Collins: Stay or Go Criteria

[Kat burglar]

I think NU has proved more difficult for Collins than he thought.

He was used to recruiting high level kids to a great program without much trouble with admissions. That's clearly not the case here. He was getting defensive in the post game press conferences so it may be wearing on him. I respect him for taking on the challenge. It may be one of the toughest assignments in the P5.

i have tempered my expectations of what a successful program at NU looks like. Middle third in B1G , top 60 in kenpom and NIT is a sucessful year for the program. I think NIT would be plus for the program. It would help sell the narative to a new recruit that we are close and with the recruit we will take the next step. That appeals to many athletes.

I think admissions should give him 5 scholarships for diversity of athletic ability to round out the student body. I would have used it on Charlie Moore and maybe Paul Mulcahy. I'm sure there were others.

Collins has brought a much more enjoyable brand of basketball to watch and one that is competitive in the B1G. I'd say that's a win.

 

[peatymeanis]

I know there's a lot of obvious facts you want to ignore about this. I hope this helps you understand the Bienan-Carmody relationship. The paragraph you want to start reading begins with:

"Having lived across the street from Carril when he was Dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of International Studies at Princeton, Bienen has had affinity for the bouncy, orange ball and the swoosh of the net since he started playing the game in his early adolescence. The love for the game led to the start of Bienen’s and Carmody’s relationship."

The Carmody Plan

Tried to run, Tried to hide, Break on through to the other side! Break on through to the other side! The Doors' lead singer Jim Morrison was not referring to Northwestern basketball when he wrote these lyrics back in 1968. But as is the case with most musical masterpieces, the subject of such...

dailynorthwestern.com

The first five years of Carmody at NU demonstrated there was a whole lot he didn't understand about NU, it challenges and its opponents.

Nah, this is assigning a level of naïveté to Carmody that is unwarranted. So he had a strong preexisting relationship with Bienen. There is nothing unusual about that. NU’s struggles and challenges at the time were not unknown - Carmody would have had the benefit of advice from an agent, advisors, professional peers when evaluating the job. How many of us would willingly jump into a dead end job just because our good friend worked at the same organization? A fluff piece profile written in a student newspaper doesn’t change professional realities. All these fairly well regarded coaches (and their agents/professional advisors) must all either be completely delusional or dumb if they keep taking the dead end NU job.

 

[Catreporter]

That's interesting. Do you feel the same way about lower tier bowl games? It sure seems like that's something that programs (not just NU) talk about all the time.

As you can probably tell, I respectfully disagree about the NIT. For a program so absent of success in basketball of any kind, consistent NITs would be a huge development IMHO.

NIT was exciting to get in, once upon a time. That time has passed and especially in a big market like Chicago, it is hardly a blip on the radar. Thousands of empty seats for the home NIT game ten years ago vs. Akron. Before the field was watered down, we played Notre Dame and DePaul in it and that gave it a little cache. Plus, we had never been to the NCAAs at that time. Big Ten doesn't really appear in any so-called lower tier bowl games. All are after Christmas and televised by ESPN.

 

[AdamOnFirst]

AdamOnFirst - I'm not a moderator but I'm awarding you WildcatReport Rookie of the Year. I appreciate the energy and posts you've brought to the board since you've joined. There are not many diehard Wildcat fans, so I always appreciate the convo.

Thank you, 7th Cir! I’ve really found what I was hoping for here in a place to chat with the (small cadre) of fellow year-round Cats fans interested in a higher level of sports discussion and knowledge. I enjoy the chat with everybody!

 

[wildcatpn]

So we're just going to throw away the facts of what an actual coach says? One who was on his way out the door and had nothing to lose.

We're going to throw away that I doubled his estimate?

We'll also going to throw away the facts of six different NU coaches in the modern era. We'll ignore that Foster, O'Neill and Carmody had true success before NU. And we'll ignore that they couldn't reach the low-bar NITs in a couple years.

All so we can fit a narrative that it's easier and doable ... without the slightest bit of evidence.

It's not easy at all. But again, many people on these boards completely overestimate how hard it is to get into NU as a scholarship athlete.

 

[hoosboot]

NIT was exciting to get in, once upon a time. That time has passed and especially in a big market like Chicago, it is hardly a blip on the radar. Thousands of empty seats for the home NIT game ten years ago vs. Akron. Before the field was watered down, we played Notre Dame and DePaul in it and that gave it a little cache. Plus, we had never been to the NCAAs at that time. Big Ten doesn't really appear in any so-called lower tier bowl games. All are after Christmas and televised by ESPN.

Come on, reporter. One could pretty easily argue that 1/2 of the Big Ten bowl tie-ins are lower tier and certainly comparable to the NIT.

Regardless, I'm not talking about for attendance and how the Chicago market views making the NIT. I'm talking about how it changes the narrative of Northwestern basketball, how it impacts CCC's ability to recruit effectively, and how the program progresses. It's most certainly a program that needs to walk consistently before it runs.

Anyway, I get people not being excited about the NIT. I just don't get how anyone could say that it doesn't have an impact.

 

[NURoseBowl]

Thank you, 7th Cir! I’ve really found what I was hoping for here in a place to chat with the (small cadre) of fellow year-round Cats fans interested in a higher level of sports discussion and knowledge. I enjoy the chat with everybody!

I'll echo 7th Circuit Cat's sentiments. Good to have you on board, Adam.

 

[Sec.112]

All these fairly well regarded coaches (and their agents/professional advisors) must all either be completely delusional or dumb if they keep taking the dead end NU job.

Or the more realistic option: Like most professional coaches, they have an incredibly inflated sense of their effect and whether it is different from most coaches.

There's ALWAYS a guy out there who thinks they are unique and can turn it around.

 

[willycat]

Your argument, taken to its logical conclusion is that it is near impossible to succeed at NU with its academic restrictions. The available talent pool is too shallow, the challenge is too difficult, etc etc. So was Collins delusional in taking the job? Was Carmody? They were both well regarded at the time of hire - why would they choose to take such a dead end job? Were they unaware of O'Neil's comments or did they not believe him? Were they not as smart as you and can't do the math?

It's called $$$. Lots of it.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Your argument, taken to its logical conclusion is that it is near impossible to succeed at NU with its academic restrictions. The available talent pool is too shallow, the challenge is too difficult, etc etc. So was Collins delusional in taking the job? Was Carmody? They were both well regarded at the time of hire - why would they choose to take such a dead end job? Were they unaware of O'Neil's comments or did they not believe him? Were they not as smart as you and can't do the math?

I mean, Stanford has had some pretty good seasons without compromising their standards.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

It's not easy at all. But again, many people on these boards completely overestimate how hard it is to get into NU as a scholarship athlete.

Here is the bottom line. NU has higher academic admissions standards for athletes than EVERY school in the B1G and all but 1 other P6 program. Spin it any way you want, it means that have a smaller pool of potential recruits than all of those schools!

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

I mean, Stanford has had some pretty good seasons without compromising their standards.

Surprised it took so long to argue the one exception that exists in the entire P6 world.

 

[wildcatpn]

Here is the bottom line. NU has higher academic admissions standards for athletes than EVERY school in the B1G and all but 1 other P6 program. Spin it any way you want, it means that have a smaller pool of potential recruits than all of those schools!

Never said otherwise.

 

[SDakaGordie]

I have no insight to the recruiting trail. So all my opinions are very uninformed when it comes to recruiting. Some thoughts:

1) I believe CC has brought in a decent amount of talent. Significantly more than BC. I don't care that Shurna was a better player than any CC recruited. One player does not make the critical mass needed to be competitive on the court. I remember hoping we would not be out rebounded by more than 10. Feeling a dunk was a miracle. That feeling is gone. And that's because our roster is top to bottom filled with better athletes

2) My gut feeling is that we do not get a shot at enough guys to complain about misses on PG position and the like. We find ourselves in the position of really needing to get best available. That belief is furthered by our inability of filling scholarship spots in recent years. Were those years we waited fro the right fit? Don't know, sounds plausible and we ended up with spots to fill. MI has needed a PG the last two season, they got a high profile one in the portal both years. But every year multiple teams have holes in positions and are still competitive.

3) My problem with the use of what we have is a disconnect between the players we have and the way CC wants to play. I believe CC aims to develop a style you might see exemplified at Baylor or Villanova. One that requires really good athletes. While we have better athletes than in the past, they are still not at or better levels than our peers in our league. This year is the closest we have ever been IMO, but that means being on par with 1/2 the league. Now, better or worse athletes don't automatically mean better players. I believe we would be much better suited to play along the lines of how Wisconsin or Butler does. I know I am probably the only one following Butler and their last two seasons have not been that great. But our recruiting classes are, believe it or not, much better than theirs.

4) So, in my mind what we've had over the last two cycles was a coach, BC, who maximized the talent he had, but the talent was so poor for B1G standards that it would be a miracle to be competitive, and CC, who has raised the talent brought in, but fails miserably at maximizing it.

5) We have enough talent to be competitive. That does not mean top of the league. That means 7-12 wins depending on the year.

I don’t believe Collins has failed miserably at maximizing talent. Look at this year. We have never seen this level of competitiveness in games. It’s mostly the same guys he’s had playing against a lot of the same guys we’ve been playing against, and we are doing better (though not quite as much as we’d like in W/L which can be elusive). And his SRS is the second highest ever with more mostly easier games to go.

Most of the other teams in the BIG are always competitive like this - game in and game out. Many of these teams still end up in the middle of the standings - “average”. For us, it’s much more rare to be competitive. It sounds obvious, but it’s more likely we will be WELL below average if we are not competitive game in / out like this year. The last few years showed us that. And it’s still possible we will be average with this type of competitiveness. We need to sustain this competitiveness to be on par with others, some of whom reach the top and some who stay as average. That’s a tall order, but Collins has shown he can get to higher heights more than any other coach we’ve had.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Surprised it took so long to argue the one exception that exists in the entire P6 world.

I cheer for NU sports because of what they aspire to, what they stand for.

How are Vanderbilt's standards? Just curious (I legitimately don't know, but if they sold out, they don't have much to show for it in football).

 

[phatcat]

I'm tired of the admissions tripe. Either freewilly or willycat keeps up the steady drumbeat. Whatever. We aren't Duke, I don't want to be Duke. So someone needs to confirm that every other school cheats on admissions, including Stanford and Vandy, who have been to the tourney 10x as much as us. If, indeed, every other school (every single P6 school) relaxes admissions, and we don't/won't, then I'll embrace the suck. Otherwise STFU about admissions

 

[Catreporter]

ome on, reporter. One could pretty easily argue that 1/2 of the Big Ten bowl tie-ins are lower tier and certainly comparable to the NIT.

Many NIT games are not televised and those that are aren't promoted as part of ESPN's "bowl week" during Christmas and New Years when lots of people have time on their hands to watch on TV or travel to the game, so no, they are not comparable to a tournament almost nobody watches or cares about.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

I cheer for NU sports because of what they aspire to, what they stand for.

How are Vanderbilt's standards? Just curious (I legitimately don't know, but if they sold out, they don't have much to show for it in football).

Vanderbilt does not have as strict of admission requirements as NU.

 

[T_Levine]

I think the realistic goal and we should be able to achieve it, is to get into the ncaa two years in a row and then not then two years in a row. We will always be a developmental program that needs all the pieces to fit.
But if we were 2 on even 2 off. I think we’d be very happy. Plus that would eventually build towards a consistent consideration for the tournament every year.

when I think big ten basketball there is no reason we can’t be like Wisconsin. They have no built in basketball advantage. Actually, I’d argue what northwestern offers should be a draw for those recruits considering a Wisconsin that could get into northwestern.

if we could do that we’d be a 4-8 big ten team year in and year out.

Maybe mich. Mich state. Illinois and Purdue have historical evidence. I didn’t include Indiana because post Bobby knight they have been average. Maryland has dropped enough as well. Who knows what happens to mich state post izzo. And who knows if Michigan can be consistent.

we should at least be a team that can compete for number four but not Ever fight to stay out of the bottom four

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

I'm tired of the admissions tripe. Either freewilly or willycat keeps up the steady drumbeat. Whatever. We aren't Duke, I don't want to be Duke. So someone needs to confirm that every other school cheats on admissions, including Stanford and Vandy, who have been to the tourney 10x as much as us. If, indeed, every other school (every single P6 school) relaxes admissions, and we don't/won't, then I'll embrace the suck. Otherwise STFU about admissions

You can be tired of the admissions tripe all you want, it doesn’t make it a non-factor in why the NU is a tough proposition for any Coach. You can call it cheating but it’s not. They simply follow NCAA minimum requirements. There is nothing illegal or immoral about that. It’s a choice. A few people around here seem to think lowering those standards would suddenly destroy NU’s elite academic reputation and let in the dregs of the earth. BS. We are so high and mighty we can disparage Duke? Last time I checked it’s a damn good university. There are a boatload of reasons NU has never had consistent streak of winning seasons. A very big one is the imbalance in admissions acceptances. We literally have former athletic department employees that are regular posters on these boards that reviewed transcripts for potential recruits confirming the admission standards are more difficult than every other P5- P6 School except Stanford. How much proof do people want? So embrace the suck.

 

[AdamOnFirst]

I'm tired of the admissions tripe. Either freewilly or willycat keeps up the steady drumbeat. Whatever. We aren't Duke, I don't want to be Duke. So someone needs to confirm that every other school cheats on admissions, including Stanford and Vandy, who have been to the tourney 10x as much as us. If, indeed, every other school (every single P6 school) relaxes admissions, and we don't/won't, then I'll embrace the suck. Otherwise STFU about admissions

In the case of basketball, admissions aren’t a great excuse. They shatter consistent success, but there’s no reason we can’t have good enough teams to make the tourney a couple times a decade and some runup NITs in there. You just don’t need that many guys to hit in basketball.

 

[hoosboot]

Many NIT games are not televised and those that are aren't promoted as part of ESPN's "bowl week" during Christmas and New Years when lots of people have time on their hands to watch on TV or travel to the game, so no, they are not comparable to a tournament almost nobody watches or cares about.

Dude...you keep looking at it from a fan and media perspective. I'm talking about taking steps to raise and improve the program's competitiveness. A marketing construct built by ESPN because football is markedly bigger $ than basketball has very little to do with building a program's success. Those bowls would still be important measuring sticks even if they weren't on TV. If you can't see that consistent post-season appearances of some kind are a major step that would be benchmarked by players, and coaches, I guess we don't have much to discuss.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Vanderbilt does not have as strict of admission requirements as NU.

Because Vanderbilt is not as prestigious academically as Northwestern.

 

[hoosboot]

You can be tired of the admissions tripe all you want, it doesn’t make it a non-factor in why the NU is a tough proposition for any Coach. You can call it cheating but it’s not. They simply follow NCAA minimum requirements. There is nothing illegal or immoral about that. It’s a choice. A few people around here seem to think lowering those standards would suddenly destroy NU’s elite academic reputation and let in the dregs of the earth. BS. We are so high and mighty we can disparage Duke? Last time I checked it’s a damn good university. There are a boatload of reasons NU has never had consistent streak of winning seasons. A very big one is the imbalance in admissions acceptances. We literally have former athletic department employees that are regular posters on these boards that reviewed transcripts for potential recruits confirming the admission standards are more difficult than every other P5- P6 School except Stanford. How much proof do people want? So embrace the suck.

Totally agree that it's wrong to suggest that admissions aren't an issue. One of NU's great value propositions for scholarship athletes is its academic reputation, but it also very obviously limits the recruiting pool. But I also agree with Adam that it's not the only issue. It's part of a puzzle with several pieces and the program hasn't quite put the picture together yet. But there have been signs and there's a roadmap that seems readily apparent to me. While I'm not sure the approach he takes is always the perfect one, I think CCC may see it, too.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Everybody just keeps going around and around on this admissions thing.
NU already lowers its standards for football and basketball players.
Pretending otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

The university has some level of integrity that dictates what those standards are.
Other schools, like Duke, don't have as much integrity.
Stanford holds itself to a higher standard. I respect Stanford, not Duke.

Carmody faced the same issues that Collins faces.
Collins has an advantageous situation in recruiting relative to Carmody because the facilities are no longer an embarrassment. You can't just conveniently "forget" about that.

The modern transfer portal is a clear advantage for Collins relative to Carmody because a grad degree or undergrad degree from NU is very desirable and you don't have to sit out a year anymore.

Its still just a couple of players a year - the players who have the grades to get into NU are going to be inclined to WANT to go to a great academic school - unless they think they are NBA superstars. We should not bother with anyone like that. They'll leave the program at the drop of a hat anyhow.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Everybody just keeps going around and around on this admissions thing.
NU already lowers its standards for football and basketball players.
Pretending otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

The university has some level of integrity that dictates what those standards are.
Other schools, like Duke, don't have as much integrity.
Stanford holds itself to a higher standard. I respect Stanford, not Duke.

Carmody faced the same issues that Collins faces.
Collins has an advantageous situation in recruiting relative to Carmody because the facilities are no longer an embarrassment. You can't just conveniently "forget" about that.

The modern transfer portal is a clear advantage for Collins relative to Carmody because a grad degree or undergrad degree from NU is very desirable and you don't have to sit out a year anymore.

Its still just a couple of players a year - the players who have the grades to get into NU are going to be inclined to WANT to go to a great academic school - unless they think they are NBA superstars. We should not bother with anyone like that. They'll leave the program at the drop of a hat anyhow.

Of course they lower their standards for athletes PWB. No one ever said they didn’t. That is not the point that many are making here. What I am pointing out and have for years is those lower standards are STILL higher than every other P6 school outside of Stanford. Pretending otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

I love for us to be Duke. My bet is 95% of Duke alumni are just fine their level of integrity. There students sure are fine with it based on their rabid support. Again, I am not an alum or have a daughter at NU like you do. I want a frigging level playing field. I don’t jangle my keys at the opposition’s fans as they file out of WR after beating us.

I am not sure why Carmody is brought up. again, of course he faced the same academic restrictions. Players win games. The single most important thing to win games is having good players. We need more of them now and so did Carmody.

Yes, we now have a decent arena. However, it’s mostly filled with opposition fans or empty purple seats. The atmosphere absolutely blows unless the students show up. That has to be very appealing for all this top recruits. The arena is hardly so awe aspiring that recruits say I just got to play in that building.

 

[willycat]

I'm tired of the admissions tripe. Either freewilly or willycat keeps up the steady drumbeat. Whatever. We aren't Duke, I don't want to be Duke. So someone needs to confirm that every other school cheats on admissions, including Stanford and Vandy, who have been to the tourney 10x as much as us. If, indeed, every other school (every single P6 school) relaxes admissions, and we don't/won't, then I'll embrace the suck. Otherwise STFU about admissions

well, they all do. Now don't STFU.

 

[willycat]

In the case of basketball, admissions aren’t a great excuse. They shatter consistent success, but there’s no reason we can’t have good enough teams to make the tourney a couple times a decade and some runup NITs in there. You just don’t need that many guys to hit in basketball.

have you watched NU basketball for the last 20 plus years?

 

[7th Cir. Cat]

I didn't say "its easy."
I said "it isn't that tough."
2 high schoolers and one transfer a year and you are a good program...

And the flipside of that appears to be "woe is me, we have academic standards"

The transfer portal would be a huge boost for NU if potential players thought the coach was pretty good, because the Northwestern diploma is the 2nd or 3rd best in the Power 5.

As Ricky Roma said in Glengarry - "Your excuses are your own."

In my opinion, the value of the diploma doesn't carry that much weight in recruiting because the "academic” P5 schools have good basketball traditions so it's not much of a differentiator (Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Georgia Tech, Stanford etc) The exceptions being Duke which has an excellent tradition and non P5 Harvard which has surged under Amaker.

To Troy Murphy and Cormac Ryan (heck throw in Luke Harangody who was from Illinois) the NU degree can't overcome the lack of winning tradition especially when you can get a dipoloma from a school that to 95% of the country (and employers) is essentially the same. I can't imagine saying you were a D1 athlete at Stanford, Georgetown or Notre Dame puts you at any disadvantage in a job interview.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Of course they lower their standards for athletes PWB. No one ever said they didn’t. That is not the point that many are making here. What I am pointing out and have for years is those lower standards are STILL higher than every other P6 school outside of Stanford. Pretending otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

I love for us to be Duke. My bet is 95% of Duke alumni are just fine their level of integrity. There students sure are fine with it based on their rabid support. Again, I am not an alum or have a daughter at NU like you do. I want a frigging level playing field. I don’t jangle my keys at the opposition’s fans as they file out of WR after beating us.

I am not sure why Carmody is brought up. again, of course he faced the same academic restrictions. Players win games. The single most important thing to win games is having good players. We need more of them now and so did Carmody.

Yes, we now have a decent arena. However, it’s mostly filled with opposition fans or empty purple seats. The atmosphere absolutely blows unless the students show up. That has to be very appealing for all this top recruits. The arena is hardly so awe aspiring that recruits say I just got to play in that building.

College basketball doesn't have a level playing field!
And it won't.

I brought up Carmody because people bring him up all the time. Many compare Collins' success or lack thereof to Carmody's success or lack thereof. Sometimes the "Collins has raised the program" people will ignore the advantages Collins has relative to Carmody when it comes to recruiting.

Stanford has higher standards, presumably, than NU. They should - its a better school. We are better academically than anybody in the Big Ten and should have the highest academic standards for athletes in the league.

Most "smart" kids would rather go to Northwestern than Ohio State, as long as their dream isn't to play professional sports. Those kids are our bread and butter. Plenty of talented athletes that fit the bill, just not too many in the Top 50.

Thats our reality. There's only four ways to be more successful that come to my mind.

1. You could lower the academic standards for freshmen and watch those kids struggle in school, but broaden the talent pool.
2. You could use the transfer portal to great advantage, leveraging NU's academic reputation with quality (non-NBA) players.
3. You could recruit high schoolers more effectively and most importantly, more realistically.
4. You could hire a better coach.

 

[phatcat]

well, they all do. Now don't STFU.

To be clear, your position is that every other P6 school cheats on bball admissions and NU doesn't?

 

[catfans5]

I am/was a vocal critic of CC. This post has morphed into a discussion about other things, but I will keep my post directed toward CC. I think next year is his make/break year, but there are some items that are a result of his stamp on the program that are important to consider:

a) In game coaching. His substitution pattern and failure to really drives me nuts. Some of the terrible shot selection, inability to break and attack a press, and not riding the hot hand drives me nuts. However, I did see a glimmer. In the Rutgers game, when a run was made against us, we were settling for jump shots. After a timeout, there was a change in the offense with a focus on getting to the hoop with Greer running the show. It was a nice adjustment. In person, you saw a more free flowing offense. It was the difference. In the Indiana game, Indy's starting pg was eating Buie up. I posted and screamed at the game that they should switch Buie to cover Kopp who stands there, cannot shoot a contested 3, and cannot put the ball on the ground. After a timeout, there was that switch. I am not saying I am brilliant, but the move allowed Buie to rest on defense and put a player with size on Indy's pg. It was a subtle change, but I thought it made a difference in the outcome;

b) Defense. At the games, you can really see the defensive intensity. There is a lot of discussion of Audige, but the team really fights through screens, hedges well and plays excellent help defense. There is a lot of criticism of Beran, but he is an effective defender. He actually has some decent lateral movement The most important of his game is that he keep the other team's forward off the boards. I think this is why CC plays him. The defense this year is a major improvement;

c) Rebounding. The whole team rebounds. It is not just Vic and Lumpkin, but everyone rebounds, even Buie. The rebounding is not just Pete getting 20 rebounds, but when you are at the game, you can see the players are keeping their assignments and not letting the opponent get to the boards. Now, you are going to get teams which have superior big men or athletes, but we are not completely overmatched on the boards. How many times do we see defensive rebounds where there are 2 or 3 NU players surrounding the ball coming off the rim? A lot more than I remember. There obviously is a huge commitment to rebounding which yields benefits;

d) Abandonment of the mid range game and reliance on the high post. I have a problem with his total reliance on the 3 point game. We just do not shoot that well. You have a problem with the high post game which gets stagnant. Our other 3 players just stand there and the cuts to the basket are few and far in between;

e) Practice. This is where, I think, NU has improved. Rarely, do we see a team come in blow us off the court in the first five minutes. Our starting line up is Buie, Roper, Beran, Audige and Nance. Who do they practice against? Greer, Simmons, Barnhizer, Williams, Young, Berry and Nicholson. Practices have to be much better since the reserves can better replicate the size and quickness confronted in a game. I think this next offseason will see a huge jump in Berry, Simmons, Roper and Barnhizer. Just better practice teammates; and,

f) Big 3 and returning experience If we do not have transfers and Nance leaves, CC will have a pretty good big three in Buie, Audige and Young. I am not saying they are superstars, but they showed this year that they can compete in the B10. Each can go off, but I think we will get more consistent performance from them night in night out. We will also have a ton ox experience with expected improvement from our frosh.

Conclusion: If I am the AD, CC gets one more year. Frankly, it is make or break. I think the extra time is also a nod to all the impediments present in the program, but ten years is long eneough.

 

[phatcat]

I am/was a vocal critic of CC. This post has morphed into a discussion about other things, but I will keep my post directed toward CC. I think next year is his make/break year, but there are some items that are a result of his stamp on the program that are important to consider:

a) In game coaching. His substitution pattern and failure to really drives me nuts. Some of the terrible shot selection, inability to break and attack a press, and not riding the hot hand drives me nuts. However, I did see a glimmer. In the Rutgers game, when a run was made against us, we were settling for jump shots. After a timeout, there was a change in the offense with a focus on getting to the hoop with Greer running the show. It was a nice adjustment. In person, you saw a more free flowing offense. It was the difference. In the Indiana game, Indy's starting pg was eating Buie up. I posted and screamed at the game that they should switch Buie to cover Kopp who stands there, cannot shoot a contested 3, and cannot put the ball on the ground. After a timeout, there was that switch. I am not saying I am brilliant, but the move allowed Buie to rest on defense and put a player with size on Indy's pg. It was a subtle change, but I thought it made a difference in the outcome;

b) Defense. At the games, you can really see the defensive intensity. There is a lot of discussion of Audige, but the team really fights through screens, hedges well and plays excellent help defense. There is a lot of criticism of Beran, but he is an effective defender. He actually has some decent lateral movement The most important of his game is that he keep the other team's forward off the boards. I think this is why CC plays him. The defense this year is a major improvement;

c) Rebounding. The whole team rebounds. It is not just Vic and Lumpkin, but everyone rebounds, even Buie. The rebounding is not just Pete getting 20 rebounds, but when you are at the game, you can see the players are keeping their assignments and not letting the opponent get to the boards. Now, you are going to get teams which have superior big men or athletes, but we are not completely overmatched on the boards. How many times do we see defensive rebounds where there are 2 or 3 NU players surrounding the ball coming off the rim? A lot more than I remember. There obviously is a huge commitment to rebounding which yields benefits;

d) Abandonment of the mid range game and reliance on the high post. I have a problem with his total reliance on the 3 point game. We just do not shoot that well. You have a problem with the high post game which gets stagnant. Our other 3 players just stand there and the cuts to the basket are few and far in between;

e) Practice. This is where, I think, NU has improved. Rarely, do we see a team come in blow us off the court in the first five minutes. Our starting line up is Buie, Roper, Beran, Audige and Nance. Who do they practice against? Greer, Simmons, Barnhizer, Williams, Young, Berry and Nicholson. Practices have to be much better since the reserves can better replicate the size and quickness confronted in a game. I think this next offseason will see a huge jump in Berry, Simmons, Roper and Barnhizer. Just better practice teammates; and,

f) Big 3 and returning experience If we do not have transfers and Nance leaves, CC will have a pretty good big three in Buie, Audige and Young. I am not saying they are superstars, but they showed this year that they can compete in the B10. Each can go off, but I think we will get more consistent performance from them night in night out. We will also have a ton ox experience with expected improvement from our frosh.

Conclusion: If I am the AD, CC gets one more year. Frankly, it is make or break. I think the extra time is also a nod to all the impediments present in the program, but ten years is long eneough.

Dammit. I can't disagree with any of this

 

[Catreporter]

consistent post-season appearances of some kind are a major step

Much harder to do playing in the Big Ten now with the new NIT guidelines. I remember when 14-13, 5-13, got us in back during the Ricky Byrdsong era. Wouldn't happen today even though that was a pretty good team.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

College basketball doesn't have a level playing field!
And it won't.

I brought up Carmody because people bring him up all the time. Many compare Collins' success or lack thereof to Carmody's success or lack thereof. Sometimes the "Collins has raised the program" people will ignore the advantages Collins has relative to Carmody when it comes to recruiting.

Stanford has higher standards, presumably, than NU. They should - its a better school. We are better academically than anybody in the Big Ten and should have the highest academic standards for athletes in the league.

Most "smart" kids would rather go to Northwestern than Ohio State, as long as their dream isn't to play professional sports. Those kids are our bread and butter. Plenty of talented athletes that fit the bill, just not too many in the Top 50.

Thats our reality. There's only four ways to be more successful that come to my mind.

1. You could lower the academic standards for freshmen and watch those kids struggle in school, but broaden the talent pool.
2. You could use the transfer portal to great advantage, leveraging NU's academic reputation with quality (non-NBA) players.
3. You could recruit high schoolers more effectively and most importantly, more realistically.
4. You could hire a better coach.

Those 4 ways you mention can’t be done in isolation. You might need to do ALL 4 to have success that people here expect.

You view of academic standards doesn’t jive with reality. Atheletes admission criteria is stack ranked academic prestige. Michigan doesn’t have different requirements than Nebraska. The ONLY difference is NU.

I don’t believe that most smart “athletes” would rather go to NU than OSU. That is our idyllic view formed by our own personal experiences. I can assure you that nearly every player in the top 200 had dreams of playing professionally and thinks with the right assistance it can happen. Pretty sure out recruiting pitch isn’t that we know you are a long shot to make the pro’s, but we think you can get a good education here to offset that. We sell both! Oh, and being an athlete at OSU is probably way more appealing than being on at NU for a myriad of reasons.

Just changing the HC isn’t going to make us a consistent winner. That has been proven time and time again.

 

[willycat]

Everybody just keeps going around and around on this admissions thing.
NU already lowers its standards for football and basketball players.
Pretending otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

The university has some level of integrity that dictates what those standards are.
Other schools, like Duke, don't have as much integrity.
Stanford holds itself to a higher standard. I respect Stanford, not Duke.

Carmody faced the same issues that Collins faces.
Collins has an advantageous situation in recruiting relative to Carmody because the facilities are no longer an embarrassment. You can't just conveniently "forget" about that.

The modern transfer portal is a clear advantage for Collins relative to Carmody because a grad degree or undergrad degree from NU is very desirable and you don't have to sit out a year anymore.

Its still just a couple of players a year - the players who have the grades to get into NU are going to be inclined to WANT to go to a great academic school - unless they think they are NBA superstars. We should not bother with anyone like that. They'll leave the program at the drop of a hat anyhow.

You do understand that facility upgrades were part of the Collins offer, right? In order to win with some consistency you need a couple of NBA type guys evry season.

In my opinion, the value of the diploma doesn't carry that much weight in recruiting because the "academic” P5 schools have good basketball traditions so it's not much of a differentiator (Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown, Georgia Tech, Stanford etc) The exceptions being Duke which has an excellent tradition and non P5 Harvard which has surged under Amaker.

To Troy Murphy and Cormac Ryan (heck throw in Luke Harangody who was from Illinois) the NU degree can't overcome the lack of winning tradition especially when you can get a dipoloma from a school that to 95% of the country (and employers) is essentially the same. I can't imagine saying you were a D1 athlete at Stanford, Georgetown or Notre Dame puts you at any disadvantage in a job interview.

Oh yes it does. That's according to my wife who headed the personal department at well known business.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

I am/was a vocal critic of CC. This post has morphed into a discussion about other things, but I will keep my post directed toward CC. I think next year is his make/break year, but there are some items that are a result of his stamp on the program that are important to consider:

a) In game coaching. His substitution pattern and failure to really drives me nuts. Some of the terrible shot selection, inability to break and attack a press, and not riding the hot hand drives me nuts. However, I did see a glimmer. In the Rutgers game, when a run was made against us, we were settling for jump shots. After a timeout, there was a change in the offense with a focus on getting to the hoop with Greer running the show. It was a nice adjustment. In person, you saw a more free flowing offense. It was the difference. In the Indiana game, Indy's starting pg was eating Buie up. I posted and screamed at the game that they should switch Buie to cover Kopp who stands there, cannot shoot a contested 3, and cannot put the ball on the ground. After a timeout, there was that switch. I am not saying I am brilliant, but the move allowed Buie to rest on defense and put a player with size on Indy's pg. It was a subtle change, but I thought it made a difference in the outcome;

b) Defense. At the games, you can really see the defensive intensity. There is a lot of discussion of Audige, but the team really fights through screens, hedges well and plays excellent help defense. There is a lot of criticism of Beran, but he is an effective defender. He actually has some decent lateral movement The most important of his game is that he keep the other team's forward off the boards. I think this is why CC plays him. The defense this year is a major improvement;

c) Rebounding. The whole team rebounds. It is not just Vic and Lumpkin, but everyone rebounds, even Buie. The rebounding is not just Pete getting 20 rebounds, but when you are at the game, you can see the players are keeping their assignments and not letting the opponent get to the boards. Now, you are going to get teams which have superior big men or athletes, but we are not completely overmatched on the boards. How many times do we see defensive rebounds where there are 2 or 3 NU players surrounding the ball coming off the rim? A lot more than I remember. There obviously is a huge commitment to rebounding which yields benefits;

d) Abandonment of the mid range game and reliance on the high post. I have a problem with his total reliance on the 3 point game. We just do not shoot that well. You have a problem with the high post game which gets stagnant. Our other 3 players just stand there and the cuts to the basket are few and far in between;

e) Practice. This is where, I think, NU has improved. Rarely, do we see a team come in blow us off the court in the first five minutes. Our starting line up is Buie, Roper, Beran, Audige and Nance. Who do they practice against? Greer, Simmons, Barnhizer, Williams, Young, Berry and Nicholson. Practices have to be much better since the reserves can better replicate the size and quickness confronted in a game. I think this next offseason will see a huge jump in Berry, Simmons, Roper and Barnhizer. Just better practice teammates; and,

f) Big 3 and returning experience If we do not have transfers and Nance leaves, CC will have a pretty good big three in Buie, Audige and Young. I am not saying they are superstars, but they showed this year that they can compete in the B10. Each can go off, but I think we will get more consistent performance from them night in night out. We will also have a ton ox experience with expected improvement from our frosh.

Conclusion: If I am the AD, CC gets one more year. Frankly, it is make or break. I think the extra time is also a nod to all the impediments present in the program, but ten years is long eneough.

You list a lot of problems with the substitution patterns, in-game coaching, the actual offense itself.
These are real problems, specifically attributable to the head coach.

On the positive side, you talk about things like "better practices" which are unknown, just a hypothesis, really. You talk about rebounding and defense. Defense is mainly effort and awareness. Rebounding is mainly attributable to size and effort. Most of our guys play hard. A few are not tough enough. Thats more a reflection of the players than the coaching, though coaching has some impact.

My main frustration with Collins is that his use of his players is poor and we underperform our talent. The random use of lineups makes that clear - there is no method to the madness. There is also no creativity. We have size to take advantage of and it sits on the bench while we shoot poorly from the perimeter. and lose games because our coach wants to play a style that doesn't suit his personnel.

He just isn't good enough at his job to retain.

 

[7th Cir. Cat]

Oh yes it does. That's according to my wife who headed the personal department at well known business.

So you’re telling me that job candidate who was a D1 athlete from Stanford is at a disadvantage for the D1 athlete who went to Northwestern? I find that really hard to believe.

 

[catfans5]

You list a lot of problems with the substitution patterns, in-game coaching, the actual offense itself.
These are real problems, specifically attributable to the head coach.

On the positive side, you talk about things like "better practices" which are unknown, just a hypothesis, really. You talk about rebounding and defense. Defense is mainly effort and awareness. Rebounding is mainly attributable to size and effort. Most of our guys play hard. A few are not tough enough. Thats more a reflection of the players than the coaching, though coaching has some impact.

My main frustration with Collins is that his use of his players is poor and we underperform our talent. The random use of lineups makes that clear - there is no method to the madness. There is also no creativity. We have size to take advantage of and it sits on the bench while we shoot poorly from the perimeter. and lose games because our coach wants to play a style that doesn't suit his personnel.

He just isn't good enough at his job to retain.

Rebounding is a taught skill. Yes, the players at this point know how to jump and grab a rebound, but at this level, there is so much more: 1) proper positioning at the rim; 2) Away from the rim to not let your man slip in to grab the board. Boxing out occurs all over the court. This has to be drilled into a player to become a habit; 2) The want to get the ball. If you are at the games, you can clearly see how many weak side rebounds our players get. This is a function of eliminating laziness and a demand to rebound. MSU used to drill NU on the boards. Most B10 teams did. This no longer occurs. Rebounding is a function of effort and a demand from the coaching staff. CC had definitely improved that aspect of NU's game.

Defense is a function of coaching. It is not pure effort. Anyone can defend when playing one on one in the driveway. At this level, it is being coached on a) where to funnel your player; b) where help will be, c) how to get in proper defensive position, d) proper footwork, d) how to hedge or double team up top, e) how to recover on a hedge, f) where off the ball player moves to protect the lane, g) where off ball defenders positions themselves to provide help, h) where and how you use your hands, but more importantly your legs to slide the opponent out and away from the hoop, h) how you will defend the pick and roll, i) how you will help your teammate get through screens and by screens, j) whether you go under or above a screen and k) closing out. These are all drilled into their heads. If you go to a high level basketball practice, this is what they teach. The entire team plays much more defensive intensity and success. This is a function of coaching. CC gets credit for that improvement, at least what is seen this year. If you cannot see that or do not want to see it, I cannot help you.

As to better practice, IIRC, you are the person who speaks about how good MN is. If you say 'yes' and he is the second coming, does not his presence in defending Young and Nance in practice make them better because they have to play against such a tough opponent and thereby making the practices better? I think CC has more and better depth. I don't know, but usually in life, when you compete against better foes, one normally improves. I don't think better players means better practices is a hypothesis, but something we see in every aspect of life.

I do agree with you on some of the other points. I can see saying enough is enough after this year.

 

[GatoLouco]

Regarding the portal, what is everyone feeling as it relates to NU?

1) on the one hand I am tempted to believe we would be well positioned with older players, especially grad students. The ones who have had their experiences, know being a pro is a mirage and are presented with the possibility of having a prestigious degree.

2) on the other hand these kids might desperately want to just have one shot, one season that could be special, playing deep into the tournament maybe. And that’s not NU