Recruiting and Style of play concerning

[atemp]

Can't win in the Big Ten playing with four guards. Not going to win chucking threes and getting pounded inside. No power forward, no center, and recruits coming in next year are not going to make an impact like some other freshman (May and Cougill). May is basically Jake Kelley, Tucker, etc. I'm not giving up on Lickliter, but I think there has to be a shift in philosophy, it's been frustrating watching Iowa Basketball the last ten years.

Iowa BBall was once as big as Iowa Football, wish it were that way again.

[nolookpass]

Lick is another Lisa Bluder. Good at mid level majors, but then makes the jump up and still recruits the same caliber of players.

[PipeDaddy]

Lick is another Lisa Bluder. Good at mid level majors, but then makes the jump up and still recruits the same caliber of players.

Good grief.

[nolookpass]

Lick is another Lisa Bluder. Good at mid level majors, but then makes the jump up and still recruits the same caliber of players.

Good grief.

give me a list of all the big ten/big 12 offers cougill and may had?

TIA

[Jim]

Lick is another Lisa Bluder. Good at mid level majors, but then makes the jump up and still recruits the same caliber of players.

THE Lisa Bluder that won the Big Ten last year?

Lick will get it done. Give it another year or two.

[Soda Popinski]

Cripes you guys are already getting all over Lickliters case in his 2nd year? Iowa fans suck sometimes.

[PipeDaddy]

Cripes you guys are already getting all over Lickliters case in his 2nd year? Iowa fans suck sometimes.

Exactly. nolook expects top talent to just line up - to come to Iowa - simply because we get a new coach.

[nolookpass]

Cripes you guys are already getting all over Lickliters case in his 2nd year? Iowa fans suck sometimes.

Exactly. nolook expects top talent to just line up - to come to Iowa - simply because we get a new coach.
no, thats not true.

I hope Im wrong and May and Cougill are great Big Ten players.

[PipeDaddy]

Well, his first year of recruiting was extremely hampered. And he's got to make some headway before any big talent would realistically look, don't you think?

I just think it is far too early to declare much of anything about his ability to recruit.

[roseboundhawk]

Ill be honest, I consider myself to be a huge hawkeye basketball fan. Been going to most of the games with my dad since the mid-Tom Davis years (he says I was at the Chris Street michigan game but I dont remember it unfortunately), and now student tickets the last couple years. Even I am starting to lose interest in the program. Something has to happen and I don't see the current talent level, minus Gatens, changing much.

[PipeDaddy]

Something has to happen. Define that. Dean Smith comes out of retirement to lead Iowa to the Promised Land?

We're a year or two away. It's the reality. Had Alford been shown the door when he should have been, it wouldn't be this way. But he wasn't.

[Verbal]

The players we have are fine, the system is also fine. Problem is we've got one guy (Cyrus Tate) on the team that could conceivably be called a veteran leader, and he's down with an injury. This year's team will show some flashes, and then they'll have days where they can't throw the ball in the ocean. A year from now, things will be better. In 2 years, they'll be a lot better.

Nobody on this board was calling for a 20+ win season this year, I don't see why there's so much hand-wringing at 11-6. Seems to me the guys are right on track for the 16-18 wins most thought they'd get.

[PipeDaddy]

The players we have are fine, the system is also fine. Problem is we've got one guy (Cyrus Tate) on the team that could conceivably be called a veteran leader, and he's down with an injury. This year's team will show some flashes, and then they'll have days where they can't throw the ball in the ocean. A year from now, things will be better. In 2 years, they'll be a lot better.

Nobody on this board was calling for a 20+ win season this year, I don't see why there's so much hand-wringing at 11-6. Seems to me the guys are right on track for the 16-18 wins most thought they'd get.

I said at the beginning of the season I expected about 17 wins and a possible NIT berth. I'm happy with that. And it is still very possible.

[Gushawk]

The handwringing IMO is because we've just been beaten (in one case very convincingly) by two programs that arguably should be in the exact same place in the "development curve" as we are. One would have a hard time convincingly establishing that either Smith or Beelein came into a clearly better situation than did Lick. Does that mean Lick is a bad coach? No. But it isn't entirely irrelevant either.

[Jim]

The handwringing IMO is because we've just been beaten (in one case very convincingly) by two programs that arguably should be in the exact same place in the "development curve" as we are. One would have a hard time convincingly establishing that either Smith or Beelein came into a clearly better situation than did Lick. Does that mean Lick is a bad coach? No. But it isn't entirely irrelevant either.

Too many variables to compare programs based on what year their coaches are in. If that's the case then Lick is over-achieving if you compare Iowa to Iowa State, Kansas State, and UNI.

Personally, I like where the program is headed. Sure it would be nice to have a couple more wins, but like Pipe, they are right where I thought they would be.

[PipeDaddy]

The handwringing IMO is because we've just been beaten (in one case very convincingly) by two programs that arguably should be in the exact same place in the "development curve" as we are. One would have a hard time convincingly establishing that either Smith or Beelein came into a clearly better situation than did Lick. Does that mean Lick is a bad coach? No. But it isn't entirely irrelevant either.

We've been beaten by Ohio State at their place and played very well.

Than we got beat by Minny and Michigan without arguably our most important player on the team.

I'm not nervous, and taking the injury into account, I'm not convinced we are at a different level than Minnesota. And Michigan will always recruit better than Iowa - always.

[Gushawk]

The handwringing IMO is because we've just been beaten (in one case very convincingly) by two programs that arguably should be in the exact same place in the "development curve" as we are. One would have a hard time convincingly establishing that either Smith or Beelein came into a clearly better situation than did Lick. Does that mean Lick is a bad coach? No. But it isn't entirely irrelevant either.

We've been beaten by Ohio State at their place and played very well.

Than we got beat by Minny and Michigan without arguably our most important player on the team.

I'm not nervous, and taking the injury into account, I'm not convinced we are at a different level than Minnesota. And Michigan will always recruit better than Iowa - always.

Minnesota is clearly better than we are right not. It really isn't close.

That said, perhaps I should draw comfort in analogizing to the football program. There were coaches out there who almost certainly could have "turned things around quicker" than Ferentz (in terms of Ws and Ls), but probably none of them were better choices for Iowa for the long term. The concern with Lick is that it's generally easier to turn around a BB program quickly, and if there aren't real signs of life next season (i.e., a better than .500 record in the Big Ten), I think there will be real and valid questions on the matter of whether he can ever recruit the type of talent we need to win consistently against quality opponents.

[MikeyJoe]

The concern with Lick is that it's generally easier to turn around a BB program quickly, and if there aren't real signs of life next season (i.e., a better than .500 record in the Big Ten), I think there will be real and valid questions on the matter of whether he can ever recruit the type of talent we need to win consistently against quality opponents.
I agree. A comparable situation would be Jerry Wainwright at DePaul. He's in his 4th year, and DePaul fans (both of them) in this area are running out of patience very quickly. I caught 10 minutes of his call in show on the radio the other night, and it was absolutely brutal.

[PipeDaddy]

The handwringing IMO is because we've just been beaten (in one case very convincingly) by two programs that arguably should be in the exact same place in the "development curve" as we are. One would have a hard time convincingly establishing that either Smith or Beelein came into a clearly better situation than did Lick. Does that mean Lick is a bad coach? No. But it isn't entirely irrelevant either.

We've been beaten by Ohio State at their place and played very well.

Than we got beat by Minny and Michigan without arguably our most important player on the team.

I'm not nervous, and taking the injury into account, I'm not convinced we are at a different level than Minnesota. And Michigan will always recruit better than Iowa - always.

Minnesota is clearly better than we are right not. It really isn't close.

That said, perhaps I should draw comfort in analogizing to the football program. There were coaches out there who almost certainly could have "turned things around quicker" than Ferentz (in terms of Ws and Ls), but probably none of them were better choices for Iowa for the long term. The concern with Lick is that it's generally easier to turn around a BB program quickly, and if there aren't real signs of life next season (i.e., a better than .500 record in the Big Ten), I think there will be real and valid questions on the matter of whether he can ever recruit the type of talent we need to win consistently against quality opponents.

I disagree about Minnesota - they may be in a better spot than we are right now, but I wouldn't say it wasn't close. They haven't looked good when I've watched them. I don't think they'll finish above middle of the pack - which is where I think we'll be too, if Tate comes back and is effective relatively soon. Good time to have a week off - we need him back, no doubt about it.

[Gushawk]

I suppose if you regard a 3-5 win difference in conference standings when it's all said and done to be "close," then, yeah, I guess you could say we're "close" to Minnesota.

[lilzaphod]

Before Tate went down, we were killing Minnesota. We would have won that game if he would have been able to finish it out.

[Gushawk]

I'll concede Tate is our best, or at least most important, player. He also was recruited by Lick's predecessor. Lick's ability to get quality bigs is probably the thing that concerns me the most about his prospects.

[Verbal]

I'll concede Tate is our best, or at least most important, player. He also was recruited by Lick's predecessor. Lick's ability to get quality bigs is probably the thing that concerns me the most about his prospects.

You and Lick are operating under different ideas of what a "quality big" is.

[Gushawk]

I'll concede Tate is our best, or at least most important, player. He also was recruited by Lick's predecessor. Lick's ability to get quality bigs is probably the thing that concerns me the most about his prospects.

You and Lick are operating under different ideas of what a "quality big" is.

Maybe, maybe not. I'd take a couple of the tough-nosed, somewhat athletically limited 6'8" guys with shooting range that he coached at Butler.

[PipeDaddy]

Give him some time, guys. Geez.

[Gushawk]

Give him some time, guys. Geez.

How much time must pass before one may have a reasonable expectation of substantial progress? As I noted above, I think 3 years is plenty in the context of a basketball program. From your post above, it's clear you think Alford was given far too long, which would lead me to believe you think the appropriate period wouldn't be much more than 4-5 years.

[Glen]

Give him some time, guys. Geez.

How much time must pass before one may have a reasonable expectation of substantial progress? As I noted above, I think 3 years is plenty in the context of a basketball program. From your post above, it's clear you think Alford was given far too long, which would lead me to believe you think the appropriate period wouldn't be much more than 4-5 years.

5 years is sufficient. We are in year 1.3. While your concerns are valid, I think they are premature.

[Gushawk]

I generally think 5 is more than enough, but perhaps that is fair given the shape in which Alford left the program (I had a friend the other day half-jokingly refer to the SMU death penalty in the context of his program killing tenure).

I just don't see a ton of future bright spots on the current roster (including signees)...Gatens will be very good...beyond that, though, the sure-fire eventual high quality Big Ten players seem are who? I'm rooting for him, but recruiting is really gonna have to pick up for him to get there even by year 5, IMO.

[Glen]

I generally think 5 is more than enough, but perhaps that is fair given the shape in which Alford left the program (I had a friend the other day half-jokingly refer to the SMU death penalty in the context of his program killing tenure).

I just don't see a ton of future bright spots on the current roster (including signees)...Gatens will be very good...beyond that, though, the sure-fire eventual high quality Big Ten players seem are who? I'm rooting for him, but recruiting is really gonna have to pick up for him to get there even by year 5, IMO.

Again, a well stated post with valid points.

To answer your question: I think Tucker, Cole and Fuller have potential to be solid contributors at the Big 10 level. Cole is a year removed from major knee surgery - typically a two year process. Tucker's combination of booze and illness knocked him off a very good start.

Gatans is a star, and should be the centerpiece of the offense. A point guard and athletic big man are necessary. Cougill is likely not the answer. Brommer has a chance, although he's a bit soft.

2 guys away from putting a good team on the floor each night. Please remember we are relying heavily on young guys. They are prone to mistakes and inconsistent play.

At year 1.3 I'm not thrilled, but neither am I ready to push the panic button. Your analogy to KF is a good one, I think.

[Gushawk]

Okay, Glen. I agree that Fuller has some potential, and Tucker could be a nice role player (preferably off the bench). Less hopeful that Cole is ever much more than a rebounder and screener.

No more bitching from me until after next year at the earliest.

[PipeDaddy]

Gus, I think there are different things to assess though.

First, on court wins and losses.

Second, the seeming direction of the recruiting.

Third, off court stuff.

Alford failed with all three, with recruiting being perhaps his best. Which says a lot.

Lick is poised to improve from a wins-losses standpoint this season. And the off the court stuff has calmed down too. I agree, the recruiting isn't exactly catching fire, but I'm willing to see how things go for at least 4 years.

[PipeDaddy]

Oh, and one other thing - perhaps teh biggest - is finding the Iowa BB tradition again. And fan base.

A lot of them left. Poor TV coverage (which I've bitched about ad nauseum on here) doesn't help. That's a tough one. If Lick can help turn that around then that earns him some extra points too imo.

[The Tin Man]

I just don't see a ton of future bright spots on the current roster (including signees)...Gatens will be very good...beyond that, though, the sure-fire eventual high quality Big Ten players seem are who?

Gatans is a star, and should be the centerpiece of the offense.

Okay, Glen. I agree that Fuller has some potential, and Tucker could be a nice role player (preferably off the bench). Less hopeful that Cole is ever much more than a rebounder and screener.

While I agree that better recruiting is needed, you both are insane to think that Tucker is merely a role player or less. He will lead this team in scoring for as long as he is here and healthy, think 20 points a night. If you do not realize he is our best player than you are crazy.

[PipeDaddy]

While I agree that better recruiting is needed, you both are insane to think that Tucker is merely a role player or less. He will lead this team in scoring for as long as he is here and healthy, think 20 points a night. If you do not realize he is our best player than you are crazy.

I kind of thought the same thing. He's good for a minimum of 12 points a night, and on good nights 20+.

Even though he didn't look real good last game, he isn't afraid to mix it up and be the guy to take shots. I like that. We need some attitude on offense right now.

[Glen]

I just don't see a ton of future bright spots on the current roster (including signees)...Gatens will be very good...beyond that, though, the sure-fire eventual high quality Big Ten players seem are who?

Gatans is a star, and should be the centerpiece of the offense.

Okay, Glen. I agree that Fuller has some potential, and Tucker could be a nice role player (preferably off the bench). Less hopeful that Cole is ever much more than a rebounder and screener.

While I agree that better recruiting is needed, you both are insane to think that Tucker is merely a role player or less. He will lead this team in scoring for as long as he is here and healthy, think 20 points a night. If you do not realize he is our best player than you are crazy.

No where did I say Tucker was a simply a role player. He was arguably playing the best until he got Podalaked.

Gatens is the best player on the team, however. He's bigger and stronger than Tucker. He can get to the rim, shoot the three, and rebound.

Listening to Lick yesterday on JM's show was interesting. He's not shocked by MG's start, and in fact expects him to contribute more.

[Gushawk]

Tucker is a shooter. Not a good defender, average off the dribble, not strong at the cup. I could see him averaging 12-15 points (on an average of 3 threes or so a game), but I don't think that defeats a classification of him as a role player. His role just happens to be that of shooter.

[MickerHawk]

Oh, and one other thing - perhaps teh biggest - is finding the Iowa BB tradition again. And fan base.

A lot of them left. Poor TV coverage (which I've bitched about ad nauseum on here) doesn't help. That's a tough one. If Lick can help turn that around then that earns him some extra points too imo.

True. The competition is more fierce for BBall players than for football. Really, we're in the top 3 of desirable schools to go to for FB, possibly top-20 after this year, but for BBall all the mid-majors come into play.

Our guards will be terrific in another 2 years, but we don't have the front-court at all. They are of course in higher demand, so they may take a bit longer, but I am convinced that Lick is a great coach. Give it time, we'll get some bigs.

[Natty Bumppo]

I've been thinking about the whole style of play and recruiting angle, and I thought back to when Dr. Tom was here. His style was 'exciting' and 'high scoring', maybe even more frenetic than the much ballyhooed Bruce Pearl.

And the style definitely translated to some high profile recruits like Troy Skinner, Brig Tubbs, Jake Jaacks, Greg Helmers, Antonio Ramos, Marcelo Gomez, etc, etc. If only Lickliter would have a more exciting style, we could get back to bringing in those type of recruits.;)

[HawkLax6]

Eric May scored 35 sometime in the last two days.

[Gushawk]

IMO, unless a coach is at a school with a tradition that sells itself, effective recruiting has less to do with style of play and more to do with personality and being a good salesman. The tension is that alot of Iowans aren't particularly comfortable with good salesmen (I know that I generally am not).

[nolookpass]

Eric May scored 35 sometime in the last two days.
against Hempstead I could go for 22 or 23.

[Legend12]

Before Tate went down, we were killing Minnesota. We would have won that game if he would have been able to finish it out.

Gatens made a lay-up to put the Hawks up 11-8 on the play Tate was hurt during...not exactly "killing" the other team.