ADVERTISEMENT

ESPN Take on NU Hoops

The essence of NU hoops has been captured again, and again, and again, and again by various articles and news outlets over the past couple of years. It's BOOOOOOORIIIIINNNNNGGGGG to keep talking about how much better of a recruiter, how much more energetic, etc. Collins is than Carmody. Everyone could see that from day one. Carmody had many widely publicized flaws....and guess what: HE GOT FIRED! It's over. Why in the world are we talking about the Princeton and 1-3-1 zone (other than the fact the author is apparently a lazy hack)?

Talk to me about the system, about the actual recruits and how they fit, the prospects for next year, how the schedule shapes up, the zone vs. man, the offense. Talk to me about anything else besides Bill ****ing Carmody at this point. This article doesn't even mention most of our players!

Don't kid yourself...until we make the tournament, we are irrelevant--I don't like it, but that's what it is.
But make no mistake.... this article isn't written for die-hard NU fans like you and me. Heck... there are only about 50 of us that will read that article. Its written for the fan of other BiG teams or the casual sports fan who happens to click on it because they are bored at work. The difference in coaching styles is THE story line of NU hoops at the moment until either CC succeeds wildly or starts to flame out.
 
The article says nothing about NU's basketball team.

Carmody, who has been gone for over two years, gets 500 words. Falzon, Law and B Mac are mentioned.

Alex Olah is not mentioned.

Scottie Lyndsey is not mentioned

JVZ is not mentioned.

Pardon and Ash are not mentioned.

Skelly is not mentioned.

It's a vacuous piece.
This exactly.
 
But make no mistake.... this article isn't written for die-hard NU fans like you and me. Heck... there are only about 50 of us that will read that article. Its written for the fan of other BiG teams or the casual sports fan who happens to click on it because they are bored at work. The difference in coaching styles is THE story line of NU hoops at the moment until either CC succeeds wildly or starts to flame out.

Why isn't the story line of Minnesota hoops the difference between Richard Pitino and Tubby Smith?
 
Why isn't the story line of Minnesota hoops the difference between Richard Pitino and Tubby Smith?

Because Minnesota has had great recruiters in the past. NU has NEVER in modern history had a coach that has shown the kind of recruiting prowess CC has. It is certainly notable.
 
Because Minnesota has had great recruiters in the past. NU has NEVER in modern history had a coach that has shown the kind of recruiting prowess CC has. It is certainly notable.

Minnesota just went from a coach with national championship experience to an inexperienced coach whose only claim to fame is his famous father. How do their approaches to the game differ? How are their locker rooms handled? How is it different having Pitino in a recruit's living room and not Smith? You could easily write half the preview on that topic if you wanted. But they didn't, because it's a meaningless topic now that Pitino is heading into his third season. Instead, their preview is a fairly detailed evaluation of their returning players, their freshman signees, and the team's prospects going forward. And that's for a program that, to the "casual sports fan," is almost as nationally irrelevant as Northwestern.

"Chris Collins is a better recruiter than Bill Carmody," while true, tells us absolutely nothing about how the 2015-16 team is going to perform on the court.
 
You're complaining because the article wasn't glowing about Carmody. If it had, I'm guessing you'd probably have no problem with it.

Regardless, NU bball's biggest story IS the new the coach right now, and the kind of recruits he's bringing that give optimism for the future. So the story absolutely hit the essence of the current storyline for our bball team, which is hit upon all time in this very forum.
 
Garbage is a strong word. The article isn't written on Wildcat Report. For the vast majority of readers (basically everyone but we schleps on this board), this is informative and spot on. For them, an article talking about the points people would have rather have seen would be irrelevant. And it is further information for the Carmody hugging holdouts to chew on, since they appear not to understand the information within.

Frankly, I'm very happy with the piece as it is good press for NU, which is all you can ask for, for a nationally syndicated article.

No it was complete garbage. The article did provide an excuse that Carmody was an awful recruiter (but that's not really completely fair) and said that Collins is different. So to someone that doesn't know and doesn't care, I guess that's a net positive, but they probably aren't really reading the article to begin with just like I didn't bother to read the equivalent article on Washington State.

The title of the article is looking ahead and all it did was look back at Carmody's lack of recruiting success and then say Collins has changed things by recruiting. Things that would be better to talk about rather than the recruiting ability of Chris Collins and Bill Carmody:

The system that Chris Collins wants/will run now that he has 2 full recruiting classes to that should fit his system.

Bryant McIntosh's mental acumen at the point guard spot.

Tre Demps and Alex Olah continued development as seniors

Tre Demps's ability as "Captain Clutch" (athletic department's words on his birthday facebook shout out) and how
that can keep us out of the close loses we had last season

The guard rotation or Demps, McIntosh, and Ash which I think will be the best in my memory.

How Lindsey and Law will compete for playing time on the wing.

Pardon, Falzon, Olah, and JVG at the 4-5 position actually making NU big and physical enough to compete in the big ten.
 
You're complaining because the article wasn't glowing about Carmody. If it had, I'm guessing you'd probably have no problem with it.

Please quote any of my posts in this thread which indicate that I want the article to talk about Bill Carmody at all, positively or negatively. Otherwise please respond to the posts I actually write, not the ones you dream up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ColumbusCatFan1
No it was complete garbage. The article did provide an excuse that Carmody was an awful recruiter (but that's not really completely fair) and said that Collins is different. So to someone that doesn't know and doesn't care, I guess that's a net positive, but they probably aren't really reading the article to begin with just like I didn't bother to read the equivalent article on Washington State.

The title of the article is looking ahead and all it did was look back at Carmody's lack of recruiting success and then say Collins has changed things by recruiting. Things that would be better to talk about rather than the recruiting ability of Chris Collins and Bill Carmody:

The system that Chris Collins wants/will run now that he has 2 full recruiting classes to that should fit his system.

Bryant McIntosh's mental acumen at the point guard spot.

Tre Demps and Alex Olah continued development as seniors

Tre Demps's ability as "Captain Clutch" (athletic department's words on his birthday facebook shout out) and how
that can keep us out of the close loses we had last season

The guard rotation or Demps, McIntosh, and Ash which I think will be the best in my memory.

How Lindsey and Law will compete for playing time on the wing.

Pardon, Falzon, Olah, and JVG at the 4-5 position actually making NU big and physical enough to compete in the big ten.
I agree. Those would all be great articles, and if they don't become articles, they should at least be topics for us to kick around here during the summer.
 
Absolutely horrible article.
Where does he mention that after decades of B1G futility, NU started playing competitive B1G basketball (even getting to the .500 mark) fairly early in the BC's regime? Where does he say that (except for the last injury-riddled season) NU put a string of years of NIT appearances (yes, not as good as making the NCAA-T but fairly significant) following competitive B1G seasons (winning 7-8 reg. s. B1G games)? Where does he mention that under BC NU was routinely getting players with solid offer lists, including from decent B1G programs like IOA and Illinois? Wasn't Sina a top 100 player? Etc., etc. For a coach that was so bad at recruiting, NU was doing reasonably well, it seems....He makes a huge deal of BC's apparent low interest in Law, which, if true, could have been the result of Law's skill set being more appropriate for a non-Princeton type of O (which CC instituted)...Etc. Etc.
A VERY BAD article, for sure.
Who outside of NU gives a c**p? Basically he is saying that recruiting at NU is on an upswing and that O and D are different than they were. There is a blurb on every team and they are basically fluff pieces.
 
We all know that the success of the upcoming year's basketball team hinges on the continued development of Olah and Demps as the leaders of the team and the continued development of the sophs - McIntosh, Law and Lindsey and hopefully Skelly. But from a national perspective, until NU breaks down through the NCAA tournament door, the main issue will be when or if it will happen and why it hasn't happened in early years as others have done a good job in their posts pointing out.
 
Please quote any of my posts in this thread which indicate that I want the article to talk about Bill Carmody at all, positively or negatively. Otherwise please respond to the posts I actually write, not the ones you dream up.
That's what the 2nd half of my previous post was for, which you convieniently ignored. :)
 
I will say this -- good or bad, this article probably produced more clicks and comments than any five standard, here's-who-is-coming-back, here's-the-new-guys NU previews would have generated. This guy obviously knows nothing generates interest in NU basketball like a good, old fashioned Carmody-vs-CC debate.
 
No it was complete garbage. The article did provide an excuse that Carmody was an awful recruiter (but that's not really completely fair) and said that Collins is different. So to someone that doesn't know and doesn't care, I guess that's a net positive, but they probably aren't really reading the article to begin with just like I didn't bother to read the equivalent article on Washington State.

The title of the article is looking ahead and all it did was look back at Carmody's lack of recruiting success and then say Collins has changed things by recruiting. Things that would be better to talk about rather than the recruiting ability of Chris Collins and Bill Carmody:

The system that Chris Collins wants/will run now that he has 2 full recruiting classes to that should fit his system.

Bryant McIntosh's mental acumen at the point guard spot.

Tre Demps and Alex Olah continued development as seniors

Tre Demps's ability as "Captain Clutch" (athletic department's words on his birthday facebook shout out) and how
that can keep us out of the close loses we had last season

The guard rotation or Demps, McIntosh, and Ash which I think will be the best in my memory.

How Lindsey and Law will compete for playing time on the wing.

Pardon, Falzon, Olah, and JVG at the 4-5 position actually making NU big and physical enough to compete in the big ten.
Don't you think we all need to wait and see what NU BB looks like after Collins has a squad of all of his recruits?
 
This guy obviously knows nothing generates interest in NU basketball like a good, old fashioned Carmody-vs-CC debate.

Sad but true. But it's the same old tired arguments, would rather just move on. No one has changed their opinion as a result of these debates.......
 
I will say this -- good or bad, this article probably produced more clicks and comments than any five standard, here's-who-is-coming-back, here's-the-new-guys NU previews

Ooooo, never thought of that in this context. You're probably right, Idaho.

I can't believe the board is 59 messages into this discussion. If this is what results from unimaginative writing, let's hope Fred Mitchell from the Tribune never becomes a regular beat writer for NU.
 
I will say this -- good or bad, this article probably produced more clicks and comments than any five standard, here's-who-is-coming-back, here's-the-new-guys NU previews would have generated. This guy obviously knows nothing generates interest in NU basketball like a good, old fashioned Carmody-vs-CC debate.

The article was worthless as a preview article. Any die-hard, reads-college-hoops-in-May college basketball fan, if they know anything about NU hoops, knows the 'close but not cigar' story that was actual news half a decade ago.

The writer wanted to stir up some interest here (sheesh, isn't that kind of a sad station in life), or simply wanted to self-plagiarize an article from several months or years ago, because he was on a deadline.

I wonder what the reaction would have been if he wrote an incisive analysis of Vic's February surge, Mac's February fade, Lindsey's D, Olah's flashes of total dominance, Demps' absurd Michigan performances, and the circumstances surrounding JVZ's departure and where he fits in on a perimeter-oriented team.

Probably,
Post 1: (link) "pretty insightful article.
Excites me for this year."
Post 2: " cool. Good article. Thanks for finding it."
Post 3. (No post three.)
 
Absolutely horrible article.
Where does he mention that after decades of B1G futility, NU started playing competitive B1G basketball (even getting to the .500 mark) fairly early in the BC's regime? Where does he say that (except for the last injury-riddled season) NU put a string of years of NIT appearances (yes, not as good as making the NCAA-T but fairly significant) following competitive B1G seasons (winning 7-8 reg. s. B1G games)? Where does he mention that under BC NU was routinely getting players with solid offer lists, including from decent B1G programs like IOA and Illinois? Wasn't Sina a top 100 player? Etc., etc. For a coach that was so bad at recruiting, NU was doing reasonably well, it seems....He makes a huge deal of BC's apparent low interest in Law, which, if true, could have been the result of Law's skill set being more appropriate for a non-Princeton type of O (which CC instituted)...Etc. Etc.
A VERY BAD article, for sure.

Why is Vic Law's skill set less appropriate for the Princeton offense? He is actually a pretty good passer (he made several really nice entry passes into Olah later in the season), has the potential to be a good ball handler for his size and ended up shooting 35.5% on 3-pointers. The weakest part of his game last year was driving to the basket (which suits the Princeton offense just fine). He is an elite athlete and a great rebounder for his size, but I assume that you don't have to be an average athlete to excel in the Princeton offense. Having a low interest in Law (if that's true) is hard to explain. Having a 6'8" athletic player on your team is never a bad idea at NU, even if he just plays 10 to 15 minutes of great defense and grabs a few precious rebounds. The biggest issue for Carmody iin recruiting was depth and adding Law could only have been a good thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJCat83588
Why is Vic Law's skill set less appropriate for the Princeton offense? He is actually a pretty good passer (he made several really nice entry passes into Olah later in the season), has the potential to be a good ball handler for his size and ended up shooting 35.5% on 3-pointers. The weakest part of his game last year was driving to the basket (which suits the Princeton offense just fine). He is an elite athlete and a great rebounder for his size, but I assume that you don't have to be an average athlete to excel in the Princeton offense. Having a low interest in Law (if that's true) is hard to explain. Having a 6'8" athletic player on your team is never a bad idea at NU, even if he just plays 10 to 15 minutes of great defense and grabs a few precious rebounds. The biggest issue for Carmody iin recruiting was depth and adding Law could only have been a good thing.
You must have been watching a different V. Law then I. Yes, he did improve his overall play during the season he remains an average in the passing game, if far from a good ball handler and is the type of player who wants to be part of an up-tempo offense and still think he will a fulltime starter by his junior year. NU needs better than average athlethes, not average, if they are to compepete in the Big Ten.
 
Why is Vic Law's skill set less appropriate for the Princeton offense? He is actually a pretty good passer (he made several really nice entry passes into Olah later in the season), has the potential to be a good ball handler for his size and ended up shooting 35.5% on 3-pointers. The weakest part of his game last year was driving to the basket (which suits the Princeton offense just fine). He is an elite athlete and a great rebounder for his size, but I assume that you don't have to be an average athlete to excel in the Princeton offense. Having a low interest in Law (if that's true) is hard to explain. Having a 6'8" athletic player on your team is never a bad idea at NU, even if he just plays 10 to 15 minutes of great defense and grabs a few precious rebounds. The biggest issue for Carmody iin recruiting was depth and adding Law could only have been a good thing.

Precisely. Why anyone would think Vic couldn't excel in the PO is beyond me. Hopefully he is continuing to work on creating his own shot, which seems more critical in the Collins offense than it was in the prior regime.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT