ADVERTISEMENT

Collins needs to go

Status
Not open for further replies.

ricko654321

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2006
4,171
3,179
113
Ever since the last time I posted this, we have played excellent basketball. However, I am not swayed. The facts are the facts. We need a change.

If someone accuses me of saying this is just to reverse jinx the team, I don't know what they are talking about. Collins should have been fired yesterday. This recent stretch is a fluke, we got lucky, we need a new coach, we have barely any chance at all to win any games the rest of the season.

GO CATS

(And great work tonight boys... 2 tough ones ahead of us, fight hard, winnable games after that)
Rick
 
If you thought Collins was a below average coach three games ago, there has been nothing to change your mind.

Rutgers was a coaching debacle. We won anyhow, because we are more talented and deeper than Rutgers.
Nebraska was a blowout against a team we are much more talented than.
Tonight we struggled against a team missing a bunch of players. We had better talent and depth. We won.
I didn't see Collins change a single thing about his approach during the game, other than (FINALLY) playing Nance and Young together down the stretch.
 
If you thought Collins was a below average coach three games ago, there has been nothing to change your mind.

Rutgers was a coaching debacle. We won anyhow, because we are more talented and deeper than Rutgers.
Nebraska was a blowout against a team we are much more talented than.
Tonight we struggled against a team missing a bunch of players. We had better talent and depth. We won.
I didn't see Collins change a single thing about his approach during the game, other than (FINALLY) playing Nance and Young together down the stretch.
Are you employed by the BTN?
 
Man, I just hope this never ending ranting gives you some personal joy, because it is otherwise miserable for most of the rest of us fans of the program, of which the coach is a part. No one played or coached perfectly - but we have won 3 in a row. And I’m pretty sure that’s never happened except for Collins’ tenure, and multiple times at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stpaulcat
If you thought Collins was a below average coach three games ago, there has been nothing to change your mind.

Rutgers was a coaching debacle. We won anyhow, because we are more talented and deeper than Rutgers.
Nebraska was a blowout against a team we are much more talented than.
Tonight we struggled against a team missing a bunch of players. We had better talent and depth. We won.
I didn't see Collins change a single thing about his approach during the game, other than (FINALLY) playing Nance and Young together down the stretch.
Agreed, however, I have always had an open mind. I said very early in the year that a winning season is progress. We play some crap teams so that is still possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ricko654321
Agreed, however, I have always had an open mind. I said very early in the year that a winning season is progress. We play some crap teams so that is still possible.
There are no crap teams in the B1G, just some better than others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drewjin
There are no crap teams in the B1G, just some better than others.
Nebraska and Minnesota are just plain terrible and we have 3 remaining games. Perhaps we will lose one or more, but those teams are bad. PSU and Iowa also below average teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IGNORE2
Agreed, however, I have always had an open mind. I said very early in the year that a winning season is progress. We play some crap teams so that is still possible.
Some of us think we should be 8-5 in the league, 16-6 overall.
Yet there were plenty of folks on this board trashing the team, claiming our talent is way below the rest of the Big Ten, blah blah blah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drewjin
If you thought Collins was a below average coach three games ago, there has been nothing to change your mind.

Rutgers was a coaching debacle. We won anyhow, because we are more talented and deeper than Rutgers.
Nebraska was a blowout against a team we are much more talented than.
Tonight we struggled against a team missing a bunch of players. We had better talent and depth. We won.
I didn't see Collins change a single thing about his approach during the game, other than (FINALLY) playing Nance and Young together down the stretch.
You seem angry. I don’t know why. I am very happy tonight. Thought we played and closed well. But just to be clear, Collins still needs to go. (!!)
 
You seem angry. I don’t know why. I am very happy tonight. Thought we played and closed well. But just to be clear, Collins still needs to go. (!!)
I am not angry at all.
I am glad we won the game tonight.
I am disappointed that our coach gave away 4 games this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IGNORE2
You would be wrong, the 'Cats did it in 2012 and twice in 2009.
Only once in 2009. One of the three-game win streaks during conference play included a random win over Chicago State.
 
Minnesota was 9-0 preseason with three road wins and Nebraska beat Clemson in the ACC Challenge, so no, they are not just plain terrible. Until we gave them a beatdown, the Huskers had been playing everybody pretty tough. Both teams lack depth.

Minnesota (NET #91) is not terrible. Nebraska (#197) is terrible.
 
Minnesota (NET #91) is not terrible. Nebraska (#197) is terrible.
I'm still in the Groucho Marx mode of "any team that loses to us must suck".

Anyone paying any attention at all knows we won* 3 in a row a) despite blowing a 25 point 2nd half lead b) against #197 and c) against a team that, on game day, was suddenly down 5-6 players. Hey, I'm happy for the wins and the break in the schedule. We'd just gone through a stretch where we lost 8 of 9, and had played 6 ranked teams.

Anyway, glad for the wins*, and there are winnable games left. I'll still be content with a >.500 record, for the year.
 
We won last night despite very poor shooting. If we shot a halfway decent percentage, we win by at least 20. Our poor shooting percentage has nothing to do with the coach. On the other hand, our rebounding has gotten much better over the course of the season, which I believe is directly related to coaching. Berry and Audige were terrible from distance in the IU game. Does anybody really think that Audige intended to bank that late 3, which was big for us. Boo's development has been fabulous, and he was clearly the best player on the floor for us in recent games. He absolutely embarrassed Kopp on that late drive to the hoop. I suspect the presence of his brother on the coaching staff has been very helpful to Boo. We need another consistent 3 point shooter to be really good.
 
We won last night despite very poor shooting. If we shot a halfway decent percentage, we win by at least 20. Our poor shooting percentage has nothing to do with the coach.
What? Why does rebounding relate to coaching, but shooting doesn't? That's silly.

Indiana shot badly as well and they actually have somewhat of an excuse with 5 guys playing 34 or more minutes in the game as they were down so many players. Should they be saying that they'd have won by double digits if they don't shoot badly? Northwestern is a poor shooting team overall. That like everything else (including the improved rebounding and resilience despite the struggles early in conference season) relate to coaching.
 
What? Why does rebounding relate to coaching, but shooting doesn't? That's silly.

Indiana shot badly as well and they actually have somewhat of an excuse with 5 guys playing 34 or more minutes in the game as they were down so many players. Should they be saying that they'd have won by double digits if they don't shoot badly? Northwestern is a poor shooting team overall. That like everything else (including the improved rebounding and resilience despite the struggles early in conference season) relate to coaching.
I know about as much about basketball as you can put in your ear; however, I do feel that shooting is a less coachable skill than rebounding or defense. But - what do I know?
 
  • Like
Reactions: No Chores
What? Why does rebounding relate to coaching, but shooting doesn't? That's silly.

Indiana shot badly as well and they actually have somewhat of an excuse with 5 guys playing 34 or more minutes in the game as they were down so many players. Should they be saying that they'd have won by double digits if they don't shoot badly? Northwestern is a poor shooting team overall. That like everything else (including the improved rebounding and resilience despite the struggles early in conference season) relate to coaching.
Sorry my friend, but I could not disagree more. I was a self-taught excellent shooter in high school, but everything I learned about defense and rebounding came directly from my local hall of fame coach. See phatcat's comment - he is absolutely correct. Collins did not teach Greer to shoot free throws, but he always shoots the technicals because he almost never misses. He missed one for the first time this season last night. We should have won by at least 20 last night if we had shot a bit better. IU was completely gassed by late in the game, and even had to play a walk-on for a bit. Woodsen did an excellent job with what he had available, but the Hoosiers should never have been in that game. We were only down 4 at the half despite being 1 for 13 from deep.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IGNORE2 and DaCat
I know about as much about basketball as you can put in your ear; however, I do feel that shooting is a less coachable skill than rebounding or defense. But - what do I know?
I would disagree with that. Shooting is a very coachable skill. But it's not just about the mechanics of shooting in a vacuum. It's also about what shots you take, who takes them, how open they are, and what you do to try to prioritize getting those shots in addition to just the mechanics of shooting. A closely guarded Ryan Greer layup is not the same as a Boo Buie or Chase Audige one.

I buy the old saw that rebounding and defense are effort and offense is organization, so that probably colors why I think those things are impacted strongly by coaching.
 
Sorry my friend, but I could not disagree more. I was a self-taught excellent shooter in high school, but everything I learned about defense and rebounding came directly from my local hall of fame coach. See phatcat's comment - he is absolutely correct. Collins did not teach Greer to shoot free throws, but he always shoots the technicals because he almost never misses. He missed one for the first time this season last night. We should have won by at least 20 last night if we had shot a bit better. IU was completely gassed by late in the game, and even had to play a walk-on for a bit. Woodsen did an excellent job with what he had available, but the Hoosiers should never have been in that game. We were only down 4 at the half despite being 1 for 13 from deep.
My experience is almost exactly the opposite, so that's really interesting. I know he's not the most popular person, but Bob Knight literally said that defense and rebounding are mostly effort at a camp I was at and that's always been the coaching that I've been around. I'm working on a project with a current college coach and he teaches a relatively complex defense that he still believes is primarily about effort. And I think the abundance of shooting coaches out there belies the idea that it's not a skill that is coached. I don't see a ton of rebounding coaches or defense coaches working the AAU and summer college player circuit, but maybe there are other explanations for that.

Regardless, Indiana can say the same thing. If only our players shot better (like we normally do), we would have won by double digits over NU (which normally doesn't shoot well.)
 
But it's not just about the mechanics of shooting in a vacuum. It's also about what shots you take, who takes them, how open they are, and what you do to try to prioritize getting those shots in addition to just the mechanics of shooting.
This pretty much sums it up. And that’s why it was not that surprising that yesterday we shot poorly. It was too many bad shots.

Granted IU is physical, forces bad shots, and in those conditions, when you feel the physicality you start making bad decisions even when you are not forced into them. Still, too many dumb shots, way too many.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drewjin
My experience is almost exactly the opposite, so that's really interesting. I know he's not the most popular person, but Bob Knight literally said that defense and rebounding are mostly effort at a camp I was at and that's always been the coaching that I've been around. I'm working on a project with a current college coach and he teaches a relatively complex defense that he still believes is primarily about effort. And I think the abundance of shooting coaches out there belies the idea that it's not a skill that is coached. I don't see a ton of rebounding coaches or defense coaches working the AAU and summer college player circuit, but maybe there are other explanations for that.

Regardless, Indiana can say the same thing. If only our players shot better (like we normally do), we would have won by double digits over NU (which normally doesn't shoot well.)
anyway it feels like half of our missed shots this season are layups, so I my premise about shooting = talent is not applicable. I can't believe how many layups we miss. WTAF?
 
This pretty much sums it up. And that’s why it was not that surprising that yesterday we shot poorly. It was too many bad shots.

Granted IU is physical, forces bad shots, and in those conditions, when you feel the physicality you start making bad decisions even when you are not forced into them. Still, too many dumb shots, way too many.
Way too many dumb shots is right. We need better shooters. With IU's limited options in terms of number of available players, we should have won easily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: drewjin
anyway it feels like half of our missed shots this season are layups, so I my premise about shooting = talent is not applicable. I can't believe how many layups we miss. WTAF?
After watching IU last night, I am not sure all the missed layups are strictly a "Northwestern thing." IU missed its share of layups (putbacks, bunnies, etc.). There was a lot of tough defense being meted out deep inside the paint by both teams, and the game made me realize that being close to the hoop does not always equal an easy shot. So many of those shots are contested in various ways--getting bumped, being forced to move away from the hoop despite being close in, having a big sweaty paw in the face, etc.

We held Davis to 4 of 13 last night. We made it hard for him. Galloway, the guard, had a nice game by getting some drives early, but late in the game we locked him down well enough. He tried going to rim late a few times and got bagel.

The B1G is a physical conference. There are many capable, athletic bigs patrolling the paint. I don't think we are the only ones who have a hard time cashing in layups.
 
Galloway, the guard, had a nice game by getting some drives early, but late in the game we locked him down well enough. He tried going to rim late a few times and got bagel.
We definitely adjusted well on him, he scored 9 points in the first 5:42 and 4 points in the next 31:42. Also, all 5 of his fouls were earned in a 10-minute span of the 2nd half.
 
After watching IU last night, I am not sure all the missed layups are strictly a "Northwestern thing." IU missed its share of layups (putbacks, bunnies, etc.). There was a lot of tough defense being meted out deep inside the paint by both teams, and the game made me realize that being close to the hoop does not always equal an easy shot. So many of those shots are contested in various ways--getting bumped, being forced to move away from the hoop despite being close in, having a big sweaty paw in the face, etc.

We held Davis to 4 of 13 last night. We made it hard for him. Galloway, the guard, had a nice game by getting some drives early, but late in the game we locked him down well enough. He tried going to rim late a few times and got bagel.

The B1G is a physical conference. There are many capable, athletic bigs patrolling the paint. I don't think we are the only ones who have a hard time cashing in layups.
Although it seems driving to the basket and lay-ups are not NU's thing, really. Which is why when we miss the perimeter shots, we tend to lose momentum. Winning last night ultimately hinged on Audige's 3 pointer.
 
We definitely adjusted well on him, he scored 9 points in the first 5:42 and 4 points in the next 31:42. Also, all 5 of his fouls were earned in a 10-minute span of the 2nd half.
Galloway got gassed, and then started playing dirty. Good player but didn't need to resort to his flagrant fouls.
 
Galloway got gassed, and then started playing dirty. Good player but didn't need to resort to his flagrant fouls.
I don't think he played dirty, his hook and holds were just fatigue and inexperience. Elmore kept saying he needs to break that habit. Kid played hard but needs to play smart as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
I don't think he played dirty, his hook and holds were just fatigue and inexperience. Elmore kept saying he needs to break that habit. Kid played hard but needs to play smart as well.
No, I'd say he's a bully and when he got tired, he showed it. Not a good look.
 
I don't think he played dirty, his hook and holds were just fatigue and inexperience. Elmore kept saying he needs to break that habit. Kid played hard but needs to play smart as well.
I don't think he decided he suddenly wanted to hook and hold (TWICE) out of the blue against NU. No doubt he's done it before and probably got away with it. Elmore is right, he's a good player and doesn't need to go the Grayson Allen route.
 
My gut feeling is that he is a kid with at least dirty player instincts. He grabbed Purdue's Ivey all game long. At some point frustrating Ivey enough that he shoved him pretty hard.
 
My gut feeling is that he is a kid with at least dirty player instincts. He grabbed Purdue's Ivey all game long. At some point frustrating Ivey enough that he shoved him pretty hard.
Dirty? What's being called "dirty" around these parts is super interesting. Dude got some dumb fouls that hurt his team, but it's not like he clotheslined a guy going hard to the basket or took a cheap shot at a guy in a scrum for the ball. Frustrating opposing players with physical play (some of which a foul gets called on) isn't "dirty" by any definition I've seen of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IGNORE2 and NJCat
Dirty? What's being called "dirty" around these parts is super interesting. Dude got some dumb fouls that hurt his team, but it's not like he clotheslined a guy going hard to the basket or took a cheap shot at a guy in a scrum for the ball. Frustrating opposing players with physical play (some of which a foul gets called on) isn't "dirty" by any definition I've seen of it.
I called it a gut feeling, based on 2/3 of a season. Also called it "instincts", which is not the same as calling him dirty.
 
I called it a gut feeling, based on 2/3 of a season. Also called it "instincts", which is not the same as calling him dirty.
Got it. I guess I'd want some evidence to call somebody dirty. I'd love it if Beran had some of Galloway's grit and desperation.
 
Yeah I just saw it as we finally put Nance and Young out there together and they were getting to the boards and Galloway ended up in two physical mismatches.

Doing "whatever it takes" is generally good, but you have to know where the line is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
Ever since the last time I posted this, we have played excellent basketball. However, I am not swayed. The facts are the facts. We need a change.

If someone accuses me of saying this is just to reverse jinx the team, I don't know what they are talking about. Collins should have been fired yesterday. This recent stretch is a fluke, we got lucky, we need a new coach, we have barely any chance at all to win any games the rest of the season.

GO CATS

(And great work tonight boys... 2 tough ones ahead of us, fight hard, winnable games after that)
Rick
Receipts!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT