a bottom feeder win some fans will brag on Mick and after a loss some fans will be calling for his head. The big question is will a 8 or 9 win record in the Big East next year get Mick the needed contract extension or will low attendance and fan displeasure cost him his head. I think it could go either way and we will have to wait a year to find out. For my part mid-pack in the Big East isn't good enough. My opinion of course means squat.

Ok, since you brought it up - heart vs. head, then what data do you have to say that Cincy will still be middle of the pack next year? Can't really say this is a head conversation without some data to back it up.

I do think we agree that mid-pack is not good enough. I look for improvement each year. Right now, I see improvement over last year and will expect the same thing next year over this year. Its YOY baby! ;)

[Billy Don]

Ok, since you brought it up - heart vs. head, then what data do you have to say that Cincy will still be middle of the pack next year? Can't really say this is a head conversation without some data to back it up.

I do think we agree that mid-pack is not good enough. I look for improvement each year. Right now, I see improvement over last year and will expect the same thing next year over this year. Its YOY baby! ;)

Any opinion on what will happen next week or next year is of course just an opinion. But my opinion is based on over 50 years experience of watching UC and college basketball. When you are young you go through the heart years opinions. After several years of seeing what actually happens you go with the head opinions. Even a novice can watch UConn and other top Big East teams and see that Davis, Mitchell, Biggie, Wilks, Toyloy and the rest of that bunch isn't going to beat the talent they have. Bottom line is UC is going to need an upgrade in talent. I don't care if Davis and that bunch play till they are 60 years old they are either too slow, too dumb, can't shoot, can't make a decent pass and about 40 more things they can't do well. Nothing a talent upgrade can't take care of. If you expect improvement next year you might get a little. Instead of getting beat by a team like Marquette by 34 you might only get beat by 15. That's improvement but it doesn't get you a whole lot. This current UC team can be a good decent mid-pack team next year. I don't know what else you could expect out of them. No way they could be top 5 in the Big East. Right?

[CincyBeerCo]

Any opinion on what will happen next week or next year is of course just an opinion. But my opinion is based on over 50 years experience of watching UC and college basketball. When you are young you go through the heart years opinions. After several years of seeing what actually happens you go with the head opinions. Even a novice can watch UConn and other top Big East teams and see that Davis, Mitchell, Biggie, Wilks, Toyloy and the rest of that bunch isn't going to beat the talent they have. Bottom line is UC is going to need an upgrade in talent. I don't care if Davis and that bunch play till they are 60 years old they are either too slow, too dumb, can't shoot, can't make a decent pass and about 40 more things they can't do well. Nothing a talent upgrade can't take care of. If you expect improvement next year you might get a little. Instead of getting beat by a team like Marquette by 34 you might only get beat by 15. That's improvement but it doesn't get you a whole lot. This current UC team can be a good decent mid-pack team next year. I don't know what else you could expect out of them. No way they could be top 5 in the Big East. Right?

I think the Cats can absolutely be top 5 (not saying "will" bout "can") in the BEast next year. W/ all players adding a year of experience and gaining Cash, Kilpatrick and maybe another guard. Absolutely!

...and FWIW dismissing someones' thoughts based purely on age is pretty condescending and narrow minded.

[CincyBearcat95]

Any opinion on what will happen next week or next year is of course just an opinion. But my opinion is based on over 50 years experience of watching UC and college basketball. When you are young you go through the heart years opinions. After several years of seeing what actually happens you go with the head opinions. Even a novice can watch UConn and other top Big East teams and see that Davis, Mitchell, Biggie, Wilks, Toyloy and the rest of that bunch isn't going to beat the talent they have. Bottom line is UC is going to need an upgrade in talent. I don't care if Davis and that bunch play till they are 60 years old they are either too slow, too dumb, can't shoot, can't make a decent pass and about 40 more things they can't do well. Nothing a talent upgrade can't take care of. If you expect improvement next year you might get a little. Instead of getting beat by a team like Marquette by 34 you might only get beat by 15. That's improvement but it doesn't get you a whole lot. This current UC team can be a good decent mid-pack team next year. I don't know what else you could expect out of them. No way they could be top 5 in the Big East. Right?

Ok, how about a comparison. Uconn, which beat us by only 9 and has 1 lost this year was young a couple years back:

06 - 07 they lost 13 games some to:
West Virginia
St. Johns
Providence
DePaul
Villanova
Louisville

etc. and didn't make the NCAA

Last year: Lost 9 games. Lost to:
ND
Gtown
Providence (twice)
Villanova
West Virginia

And went out in the first round to San Diego (in OT)

What's wrong with the comparison of the Cats now to their 06 to 07 team?

We probably won't make the tourney this year, but I bet we get better and make it next year.

If their talent is so much greater than ours, how come they didn't beat us by 30 with their much more experienced team?

[Billy Don]

I think the Cats can absolutely be top 5 (not saying "will" bout "can") in the BEast next year. W/ all players adding a year of experience and gaining Cash, Kilpatrick and maybe another guard. Absolutely!

...and FWIW dismissing someones' thoughts based purely on age is pretty condescending and narrow minded.

Sorry if I am narrow minded and not very tactful. I usually don't dismiss a 12 year olds thoughts, for example, in words. I usually just get a big grin.

[Billy Don]

Ok, how about a comparison. Uconn, which beat us by only 9 and has 1 lost this year was young a couple years back:

06 - 07 they lost 13 games some to:
West Virginia
St. Johns
Providence
DePaul
Villanova
Louisville

etc. and didn't make the NCAA

Last year: Lost 9 games. Lost to:
ND
Gtown
Providence (twice)
Villanova
West Virginia

And went out in the first round to San Diego (in OT)

What's wrong with the comparison of the Cats now to their 06 to 07 team?

We probably won't make the tourney this year, but I bet we get better and make it next year.

If their talent is so much greater than ours, how come they didn't beat us by 30 with their much more experienced team?

Can't compare what UConn did. They have a hall of fame coach.

[CincyBearcat95]

Can't compare what UConn did. They have a hall of fame coach.

But the comparison is that Mick can do as well. Your response suggests that its not fair to compare Mick to a hall of fame coach. I'm saying, let's throw that out and compare anyway. If we do, Mick is right on schedule with a hall of fame coach (or Calhoun if you want to drop the Hall of fame reference.)

[LongTimer]

Ok, since you brought it up - heart vs. head, then what data do you have to say that Cincy will still be middle of the pack next year? Can't really say this is a head conversation without some data to back it up.

I do think we agree that mid-pack is not good enough. I look for improvement each year. Right now, I see improvement over last year and will expect the same thing next year over this year. Its YOY baby! ;)

The key to a great coach is sustaining his performance. Rick Minter was good at developing a good team when his players finally became juniors and seniors, then we would drop back to a bad team for a few years until the next wave of recruits got two or three years of experience. We won't truly know how good Mick is until he cycles through his recruits once to see if he has a drop off or just reloads every year. The great coaches in the Big East just reload year after year. We'll see what Mick does when his guys graduate? That will be the true test!

[CincyBearcat95]

The key to a great coach is sustaining his performance. Rick Minter was good at developing a good team when his players finally became juniors and seniors, then we would drop back to a bad team for a few years until the next wave of recruits got two or three years of experience. We won't truly know how good Mick is until he cycles through his recruits once to see if he has a drop off or just reloads every year. The great coaches in the Big East just reload year after year. We'll see what Mick does when his guys graduate? That will be the true test!

Ok, but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the progression of a young team that Calhoun took to today and comparing Mick's team to the 2006-2007 version of that same team.

I laid out, what I thought was a data driven discussion and the response I received was "don't compare Mick to a hall of fame coach." What I'm saying is if we were to compare Mick (a young inexperienced coach) to a hall of fame coach such as Calhoun and he is doing the same if not better than Coach Calhoun shouldn't we agree he's doing a good job?

I have yet to hear a response other than crickets to my comparison.

[LongTimer]

Ok, but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the progression of a young team that Calhoun took to today and comparing Mick's team to the 2006-2007 version of that same team.

I laid out, what I thought was a data driven discussion and the response I received was "don't compare Mick to a hall of fame coach." What I'm saying is if we were to compare Mick (a young inexperienced coach) to a hall of fame coach such as Calhoun and he is doing the same if not better than Coach Calhoun shouldn't we agree he's doing a good job?

I have yet to hear a response other than crickets to my comparison.

If it is just a one or two year comparison, Mick can certainly look "as good" as any coach...even Calhoun. I apologize if I am not answering this thread the way you intended. I'm just not in the mood to go back and read all the posts to get the jist of the discussion. I personally think he has only been average at best and I realize where he started from. I am only speaking for myself. I was extremely happy that we got him, considering what was done to the program back then. Anthony Buford immediately went on the radio proclaiming all the recruiting piplines that Mick had and that every great recruit in the nation was waiting for Mick to get this job so they could sign with him. I certainly expected us to be back to the NCAA by year 3...and we still might get there. But, there are a lot of little things that I see out of him that disappoint me. I am still just lukewarm to him. If he gets us to the dance this year, I'll think a lot better of him. I'm not going to be doing cartwheels over an NIT bid. I'll certainly go to the games if we're in the NIT, but it won't make me feel better about him. Just my opinion....I guess I was just spoiled by the success of the Huggs years.

[Billy Don]

Ok, but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the progression of a young team that Calhoun took to today and comparing Mick's team to the 2006-2007 version of that same team.

I laid out, what I thought was a data driven discussion and the response I received was "don't compare Mick to a hall of fame coach." What I'm saying is if we were to compare Mick (a young inexperienced coach) to a hall of fame coach such as Calhoun and he is doing the same if not better than Coach Calhoun shouldn't we agree he's doing a good job?

I have yet to hear a response other than crickets to my comparison.

It's hard for an experienced fan to explain to an inexperienced fan the hundreds of things they know that an inexperienced fan has yet to learn. It's like someone who has played the game trying to explain the things they know to someone who hasn't played the game but I will try to explain UConns situation. 2 years ago you could compare 150 teams to UConn including UC when it came to record or stats or whatever. Even though they had a lot of talent UConn had a lot of internal problems, injurys and players leaving the team etc. To explain the talent here's this. The starting 5 UConn players who just beat Notre Dame their last game recruit rankings. Adrien#48, Robinson#25,Thabet#59, Dyson#42, Price#32 and throw in Walker at #23 first off the bench. You see talent like that an experienced fan knows UConn is going to leave the other 150 teams, including UC in the dust. It's just a matter of time. Hence UConn becomes the #4 rated team in the nation this year. Those other 150 teams including UC all hit the wall when their talent level takes them as far as they can go. UC for example could keep up with UConn 2 years ago and last year stat wise but an experienced fan knows UC isn't going to match this years UConns #4 rated team in the nation next year. A team is only going as far as their talent level will take them plus throw in a good coach also. I hope this helps you and other young fans out a little but a few years experience is the thing that will really do the trick. Until then have fun learning the game.

[bearcat josh]

[QUOTE=Billy Don;56956]Any opinion on what will happen next week or next year is of course just an opinion. But my opinion is based on over 50 years experience of watching UC and college basketball. When you are young you go through the heart years opinions. After several years of seeing what actually happens you go with the head opinions. Even a novice can watch UConn and other top Big East teams and see that Davis, Mitchell, Biggie, Wilks, Toyloy and the rest of that bunch isn't going to beat the talent they have. Bottom line is UC is going to need an upgrade in talent. I don't care if Davis and that bunch play till they are 60 years old they are either too slow, too dumb, can't shoot, can't make a decent pass and about 40 more things they can't do well. Nothing a talent upgrade can't take care of. If you expect improvement next year you might get a little. Instead of getting beat by a team like Marquette by 34 you might only get beat by 15. That's improvement but it doesn't get you a whole lot. This current UC team can be a good decent mid-pack team next year. I don't know what else you could expect out of them. No way they could be top 5 in the Big East. Right?[/QUO


highly doubt marquette will be anywhere close to where they are this year. They lose ALOT of productive seniors next year. a 15 point loss to them next year would be really discouraging.

im not gona worry about the future right now... i have faith that mick will get these guys to be players when its all said and done...Lets give these young men a chance

[Billy Don]

[QUOTE=Billy Don;56956]Any opinion on what will happen next week or next year is of course just an opinion. But my opinion is based on over 50 years experience of watching UC and college basketball. When you are young you go through the heart years opinions. After several years of seeing what actually happens you go with the head opinions. Even a novice can watch UConn and other top Big East teams and see that Davis, Mitchell, Biggie, Wilks, Toyloy and the rest of that bunch isn't going to beat the talent they have. Bottom line is UC is going to need an upgrade in talent. I don't care if Davis and that bunch play till they are 60 years old they are either too slow, too dumb, can't shoot, can't make a decent pass and about 40 more things they can't do well. Nothing a talent upgrade can't take care of. If you expect improvement next year you might get a little. Instead of getting beat by a team like Marquette by 34 you might only get beat by 15. That's improvement but it doesn't get you a whole lot. This current UC team can be a good decent mid-pack team next year. I don't know what else you could expect out of them. No way they could be top 5 in the Big East. Right?[/QUO


highly doubt marquette will be anywhere close to where they are this year. They lose ALOT of productive seniors next year. a 15 point loss to them next year would be really discouraging.

im not gona worry about the future right now... i have faith that mick will get these guys to be players when its all said and done...Lets give these young men a chance

Another team will just replace Marquette next year and with 2 top 50 players out of the 09 class Marquette doesn't figure to be down long. When UC's 3 star players get to be Jr's and Sr's they should be solid players and team wise 6th to 9th in the Big East. When you look at the fans from DePaul and other bottom feeder Big East teams you have to consider yourself lucky. Believe me you may not know how lucky you are. It could be a lot worse.

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=Billy Don;56956]Any opinion on what will happen next week or next year is of course just an opinion. But my opinion is based on over 50 years experience of watching UC and college basketball. When you are young you go through the heart years opinions. After several years of seeing what actually happens you go with the head opinions. Even a novice can watch UConn and other top Big East teams and see that Davis, Mitchell, Biggie, Wilks, Toyloy and the rest of that bunch isn't going to beat the talent they have. Bottom line is UC is going to need an upgrade in talent. I don't care if Davis and that bunch play till they are 60 years old they are either too slow, too dumb, can't shoot, can't make a decent pass and about 40 more things they can't do well. Nothing a talent upgrade can't take care of. If you expect improvement next year you might get a little. Instead of getting beat by a team like Marquette by 34 you might only get beat by 15. That's improvement but it doesn't get you a whole lot. This current UC team can be a good decent mid-pack team next year. I don't know what else you could expect out of them. No way they could be top 5 in the Big East. Right?[/QUO


highly doubt marquette will be anywhere close to where they are this year. They lose ALOT of productive seniors next year. a 15 point loss to them next year would be really discouraging.

im not gona worry about the future right now... i have faith that mick will get these guys to be players when its all said and done...Lets give these young men a chance

Why in the world would you have faith that Mick will get these guys to be players? He has absolutely no history or track record to support that statement. I have hope that he can do it. But, until he does it, I don't have faith. In fact, he has no track record of being great at much other than breaking down film as a video coordinator and convincing recruits to come in and play for another head coach that he is working for. He came into Murray State and won with someone elses recruits and left the program with almost zero players after 3 years. The next coach had 11 new players to start with when he followed Mick. So, that says if Mick hadn't lucked into the UC job, he was about to have the same exact rebuilding job that he had here....a whole roster of new players...and he was going to start losing big. One or two more years at Murray State and there may have been no college in the nation that would have hired him. But, Mike Thomas and Nancy saw an opportunity to calm the restless fans by bringing back a former employee and UC grad, and a guy that got some good press about his recruiting. Until I see greatness, I can only have hope....not faith.

[BearcatAlum1]

[QUOTE=bearcat josh;57014]

Another team will just replace Marquette next year and with 2 top 50 players out of the 09 class Marquette doesn't figure to be down long. When UC's 3 star players get to be Jr's and Sr's they should be solid players and team wise 6th to 9th in the Big East. When you look at the fans from DePaul and other bottom feeder Big East teams you have to consider yourself lucky. Believe me you may not know how lucky you are. It could be a lot worse.

That's assuming MC doesn't recruit a high level, like he has shown the ability to do. He's already locked up Behanan for the 2011 Class, and he is a consensus top 20 recruit. Chane will be a McDonald's AA. Mark it down.

If we continually recruit players like Dion Dixon and sprinkle in some high impact players, we'll be just fine. There is more to a team than 5* players who can't play together.

However, it's near impossible to compete in this League without top flite recruits. You don't need all top flight recruits, but you certainly need some high impact kids. Syrcause has had tons of talent over the last few years, but not much to show for it. Chemisty > Individual Players. Team > Me.

We'll see.


Alum1

[bearcat josh]

[QUOTE=bearcat josh;57014]

Why in the world would you have faith that Mick will get these guys to be players? He has absolutely no history or track record to support that statement. I have hope that he can do it. But, until he does it, I don't have faith. In fact, he has no track record of being great at much other than breaking down film as a video coordinator and convincing recruits to come in and play for another head coach that he is working for. He came into Murray State and won with someone elses recruits and left the program with almost zero players after 3 years. The next coach had 11 new players to start with when he followed Mick. So, that says if Mick hadn't lucked into the UC job, he was about to have the same exact rebuilding job that he had here....a whole roster of new players...and he was going to start losing big. One or two more years at Murray State and there may have been no college in the nation that would have hired him. But, Mike Thomas and Nancy saw an opportunity to calm the restless fans by bringing back a former employee and UC grad, and a guy that got some good press about his recruiting. Until I see greatness, I can only have hope....not faith.

why do i have faith that Mick can get it done? well i just dont see a guy who has an opportunity to coach at his dream job fall flat on his face and blow it. he has had the privledge of learning from 2 of the great college coaches (pitino and huggy bear) and i think we can all tell Mick works his tail off and has the determination to restore UC to what it was. Maybe im outta my mind but i just good feelings about where Mick is going to take this basketball program. Time will tell i guess

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=Billy Don;57020]

That's assuming MC doesn't recruit a high level, like he has shown the ability to do. He's already locked up Behanan for the 2011 Class, and he is a consensus top 20 recruit. Chane will be a McDonald's AA. Mark it down.

If we continually recruit players like Dion Dixon and sprinkle in some high impact players, we'll be just fine. There is more to a team than 5* players who can't play together.

However, it's near impossible to compete in this League without top flite recruits. You don't need all top flight recruits, but you certainly need some high impact kids. Syrcause has had tons of talent over the last few years, but not much to show for it. Chemisty > Individual Players. Team > Me.

We'll see.


Alum1

I'd say Dion Dixon has been high impact and I would take a whole roster of him.

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57023]

why do i have faith that Mick can get it done? well i just dont see a guy who has an opportunity to coach at his dream job fall flat on his face and blow it. he has had the privledge of learning from 2 of the great college coaches (pitino and huggy bear) and i think we can all tell Mick works his tail off and has the determination to restore UC to what it was. Maybe im outta my mind but i just good feelings about where Mick is going to take this basketball program. Time will tell i guess

I hope you are right! I think he is starting to look better lately. I just hope we don't repeat last year....he created great hope, then tanked big time down the stretch. A great coach will learn from that and be better the next time. Let's see what he learned.

[BearcatAlum1]

[QUOTE=BearcatAlum1;57031]

I'd say Dion Dixon has been high impact and I would take a whole roster of him.

Agreed. And he is only a Frosh! He is one of our most consistent and reliable contributors.

Dixon had virtually no offers out of high school. Wyoming is the only school that comes to mind.

The "true" recruiters can evaluate talent and players that fit into their system, not necessarily stalking the 5* players that are hyped. Find those diamonds in the rough and add some blue chippers.

Alum1

[CincyBearcat95]

It's hard for an experienced fan to explain to an inexperienced fan the hundreds of things they know that an inexperienced fan has yet to learn. It's like someone who has played the game trying to explain the things they know to someone who hasn't played the game but I will try to explain UConns situation. 2 years ago you could compare 150 teams to UConn including UC when it came to record or stats or whatever. Even though they had a lot of talent UConn had a lot of internal problems, injurys and players leaving the team etc. To explain the talent here's this. The starting 5 UConn players who just beat Notre Dame their last game recruit rankings. Adrien#48, Robinson#25,Thabet#59, Dyson#42, Price#32 and throw in Walker at #23 first off the bench. You see talent like that an experienced fan knows UConn is going to leave the other 150 teams, including UC in the dust. It's just a matter of time. Hence UConn becomes the #4 rated team in the nation this year. Those other 150 teams including UC all hit the wall when their talent level takes them as far as they can go. UC for example could keep up with UConn 2 years ago and last year stat wise but an experienced fan knows UC isn't going to match this years UConns #4 rated team in the nation next year. A team is only going as far as their talent level will take them plus throw in a good coach also. I hope this helps you and other young fans out a little but a few years experience is the thing that will really do the trick. Until then have fun learning the game.

Wow, how long do you have to be a fan before you are experienced. So far, all I can get from you is that your "experience" equals cynicism. I have been a fan for 16 years and I guess if that makes me inexperienced and your seeming inexperience is more like the glass is always half empty, I'll take your statements as compliments.

I understand how good the uconn players are and was waiting for that argument to come from you. Took you a while, but at your age, most things do right? :D

I already addressed their talent level by suggesting that:

The current bearcats are at the same level of experience as Uconn was 2 years ago, yet Uconn barely beat us on our home floor. Further, it has been stated on here and many other places that rankings do not always hit the nail on the head. Dixon was considered completely under the radar because he didn't play in the AAU games very much. Mike Williams, although he is starting to play better has not lived up to McD AA status. Zeller from ND is now just starting to produce and he was an McD AA who only scored 5 points per game.

Only difference in our "experience" is that I choose to look at the same stats you ignore and believe that Mick will bring these guys along and we will win more games next year. You and the 50 years of "experience" may need longer to come along on the ride.

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57049]

Agreed. And he is only a Frosh! He is one of our most consistent and reliable contributors.

Dixon had virtually no offers out of high school. Wyoming is the only school that comes to mind.

The "true" recruiters can evaluate talent and players that fit into their system, not necessarily stalking the 5* players that are hyped. Find those diamonds in the rough and add some blue chippers.

Alum1

like Kenyon Martin, Steve Logan, Bobby Brannen, Nick Van Exel....and the list goes on and on.....agreed!

[BearcatAlum1]

[QUOTE=BearcatAlum1;57053]

like Kenyon Martin, Steve Logan, Bobby Brannen, Nick Van Exel....and the list goes on and on.....agreed!

All recruited by MC, right? Honest question.

Alum1

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57058]

All recruited by MC, right? Honest question.

Alum1

Yeah, this was the group that couldn't advance past the 2nd round....all recruited by Mick Cronin.!

[Billy Don]

Wow, how long do you have to be a fan before you are experienced. So far, all I can get from you is that your "experience" equals cynicism. I have been a fan for 16 years and I guess if that makes me inexperienced and your seeming inexperience is more like the glass is always half empty, I'll take your statements as compliments.

I understand how good the uconn players are and was waiting for that argument to come from you. Took you a while, but at your age, most things do right? :D

I already addressed their talent level by suggesting that:

The current bearcats are at the same level of experience as Uconn was 2 years ago, yet Uconn barely beat us on our home floor. Further, it has been stated on here and many other places that rankings do not always hit the nail on the head. Dixon was considered completely under the radar because he didn't play in the AAU games very much. Mike Williams, although he is starting to play better has not lived up to McD AA status. Zeller from ND is now just starting to produce and he was an McD AA who only scored 5 points per game.

Only difference in our "experience" is that I choose to look at the same stats you ignore and believe that Mick will bring these guys along and we will win more games next year. You and the 50 years of "experience" may need longer to come along on the ride.

Believe it or not I was actually in your age group once upon a time so I have experience at that also. Being in that age group right now where it wasn't all that long ago it was found out there wasn't really a Santa Claus. That age group still has a few things to fine tune and the more astute will do that. I am going to give you credit for being one of them. Some day it will be you enlighting some young fans. Until then.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57058]

All recruited by MC, right? Honest question.

Alum1

Martin, no. John Loyer.

Brannen, no. Steve Moeller.

Logan, yes. Cronin was #1 UC recruiter then.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

[QUOTE=BearcatAlum1;57060]

Yeah, this was the group that couldn't advance past the 2nd round....all recruited by Mick Cronin.!

Not so. Cronin was UC #1 recruiter on 1998-99-2000-01 classes.

Martin was 96 class. Brannen 94 class. B4 Cronin.

[Nerf]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57058]

All recruited by MC, right? Honest question.

Alum1

No, only Logan was recruited by Cronin. I believe Moeller recruited Van Exel, and Loyer the other two.

Oh, never mind. It appears '58 has straightened things out.

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57063]

Not so. Cronin was UC #1 recruiter on 1998-99-2000-01 classes.

Martin was 96 class. Brannen 94 class. B4 Cronin.

Thanks for the correction '58. I had no idea who recruited them. I assumed that bearcatalum1 knew what he was talking about.....bad assumption on my part!

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57063]

Not so. Cronin was UC #1 recruiter on 1998-99-2000-01 classes.

Martin was 96 class. Brannen 94 class. B4 Cronin.

So, Cronin was responsible for the groups that started in 1998 all the way through the guys who graduated in 2005. That was the period most disappointing to UC fans....the biggest group of underachievers. And who was chief recruiter of that group...Mick Cronin! Guess he gets equal credit with Huggs for those bad times! :D

[BearcatAlum1]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57063]

Not so. Cronin was UC #1 recruiter on 1998-99-2000-01 classes.

Martin was 96 class. Brannen 94 class. B4 Cronin.

You misquoted me. If you're going to quote my posts, please make sure they're accurate. Thanks for the clarification on the recruiting.

Alum1

[BearcatAlum1]

[QUOTE=Bearcat Fan Since 1958;57074]

Thanks for the correction '58. I had no idea who recruited them. I assumed that bearcatalum1 knew what he was talking about.....bad assumption on my part!

I never implied I knew anything. I asked you a question. That's why I said, "Honest question." hahaha.

Alum1

[CincyBearcat95]

Believe it or not I was actually in your age group once upon a time so I have experience at that also. Being in that age group right now where it wasn't all that long ago it was found out there wasn't really a Santa Claus. That age group still has a few things to fine tune and the more astute will do that. I am going to give you credit for being one of them. Some day it will be you enlighting some young fans. Until then.

1. I apologize for taking a shot at your age. Was a cheap shot (was annoyed at your prior posting which I felt was condescending.)

2. In my haste to respond, I shorted myself a couple years - I've actually been a fan for 19 years

3. Not sure how old you think I am since my children still believe in Santa and I am in my late 30's.

4. I realize that you can't get older without going through the prior years. I have no problem with understanding or agreeing that you have more experience than me in many areas. This doesn't change the fact that I see these data points as harbingers of good things to come, while you see them as less than stellar.

5. You still never answered my question of how many years a fan must follow a team before they are "experienced."

6. Not sure if you're experience is doing much for you if you think Mick should be doing better than he is now. No other coach that I know of including Huggs has ever been in his position - therefore, its really not possible to set expectations based on some sort of prior experience.

7. I would love to find another situation/team/coach no matter what the year that we could use as a measuring stick. Understanding what I said above that there is not a perfect match out there, maybe there is something close. If you have suggestions on some examples that we could look at, I'd love to see them. In fact, though many have discussed possible comparisons on here, we've never as a forum voted for which could best be used as that morningstick (might be something worth exploring.)

8. Bottom line you and I disagree about the future. I think we are heading in the right direction and that Mick has continued to improve and as long as he does improve (measured in wins, not by losing by less points) then he should keep his job. I believe you think he should already be doing better and would be perfectly happy if he lost his job and we started all over again next year. Is that correct?

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

I don't see the point of this bickering. Any objective observer can see that it's far too early to either call for Mick's head or annoint him a great coach. IMO, anyone who posts EITHER on here is allowing a personal agenda to cloud their ability to reason.

I personally feel that he has shown that he will be able to coach and recruit. The jury may be still out somewhat on his player development, but we'll find out soon enough as he has a lot of youth to work with.

In 2-3 years, one side will be able to say "I told you so." If I'm wrong I will gladly admit it. I hope the Mick doubters will do the same if he succeeds. WE WILL SEE. In the meantime, these pointless arguments feel like troll wars and taint the discourse of legitimate topics relating to this year's team on this board.

[CincyBearcat95]

I don't see the point of this bickering. Any objective observer can see that it's far too early to either call for Mick's head or annoint him a great coach. IMO, anyone who posts EITHER on here is allowing a personal agenda to cloud their ability to reason.

I personally feel that he has shown that he will be able to coach and recruit. The jury may be still out somewhat on his player development, but we'll find out soon enough as he has a lot of youth to work with.

In 2-3 years, one side will be able to say "I told you so." If I'm wrong I will gladly admit it. I hope the Mick doubters will do the same if he succeeds. WE WILL SEE. In the meantime, these pointless arguments feel like troll wars and taint the discourse of legitimate topics relating to this year's team on this board.

Agree and disagree with you. I agree that none of us knows if Mick is the right coach or not. As I've said before, I hope he is and we do not have to start over yet again. I will also gladly admit I'm wrong about him. I have always been the middle of the road with a slight lean to the right. I've never annointed him as a great coach. I've merely stated that I believe he started with nothing and is on track for getting us back to our former glory (I am no means a Ralph (sorry Ralph) but I just don't espouse he's great and remarkable. I try to come at this with some common sense. Further, I agree, we'll know in 2 to 3 years.

I disagree with you on the "troll wars." I believe both BD and I have contributed to this forum and we may be having a disagreement, but its still valuable. If one wants to read through it all and I would not blame anyone for not wanting to.

I do think one good thought that has come out of it, is for the forum to vote on some sort of measuring stick. Its been tried before, but would be great (probably impossible) for us to all agree on what defines his job performance (much like a review at any other job)

Outstanding
Above Avg.
Performing as Expected
Under performing
Need Improvement

Its the criteria behind assigning these or finding a similar situation that we can all agree on that is probably not possible.

[Billy Don]

1. I apologize for taking a shot at your age. Was a cheap shot (was annoyed at your prior posting which I felt was condescending.)



4. I realize that you can't get older without going through the prior years. I have no problem with understanding or agreeing that you have more experience than me in many areas. This doesn't change the fact that I see these data points as harbingers of good things to come, while you see them as less than stellar.

5. You still never answered my question of how many years a fan must follow a team before they are "experienced."

6. Not sure if you're experience is doing much for you if you think Mick should be doing better than he is now. No other coach that I know of including Huggs has ever been in his position - therefore, its really not possible to set expectations based on some sort of prior experience.



Well I enjoyed our little back and forth but for now for the sake of the board maybe we should tone it down until later on. Before I go I will let you in on a little secret. Among other things I'm more experienced in this word game than you. I only threw that word "experienced" in to hit a nerve. How did I do? Ha

[CincyBearcat95]

Well I enjoyed our little back and forth but for now for the sake of the board maybe we should tone it down until later on. Before I go I will let you in on a little secret. Among other things I'm more experienced in this word game than you. I only threw that word "experienced" in to hit a nerve. How did I do? Ha

Wonder which of your great experiences in life made you enjoy "hitting a nerve" for other people rather than discussing. Now, I guess from this experience I'll know to put you on ignore.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

[QUOTE=Bearcat Fan Since 1958;57074]

So, Cronin was responsible for the groups that started in 1998 all the way through the guys who graduated in 2005. That was the period most disappointing to UC fans....the biggest group of underachievers. And who was chief recruiter of that group...Mick Cronin! Guess he gets equal credit with Huggs for those bad times! :D

The 2000 Bearcats were the best team Huggins coached. The 2002 Cats are the only #1 seed and 30+ W team ever at UC. The 2001 team made Sweet 16. The 1999 team was one of only 2 teams to beat Duke that season.

The 2004 and 05 Bearcats had 25 W both seasons.

AND the 1998 thru 2001 recruiting classes graduated WELL OVER 50% of their players, something like 60% or 70% of them.

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57086]

The 2000 Bearcats were the best team Huggins coached. The 2002 Cats are the only #1 seed and 30+ W team ever at UC. The 2001 team made Sweet 16. The 1999 team was one of only 2 teams to beat Duke that season.

The 2004 and 05 Bearcats had 25 W both seasons.

AND the 1998 thru 2001 recruiting classes graduated WELL OVER 50% of their players, something like 60% or 70% of them.

You're preaching to the choir '58. This needs to be directed to the ones who say we underachieved.

[joe]

I think the Cats can absolutely be top 5 (not saying "will" bout "can") in the BEast next year. W/ all players adding a year of experience and gaining Cash, Kilpatrick and maybe another guard. Absolutely!

...and FWIW dismissing someones' thoughts based purely on age is pretty condescending and narrow minded.


IMO Don isn't "dismissing" someones thoughts and he surely isn't being condescending, what he is stating is the absolute truth. I wished I could setup a site and take bets with ANYONE who thinks that this team next year will be in the top five of the BEast. It is a suckers bet. It's not that I'm not being hopefull or anything because I am, but I also have watched college hoops for years and I know what is going on here in Clifton. You just can't "get better".....everyone else is getting "better" also and gaining experience. What it is going to take is a MONSTER and I mean MONSTER pickups by Mick *or* he is going to have to take his coaching to another level.

What many need to do (which they won't) is take off the red/black glasses and "truly" look at the other teams/talent/and coaching. I can understand why many don't or just hold onto their beliefs though....because it is sobering and everyone wants to be drunk so too speak when talking of their school.

FWIW- this doesn't mean I don't love the school and the kids, I am just using common sense and I don't have glasses on.

gregg

[YouGuessedItFrankStallone]

What many need to do (which they won't) is take off the red/black glasses and "truly" look at the other teams/talent/and coaching.

IMO it's the failure to do just that over the past 2.5 years that makes the Mick haters so maddening to listen to. You can't just rebuild from zero that quickly in a conference like the BEast. This isn't C-USA. The comparisons to Huggins are apples-to-oranges and meaningless.

[ralph1950]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57063]

Not so. Cronin was UC #1 recruiter on 1998-99-2000-01 classes.

Martin was 96 class. Brannen 94 class. B4 Cronin.

The head coach is always the # 1 recruiter. If not then you should be blaming Stubblefield for any players you do not like on UC's team. The recruiting coordinator may make first contact but it is always the head coach who makes the decision to offer a scholarship.

[ralph1950]

[QUOTE=LongTimer;57086]

The 2000 Bearcats were the best team Huggins coached. The 2002 Cats are the only #1 seed and 30+ W team ever at UC. The 2001 team made Sweet 16. The 1999 team was one of only 2 teams to beat Duke that season.

The 2004 and 05 Bearcats had 25 W both seasons.

AND the 1998 thru 2001 recruiting classes graduated WELL OVER 50% of their players, something like 60% or 70% of them.

The 2000 and 2002 teams both lost in the second round of the NCAA tourney and many a fan was complaining at the time that the coach was constantly getting outcoached in the Big Games.

[BearcatAlum1]

[QUOTE=Bearcat Fan Since 1958;57214]

The 2000 and 2002 teams both lost in the second round of the NCAA tourney and many a fan was complaining at the time that the coach was constantly getting outcoached in the Big Games.

2000 squad was a #2 seed.
2002 squad was a #1 seed.

Both first weekend flameouts.


BearcatAlum1

[CincyBearcat95]

IMO Don isn't "dismissing" someones thoughts and he surely isn't being condescending, what he is stating is the absolute truth. I wished I could setup a site and take bets with ANYONE who thinks that this team next year will be in the top five of the BEast. It is a suckers bet. It's not that I'm not being hopefull or anything because I am, but I also have watched college hoops for years and I know what is going on here in Clifton. You just can't "get better".....everyone else is getting "better" also and gaining experience. What it is going to take is a MONSTER and I mean MONSTER pickups by Mick *or* he is going to have to take his coaching to another level.

What many need to do (which they won't) is take off the red/black glasses and "truly" look at the other teams/talent/and coaching. I can understand why many don't or just hold onto their beliefs though....because it is sobering and everyone wants to be drunk so too speak when talking of their school.

FWIW- this doesn't mean I don't love the school and the kids, I am just using common sense and I don't have glasses on.

gregg

BS - he admitted he was trying to tick me off rather than have a serious conversation. Funny, how all of the so called "experienced" guys who have been watching for 50 years and are such "fans" never have anything positive to say. As the team gets better over time, they will win more. After they win more, they will recruit better players. Same damn thing happened with Huggins - I was there and watched him build the team. The way Huggs did it was with Juco's and guys that were not highly ranked, but were either overlooked or were ones he could build into better players.

The difference on here in people's opinions has nothing to do with experience. It all comes down to those who think Mick can do the same thing that Huggs did and those that think he can't. Its all opinion and I've haven't seen anything from the so called "experienced" complainers to prove differently.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

[QUOTE=Bearcat Fan Since 1958;57074]

The head coach is always the # 1 recruiter. If not then you should be blaming Stubblefield for any players you do not like on UC's team. The recruiting coordinator may make first contact but it is always the head coach who makes the decision to offer a scholarship.

Not so. One of the assistants is generally the chief recruiter.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

[QUOTE=ralph1950;57270]

2000 squad was a #2 seed.
2002 squad was a #1 seed.

Both first weekend flameouts.


BearcatAlum1
The 2000 team was devastated by the potential career ending injury to Kenyon Martin the week before.

The 2002 team lost 2OT struggle to a very talented UCLA team (that didn't have a talented coach).

[LongTimer]

[QUOTE=Bearcat Fan Since 1958;57214]

The 2000 and 2002 teams both lost in the second round of the NCAA tourney and many a fan was complaining at the time that the coach was constantly getting outcoached in the Big Games.

Hmmmm, I didn't hear many fans saying that.

[ralph1950]

[QUOTE=ralph1950;57270]

Hmmmm, I didn't hear many fans saying that.

On Sportstalk radio all the time about the second round flame outs and inability to beat a higher ranked team and the 1992 "fluke" because the bracket fell apart because of upsets. Many, many, many fans bring it up all the time.

[ralph1950]

[QUOTE=ralph1950;57265]

Not so. One of the assistants is generally the chief recruiter.

On another thread you stated the HEAD COACH IS ALWAYS the reason for recruits on the team so which is it? Were the current Bearcats recruited by Cronin or Stubblefield?

[LongTimer]

Here was an interesting article on the heels of the Lunardi comment on ESPN where he referenced Georgetown's pathetic performance against the Seton Halls and Cincinnatis of the world. It was a shot at our program, basically grouping us with the bottom feeders of college basketball. Now, you would think that Mick moving up to a 4-4 BE record and defeating Georgetown would get some notice. Well, this article talks about the current winners and losers of college basketball. Notice, no mention of Mick Cronin, but Tom Crean is one of the winners....funny since Ralph has made the point at least 1,000 times how Mick's job was much tougher than Creans. That doesn't seem to be the mainstream opinion anywhere in college basketball. Mick Cronin is never mentioned anywhere...ESPN....Networks....Radio....Newspapers ....anywhere, for the unbelievable job that he has done. But, on this forum, he is amazing, phenominal, unbelievable!!! Even Frank Martin gets credit for being one of the winners. When will someone outside of this forum talk glowingly about the job that Mick Cronin has done? If he keeps getting beat by 21 points, I suspect it will be awhile before he makes the winners list. Here is the article link:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news;_ylt=Av50CSG11f1Kt52QHCApDUrevbYF?slug=jn-winlose013109&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

[Kindog202]

Here was an interesting article on the heels of the Lunardi comment on ESPN where he referenced Georgetown's pathetic performance against the Seton Halls and Cincinnatis of the world. It was a shot at our program, basically grouping us with the bottom feeders of college basketball. Now, you would think that Mick moving up to a 4-4 BE record and defeating Georgetown would get some notice. Well, this article talks about the current winners and losers of college basketball. Notice, no mention of Mick Cronin, but Tom Crean is one of the winners....funny since Ralph has made the point at least 1,000 times how Mick's job was much tougher than Creans. That doesn't seem to be the mainstream opinion anywhere in college basketball. Mick Cronin is never mentioned anywhere...ESPN....Networks....Radio....Newspapers ....anywhere, for the unbelievable job that he has done. But, on this forum, he is amazing, phenominal, unbelievable!!! Even Frank Martin gets credit for being one of the winners. When will someone outside of this forum talk glowingly about the job that Mick Cronin has done? If he keeps getting beat by 21 points, I suspect it will be awhile before he makes the winners list. Here is the article link:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news;_ylt=Av50CSG11f1Kt52QHCApDUrevbYF?slug=jn-winlose013109&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Those are winners and losers from the past week - a small sample size. The article has Dino Gaudio listed as a loser. I highly doubt what Gaudio has done this entire year at Wake constitutes him as a loser in any sense of the word.

[ralph1950]

Here was an interesting article on the heels of the Lunardi comment on ESPN where he referenced Georgetown's pathetic performance against the Seton Halls and Cincinnatis of the world. It was a shot at our program, basically grouping us with the bottom feeders of college basketball. Now, you would think that Mick moving up to a 4-4 BE record and defeating Georgetown would get some notice. Well, this article talks about the current winners and losers of college basketball. Notice, no mention of Mick Cronin, but Tom Crean is one of the winners....funny since Ralph has made the point at least 1,000 times how Mick's job was much tougher than Creans. That doesn't seem to be the mainstream opinion anywhere in college basketball. Mick Cronin is never mentioned anywhere...ESPN....Networks....Radio....Newspapers ....anywhere, for the unbelievable job that he has done. But, on this forum, he is amazing, phenominal, unbelievable!!! Even Frank Martin gets credit for being one of the winners. When will someone outside of this forum talk glowingly about the job that Mick Cronin has done? If he keeps getting beat by 21 points, I suspect it will be awhile before he makes the winners list. Here is the article link:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news;_ylt=Av50CSG11f1Kt52QHCApDUrevbYF?slug=jn-winlose013109&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Tom Crean is 5-17 and 0-8 in the Big Ten, headed for 5-25 and 0-16 with 0 significant wins in his first season and he had 3 returning players and 2 big time recruits signed by Sampson to start out with. Mick went 11-19, with wins over Xavier and NC State in year 1 with 2-14 in the Big East so the record speaks loud and clear that Mick did a lot better in year 1 than Crean has done in year 1. Mike Decourcy of the Sporting News, the # 1 college basketball writer in the nation, says "Mick Cronin is a rising star", "Mick Cronin will be great". Don Criqui on the broadcast today said the arrow for Cincinnati is definitely pointing up, Criqui and Wensel said they were both members of the Yancy Gates fan club.

[LongTimer]

Those are winners and losers from the past week - a small sample size. The article has Dino Gaudio listed as a loser. I highly doubt what Gaudio has done this entire year at Wake constitutes him as a loser in any sense of the word.

The point is.....where is Mick Cronin and his amazing job that he has done? He defeated Georgetown. His record improved to 4-4 in the amazing Big East. Sholdn't this great past week and the amazing job that you keep saying he is doing, get him into the winner column. NO!!!! It's Tom Crean and Frank Martin. Ralph, it's time to stop posting the pie in the sky stuff. Nobody that knows anything about basketball is agreeing with you!

[LongTimer]

Tom Crean is 5-17 and 0-8 in the Big Ten, headed for 5-25 and 0-16 with 0 significant wins in his first season and he had 3 returning players and 2 big time recruits signed by Sampson to start out with. Mick went 11-19, with wins over Xavier and NC State in year 1 with 2-14 in the Big East so the record speaks loud and clear that Mick did a lot better in year 1 than Crean has done in year 1. Mike Decourcy of the Sporting News, the # 1 college basketball writer in the nation, says "Mick Cronin is a rising star", "Mick Cronin will be great". Don Criqui on the broadcast today said the arrow for Cincinnati is definitely pointing up, Criqui and Wensel said they were both members of the Yancy Gates fan club.

TOM CREAN and FRANK MARTIN!!!!!!

[Kindog202]

The point is.....where is Mick Cronin and his amazing job that he has done? He defeated Georgetown. His record improved to 4-4 in the amazing Big East. Sholdn't this great past week and the amazing job that you keep saying he is doing, get him into the winner column. NO!!!! It's Tom Crean and Frank Martin. Ralph, it's time to stop posting the pie in the sky stuff. Nobody that knows anything about basketball is agreeing with you!

I'm not too concerned that one writer didn't name Mick a winner. The writer also didn't name him a loser so by your logic, he must not be a loser either. Right?

[LongTimer]

Tom Crean is 5-17 and 0-8 in the Big Ten, headed for 5-25 and 0-16 with 0 significant wins in his first season and he had 3 returning players and 2 big time recruits signed by Sampson to start out with. Mick went 11-19, with wins over Xavier and NC State in year 1 with 2-14 in the Big East so the record speaks loud and clear that Mick did a lot better in year 1 than Crean has done in year 1. Mike Decourcy of the Sporting News, the # 1 college basketball writer in the nation, says "Mick Cronin is a rising star", "Mick Cronin will be great". Don Criqui on the broadcast today said the arrow for Cincinnati is definitely pointing up, Criqui and Wensel said they were both members of the Yancy Gates fan club.

lol.....sorry, I posted before I saw the Yancy Gates comment. The little part of the game that I saw, Gates was pathetic...air balls....anemic on defense. Sorry, I'm not in that fan club!

[LongTimer]

I'm not too concerned that one writer didn't name Mick a winner. The writer also didn't name him a loser so by your logic, he must not be a loser either. Right?

I never said he was a loser. I believe he should get two more years after this year. He is average. I graded him a "C" the other day on one of these threads. So yes....he is not a loser. But, he is proving each and every week that he is far from a winner at this point. I still like him and want him as our coach, but if he doesn't start coaching more consistently and bringing out more consistentcy in our performance, then my opinion will start falling. I said he coached well against Georgetown. I didn't see much of today's game, but it sure doesn't seem as there was great coaching present today!

[Thegreatone]

Your not on the UC fan club.

[Kindog202]

I never said he was a loser. I believe he should get two more years after this year. He is average. I graded him a "C" the other day on one of these threads. So yes....he is not a loser. But, he is proving each and every week that he is far from a winner at this point. I still like him and want him as our coach, but if he doesn't start coaching more consistently and bringing out more consistentcy in our performance, then my opinion will start falling. I said he coached well against Georgetown. I didn't see much of today's game, but it sure doesn't seem as there was great coaching present today!

I will give you this - Mick runs out of chances/excuses with me if we are not in the NCAA's next year. He will have a team filled with experience and talent. He should have a true point guard and the conference looks to be weaker overall next year than this year. I will continue to critique what he does the rest of this year on a game-to-game basis. I think where our differences lie is that I look at the situation from the standpoint of not having a capable point guard on this team with Cash's injury really affecting what Mick had planned to do this year with this team. I recognize this and will therefore give him a pass until next year. Given your posts, you too recognize this but choose in the meantime to judge him on how the team performs now. It's just two ways to look at the situation.
**
I truly believe based on what I have seen this year, combined with what is coming in next year, that by the end of the next year both you and I will see things the same way - be it positively or negatively - regarding Mick.

[LongTimer]

I will give you this - Mick runs out of chances/excuses with me if we are not in the NCAA's next year. He will have a team filled with experience and talent. He should have a true point guard and the conference looks to be weaker overall next year than this year. I will continue to critique what he does the rest of this year on a game-to-game basis. I think where our differences lie is that I look at the situation from the standpoint of not having a capable point guard on this team with Cash's injury really affecting what Mick had planned to do this year with this team. I recognize this and will therefore give him a pass until next year. Given your posts, you too recognize this but choose in the meantime to judge him on how the team performs now. It's just two ways to look at the situation.
**
I truly believe based on what I have seen this year, combined with what is coming in next year, that by the end of the next year both you and I will see things the same way - be it positively or negatively - regarding Mick.

I'm with you. I realize the point guard injury was huge and I have given him his pass on that issue. But, I still want to see something out of everyone else. I just have a problem with not seeing much improvement out of most of the players and his unexplainable playing time issues that just make no sense...i.e. Dixon's 10 mins. I know I am an identified Huggs fan, and I'll carry that banner proudly, but I ask myself often....and I have discussed this with many fans this year...How do you think we would have done with Huggs coaching this same team instead of Mick. I would bet the bank and my life that Huggs could have made the NCAA with these same players. And, everyone that I ask that question to says the same thing. And, maybe Mick will do it too. We'll see.

[ucat4]

I ask myself often....and I have discussed this with many fans this year...How do you think we would have done with Huggs coaching this same team instead of Mick. I would bet the bank and my life that Huggs could have made the NCAA with these same players

I often ask myself the same question - I honestly think that given the same exact players with Huggins coaching that this team would be right in the thick of the NCAA hunt. He was and still is a master motivator. But, there really is no point in even speculating, because it will just drive us nuts! :eek:

We just have to cross our fingers, hope & pray that MC can bring our program back to the powerhouse that we once were. :confused:

[slimm]

and I have discussed this with many fans this year...How do you think we would have done with Huggs coaching this same team instead of Mick. I would bet the bank and my life that Huggs could have made the NCAA with these same players. And, everyone that I ask that question to says the same thing.

and lose in the second round.
________
Glass Pipes (http://glasspipes.net/)

[CincyBearcat95]

I often ask myself the same question - I honestly think that given the same exact players with Huggins coaching that this team would be right in the thick of the NCAA hunt. He was and still is a master motivator. But, there really is no point in even speculating, because it will just drive us nuts! :eek:

We just have to cross our fingers, hope & pray that MC can bring our program back to the powerhouse that we once were. :confused:

I think that many of us agree that Huggs would do better with this team than Mick. Of course, Huggs has been coaching a lot longer and will probably end up in the Hall of Fame unless he retires soon. Even those that hate him have to admit he's a great coach.

Problem is, its been 3 years since he was fired. It doesn't matter if he would have won more games. We can't change the past. It is what it is and you either accept the new coach or start looking for another (who may or may not be better.) We will never have another Huggs, because there can be only one Bob Huggins. We had him for a nice long run, but its over. Some on here act like they've been dumped and can't get over it.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

and lose in the second round.

He didn't lose in 2nd round in 1992, 93, 96, or 2001. Or 2008 either (at WVU).

Mick has never won a 1st round game.

[LongTimer]

and lose in the second round.

Better than the 1st round of the CBIT.

[Thegreatone]

The CBI was a very good learning experience for a lot of people. I dont get why so many people get angry about that.

[Joe_Pong]

[QUOTE=Kindog202;57562]I will give you this - Mick runs out of chances/excuses with me if we are not in the NCAA's next year. He will have a team filled with experience and talent. QUOTE]

Really? REALLY??? A team filled with talent???

Seriously?

Man, some bearcat fans need to put down the pipe.

[Kindog202]

[QUOTE=Kindog202;57562]I will give you this - Mick runs out of chances/excuses with me if we are not in the NCAA's next year. He will have a team filled with experience and talent. QUOTE]

Really? REALLY??? A team filled with talent???

Seriously?

Man, some bearcat fans need to put down the pipe.

Yes, Cash, Deonta, Dion, Rashad, Yancy, Mike (if he comes back), Alvin, Sean Kilpatrick and Ibrahima Thomas can all play in the Big East and are talented players. This team is 4-5 in the Big East without a true point guard, in a conference that may go down as the deepest conference in the history of college b-ball. There is talent there, I don't understand how you cannot see that.

[LongTimer]

The CBI was a very good learning experience for a lot of people. I dont get why so many people get angry about that.

Correct....I learned how much I really hate this crap we are watching right now.

[BearcatAlum1]

He didn't lose in 2nd round in 1992, 93, 96, or 2001. Or 2008 either (at WVU).

Mick has never won a 1st round game.

Better than the 1st round of the CBIT.

Didn't I school both of you on the other thread about Huggins' post-season success?

Huggs advanced past the second round ONCE in his final 9 years. His seeds included a 1, 2s, 3s, 4, and a 5 seed.

Oh, and 2001? We beat a 12 and a 13 seed before getting beaten down by Stanford.

Sorry. Had to give both sides of the facts. Now everyone can continue their bickering....

Alum1

[LongTimer]

Didn't I school both of you on the other thread about Huggins' post-season success?

Huggs advanced past the second round ONCE in his final 9 years. His seeds included a 1, 2s, 3s, 4, and a 5 seed.

Oh, and 2001? We beat a 12 and a 13 seed before getting beaten down by Stanford.

Sorry. Had to give both sides of the facts. Now everyone can continue their bickering....

Alum1

He is just a Huggs fanatic. He can't stop posting about the past....lol. I truly hope that Mick can someday accomplish something so that he can research hours and hours about something current. But, I suppose I can't blame him for revisiting the past. It was a great time to be a Bearcat fan. And, it is so much more fun researching a winner! Thanks for schooling everyone on the Golden years of Bearcat basketball bearcatalum1. You get an "A" in history. Hang in there though. Someday, Mick will inspire you to research him too. I am confident about that....I think!!! :rolleyes:

[Lobot]

Can we please get back to the original topic of conversation? You can rehash Huggins issues in Where Are they Now forum if you wish to continue that conservation. Thank you.

[LongTimer]

Can we please get back to the original topic of conversation? You can rehash Huggins issues in Where Are they Now forum if you wish to continue that conservation. Thank you.

Agreed! Point taken. lol....what was the original topic?

[Billy Don]

The CBI was a very good learning experience for a lot of people. I dont get why so many people get angry about that.

Going to the CBI and losing was a good experience for me as a fan. Let me know I never want to go through that again.

[ralph1950]

Going to the CBI and losing was a good experience for me as a fan. Let me know I never want to go through that again.


This year UC can go to the collegeinsider.com tourney.

[LongTimer]

This year UC can go to the collegeinsider.com tourney.

Hey....CSI...our players can apply their criminal justice degrees and learn basketball at the same time! Oooops, my bad...that would be CIS. Wow, thought we could boost our academics at the CSI.com tourney.