The Maroon
|
So What's the Deal with this program?As I consistently preach to the 4 of you who read this thread--it's never about one game. But when winning at home is vital to being in the race and we're losing at home, that's a problem. It's highly doubtful we will match last years win total overall or in the league, despite having a lot of the team back.
Positives: We make our foulshots, we may well win. Negatives: You don't make foul shots at home, you don't deserve to win. Positive: COntinued strong play from our frosh and sophomores...Negatives: American is as young as we are.
Let's look at the Sr. classes in todays games and you tell me who has the brighter future
(8-14) Lafayette's Seniors provide: 47% of their points, 41% of the rebounds, 58% of the three pointers and 53% of the steals.
(14-7) American's Senior class provide: 21% of the points, 28% of the rebounds, 28% of the threes, and 34% of the steals.
I realize we didn't get nearly as much Alex S as we would have liked thus far this season, and I know there are lies, damn lies, and statistics, but I have a growing concern that while it's clear we have better players than we did 5 years ago---so does the rest of the league.
I really don't know what to think about this program.
|
LC Fan
|
Maroon's ViewI've watched a few games on the network but this was the first game I've seen in person. I actually liked what I saw. In particular, our women gave a tremendous effort. In some of the games I've seen, effort has occasionally to be lacking.
American was just plain better. LaKeisha Wright is a wonderful player and Alex Serowoky will be a major presence. I also liked what I saw from Melissa Downey. If we could add a little more speed from someone willing to penetrate and aggressively defend, we could play with anyone in the league--including American.
|
Lafalum
|
This was also the first game I saw in person. The main difference to my eye was the difference in speed between the two teams. I also thought their center played the defensive boards better than we did. The effort was there and there is potential but to me( as an untrained eye) those were the major differences.
|
pardon me
|
State of the programWell I'm back and I hate to say that I was right but the numbers dont lie. I said that this team would take a step backwards and it has. The sad part is they are going to take another step backwards next year. I dont know where this team goes from here. I cant tell if scholarships have helped because I think this years senior class and last years senior class had better basketball players in it than what scholarship recruiting have netted this team. Now is that a due to losing your recruiting edge because you now have scholarships to give. You can be the judge.I think that it is time to give Tammy next year that will be 4 years of scholarship players and then if she doesn't get it done pull the plug.
|
carney2
|
Both programs are getting real close to being an embarrassment. The recruiting posts give no indication that help is on the way. Someone (Bruce!) needs to sit down and take a long objective look at this thing and determine what needs to be done. I honestly don't see either program all that much improved in three years unless some outside force shakes the trees. It can start with a simple question:
We're not getting competitive recruits. Why?
|
Lafalum
|
Both programs have ineffective recruitng programs, is it facilities , is it approach, lack of effective assistants( who do most of the scouting and recruiting). The other scholarship programs are doing reasonably well having started one year later than these two!!
|
The Maroon
|
| Lafalum wrote: | | Both programs have ineffective recruitng programs, is it facilities , is it approach, lack of effective assistants( who do most of the scouting and recruiting). The other scholarship programs are doing reasonably well having started one year later than these two!! |
Regarding assistants, on the men's side I don't think we've had any stability whatsoever since Pat Brogan left (and he wasn't even a Fran hire). I realize assistant basketball coaches tend to have wanderlust, but usually at least the "number one" sticks around for a few years at a time. I gotta believe that's part of the problem.
But I can't get too carried away with that argument because on the women's side Laronda Murphy's been around longer than Tammy.
Two things stick out for both programs: The weakness of the scholarship junior class, and the lack of quality guards over the past 3 seasons.
From 3 point range on the women's side we have Zavocki and Spicer--both are stand-still shooters, and it's ALL we've got. We don't take that many 3 pointers to begin with, and when we do--the two seniors are responsible for 80% of them. How do we not have shooters? I don't get it.
But it's even worse at the 1 position. Downey may turn into a great player but right now she's got six more turnovers than she does points. She is..."the future" at the position.
I realized for one half against Bucknell we reached some sort of shooting Nirvana but most of the time we're horribly inconsistent--even when we get good looks.
In Wright, Virgin and Serowoky I truly think we have three very good players. I have hopes for McGorry and there are plenty of decent role players. But I really don't see how good we can get if we're turning the ball over 20+ times/game and we can't shoot from outside.
I just can't buy that facilities are the problem. Gym rats don't give a hoot...The baskets 10 feet and the floor is wood. Recruiting at our level has always been about selling the school...I gotta believe the place still shows well.
|
Lafalum
|
Recall that the first year of scholarships for basketball ( the junior class) was a wasted year because we got them very late in the recruiting cycle. Our first scholarshio player was Brookes Niquette, where is she?? She has played a total of 22 minutes this season. 120,000 spent so far or 2000 dollars a minute so far this season. Recruiting at the Dv 1 scholarship level starts really in the spring of a HS junior's year. We seem to be always late to the party. Turnover in our assistants I'm sure (especially for the men) have not helped. Both Bohn and Griffith (soccer and FH) have pretty much screened their class prospects for 2010 and are making sure they are arriving for this summer's camp programs. I am sure that is not happening in either basketball program.
|
Andy
|
Why did Emily play 2 mins?
Spice played 40 mins, so we have no developing PG for the future?
|
The Maroon
|
| Andy wrote: | Why did Emily play 2 mins?
Spice played 40 mins, so we have no developing PG for the future? |
You beat me to it on both questions...
Playing ANYBODY for 40 minutes in a blowout is stupid. I'm going to assume Downey was hurt, because no other explanation makes any sense whatsoever.
Garner is being slowly pushed out for our new generation of inside players. Our senior backcourt however, was out there for 76 minutes, breaking the nets with a 6 for 24 performance.
The fact that we have absolutely nothing in the pipeline as far as guards go makes me insane. This program is beyond frustrating.
|
Andy
|
| The Maroon wrote: | | Andy wrote: | Why did Emily play 2 mins?
Spice played 40 mins, so we have no developing PG for the future? |
You beat me to it on both questions...
Playing ANYBODY for 40 minutes in a blowout is stupid. I'm going to assume Downey was hurt, because no other explanation makes any sense whatsoever.
Garner is being slowly pushed out for our new generation of inside players. Our senior backcourt however, was out there for 76 minutes, breaking the nets with a 6 for 24 performance.
The fact that we have absolutely nothing in the pipeline as far as guards go makes me insane. This program is beyond frustrating. |
So she's given up on Jackson? What a mess. Reasons for the AD to continue with this coaching staff--they gave us Keisha and have a couple of promising recruits coming in. Can someone give me a few more? (Tammy is a nice woman and one has to feel for her, but this is Div 1).
|
The Maroon
|
[quote="Andy"][quote="The Maroon"] | Andy wrote: |
So she's given up on Jackson? What a mess. Reasons for the AD to continue with this coaching staff--they gave us Keisha and have a couple of promising recruits coming in. Can someone give me a few more? (Tammy is a nice woman and one has to feel for her, but this is Div 1). |
Again, I'm completely with you. Jackson certainly has solid credentials, today would have provided a wonderful opportunity to see what she could do and I don't support playing ANYBODY for 40 minutes in a game like that. We need to remember that while HC made mincemeat out of us this season this isn't one of Bill Gibbons' best teams and basically everybody is coming back.
It's a mess. Predicting the future is not my thing but from my vantage point we're staring at 9-21. Unlike some, I didn't expect us to take such a step back this season. I guess Vandy was even better than I gave her credit for, and I certainly had a lot of appreciation for her before.
Bruce's standard--as I understand it--is that every person who plays on a team at Lafayette should have a realistic chance at a championship at least once in their career. We all know the reasons Tammy hasn't succeeded, but we're certainly at a point where it's fair to wonder if anyone else could do better.
|
Xboreturns
|
The play by play indicates Garner came in at the 9:48 mark of the first half for McGorry and was subbed out for McGorry at the 8:12 mark. A total of 1:36. She never returned. No way of telling if it was injury or coach's decision from the play by play.
|
The Maroon
|
| Xboreturns wrote: | | The play by play indicates Garner came in at the 9:48 mark of the first half for McGorry and was subbed out for McGorry at the 8:12 mark. A total of 1:36. She never returned. No way of telling if it was injury or coach's decision from the play by play. |
Watching the All-Access tape-she had a brace on her right leg but she was moving fine and when she went out I didn't see her being tended to by a trainer.
Jackson in sweats, but not the game uni, I didn't see Downey on the feed---so at least we solved that.
NO matter what, the problems are big.
|
Andy
|
| The Maroon wrote: | | Xboreturns wrote: | | The play by play indicates Garner came in at the 9:48 mark of the first half for McGorry and was subbed out for McGorry at the 8:12 mark. A total of 1:36. She never returned. No way of telling if it was injury or coach's decision from the play by play. |
Watching the All-Access tape-she had a brace on her right leg but she was moving fine and when she went out I didn't see her being tended to by a trainer.
Jackson in sweats, but not the game uni, I didn't see Downey on the feed---so at least we solved that.
NO matter what, the problems are big. |
Downey is there in uniform, participates in warmups, and is on the bench next to Jackson (sweats as u said).
Funny, the color commentator says he was going to feature Garner and her 6.7 rebounds per game in his team comments, but realized she wasn't starting. He says "maybe they know something we don't know." I'm not so sure.
Does anyone work with Keisha on her foul shooting?--getting worse.
HC is in fourth place in the league and were missing several players due to injury. We trailed by 19 at the half and it was news worthy that we closed to within 10.
|
pardon me
|
What a Mess82 points, 82 points, are you freaking kidding me.They have gone beyond the step backwards they are now rolling down the hill. I never thought that it would get to this point.(Please come back VVD,Purr,Gomez and Johnson) Someone build a time machine or something.I said to give this coaching staff one more year. I have changed my mind blow it up and blow it up now! Scholarships are only good if you do your recruiting work and it is apparent to me that this staff has not done enough recruiting work in three years.
|
Xboreturns
|
Well bringing back VDV would certainly help but I don't think the other three would make a difference.
There is still time to turn this around and get back on track. We got Colgate at home on Wednesday - a sure win (or I'll be calling for a change also). Navy at home on Saturday is another winable game. Then we go to Bucknell, who we beat already and who is struggling also. We close out the home season with Lehigh on Senior Day so we should be up for that one. The last two are on the road, Army and American, and will be difficult. So if we can go 4-2, that would make us 6- 8 in the league, the same as last year. Not that bad considering we loss a first team all-leaguer.
|
pardon me
|
leadershipLiving in the past is not going to help us now but I do think that both VVD and Purr are better choices at the 4 and 5 especially on defense but the 4 of them just bring leadership that this team seems to lack and a work ethic that is also missing. Time to move on at best they go 3 and 3 sad.
|
The Maroon
|
Re: leadership | pardon me wrote: | | Living in the past is not going to help us now but I do think that both VVD and Purr are better choices at the 4 and 5 especially on defense but the 4 of them just bring leadership that this team seems to lack and a work ethic that is also missing. Time to move on at best they go 3 and 3 sad. |
You are getting into pretty big hypotheticals now--Purr was hurt most of last season and never got it going. "If" she was not hurt "AND" she played to her ability we "might" have been better off with her. I honestly don't see anything wrong with the leadership---When I see the seniors they do a great job of keping their head in the game. I hope you are pretty close to the program to comment on the work ethic. I certainly don't see any of the seniors loafing. I want to cringe at some of the things I see--but I never get the feeling like there's much quit in this team.
On the other side of that I can't get excited we "might" go 6-8 in the league (And that's pretty optimistic) even though we lost a first team all league player. We're supposed to be able to get better players now. I would think when we have 4 starters back and we're replacing non-scholarship players with scholarship players we might actually get better!
To play my broken record again: What the hell happened to our backcourt? They are turning it over more and shooting worse than last year...
And to continue my recurring theme our lack of 3 point shooters in the pipeline is driving me to drink. Remember the 1-27 squad of 2004? They had 80 3-pointers all year. Right now outside of Zavocki and Spicer we have a whopping 16 3's. No I'm not suggesting we're going to go 1-27 next year--I am saying it's incredibly hard to win if you can't extend a defense.
I guess I need to watch us beat Colgate so I can get some mojo back for this program.
|
2008pards
|
Leadership starts at the top. What have you seen in Coach Smith to inspire success? She seems distant, distracted and over matched. Watch during TO's to see her impact. She spends half the TO talking to her assistants and goes into the players huddle and offers up a few words and the kids walk back onto the court looking like they gained nothing from the break.
What's her record? Who is getting better as the season progresses? Is the team improving week in and week out? She reminds me of the old Women's Lacrosse coach. She seemed like a nice enough person but just didn't have a clue on how to put players in a position to be successful.
The offense is dull and unimaginative. The defense is inconsistent since it's usually 5 against 3 or 5 against 4 because not everybody is committed to playing defense (watch for your selves to see who is working on offense and who rests on defense). And worst of all, the younger players are pulled immediately after making a mistake giving them no time to learn on the court. That's just poor coaching by taking the easy way out. I've also heard she has pinned the blame squarely on a player for a loss but yet fails to accept responsibility for own coaching and personnel blunders.
Doesn't seem like the kind of coach you'd want to play for. How long do they stay with a coach with that kind of W/L record and lack of development and progress?
|
The Maroon
|
| 2008pards wrote: | Leadership starts at the top. What have you seen in Coach Smith to inspire success? She seems distant, distracted and over matched. Watch during TO's to see her impact. She spends half the TO talking to her assistants and goes into the players huddle and offers up a few words and the kids walk back onto the court looking like they gained nothing from the break.
What's her record? Who is getting better as the season progresses? Is the team improving week in and week out? She reminds me of the old Women's Lacrosse coach. She seemed like a nice enough person but just didn't have a clue on how to put players in a position to be successful.
The offense is dull and unimaginative. The defense is inconsistent since it's usually 5 against 3 or 5 against 4 because not everybody is committed to playing defense (watch for your selves to see who is working on offense and who rests on defense). And worst of all, the younger players are pulled immediately after making a mistake giving them no time to learn on the court. That's just poor coaching by taking the easy way out. I've also heard she has pinned the blame squarely on a player for a loss but yet fails to accept responsibility for own coaching and personnel blunders.
Doesn't seem like the kind of coach you'd want to play for. How long do they stay with a coach with that kind of W/L record and lack of development and progress? |
I try not to nitpick, but the timeout thing is interesting. Most programs I have dealt with---the coaches confer with the assistants at halftime and the assistants talk to the players on the bench when they come out--but rarely do I see a conference on every TO.
Kind of coach I'd want to play for? Her players seem to LOVE playing for her. Considering the turmoils of the program most of her players don't transfer and play for four years. I've always been impressed with the chemistry of this team--they really do seem like a family--and credit has to be given there to Tammy.
I don't agree with a lot of what you said--but I agree with your main point--the buck stops with the coach. Tammy's become kind of a "Rockyesque" figure to me--she's been beaten down for so long I REALLY want her to have success. It's hard for me to even post this because I really think she's a class act. She's never moaned about bad calls in interviews, always is stoic on the bench. I've emailed her a couple of times and honestly I wouldn't have been the least bit offended if she didn't have time to reply--but she did courteously and professionaly. Certainly beyond the call of duty. She's a great representative of our school---But as you guys correctly point out--this is D1.
I really thought we turned the corner last year---I thought 17 wins were possible! I don't for the life of me understand what's going on this year and I'm even more concerned about the overall health of the program. I really don't want to watch us go 8-22 next season with the excuse that we lost 5 seniors--including our back-court.
Maybe X is right--if his predictions ring true the entire tone of the conversation changes.
|
2008pards
|
Don't know Tammy at all and don't dispute your characterization of her. Just like to see progress and development and haven't seen that in past few years (last year was an exception). Spicer is overused a bit but who or what's the option? Zavocki needs to hit threes or she's a bit of a liability. The bigs can play, they just seem mis-used to me. I love Alex and think she'll be a very very good player before all's said and done.
All in all, I've nothing against Tammy but when is it time to win? Or better put, when does Mc Cutcheon demand results from his coaches? How long do you go with someone who is not having success?
I don't know if they "LOVE" playing for her or just love to play basketball and she's the coach of the team they play for. You tend to credit Tammy for this, I would respectfully credit the love of the game of the players. But people can disagree without being disagreeable.
I hope the Lady Leopards do indeed turn it around and make some late season noise, I just don't know if it's probable that they will.
Good luck tomorrow night against Colgate. Go Pards!!!
|
The Maroon
|
| 2008pards wrote: | Don't know Tammy at all and don't dispute your characterization of her. Just like to see progress and development and haven't seen that in past few years (last year was an exception). Spicer is overused a bit but who or what's the option? Zavocki needs to hit threes or she's a bit of a liability. The bigs can play, they just seem mis-used to me. I love Alex and think she'll be a very very good player before all's said and done.
All in all, I've nothing against Tammy but when is it time to win? Or better put, when does Mc Cutcheon demand results from his coaches? How long do you go with someone who is not having success?
I don't know if they "LOVE" playing for her or just love to play basketball and she's the coach of the team they play for. You tend to credit Tammy for this, I would respectfully credit the love of the game of the players. But people can disagree without being disagreeable.
I hope the Lady Leopards do indeed turn it around and make some late season noise, I just don't know if it's probable that they will.
Good luck tomorrow night against Colgate. Go Pards!!! |
We agree on a lot more than we disagree that's for sure.
I base what I say that they love playing for her in that she had very few defections of note during the REALLY lean years. Also I have seen teams where the coach has lost credibility---I'm willing to bet you have too--and its a sad site. I really think if they were really unhappy with their experience playing for Tammy they'd show it more. The girls on Pat Fisher's teams looked miserable half the time. I don't discount your love of the game (and camraderie among the players) POV, but I also have seen coaches who suck the love of the game from players---and Tammy definitely hasn't done that.
Still...You are at the same point I am at. I HAVE NO IDEA what to think about what standards we should have for Tammy at this point. I do think some of her teams have underachieved. I don't think a decent season last year (and I for one thought it could have been better) should automatically buy her 3 more seasons. We've been having this discussion for years....First it was trying to weigh have no scholarships vs doing a little bit better than 7-70? Than it was about giving her time with scholarships. Now it's about how much time? We're even giving her a pass on her first scholarship class because she didn't get a full cycle to recruit them. At what point do we expect to stop making excuses and start competing for a league title? I can definitely see the argument to end it now....LIke I said, I hope X proves prophetic and we can win 4 of the last 6. We win 2 or 3, it's murky waters as to what to do.
|
carney2
|
| 2008pards wrote: | | All in all, I've nothing against Tammy but when is it time to win? Or better put, when does Mc Cutcheon demand results from his coaches? |
Where exactly does Bruce fit in all of this? Does he have the authority to hire and fire, or is he just a bureaucratic link between the coaches and the real power structure?
|
Lafalum
|
good question, I have thought for years his main objective was to preserve jobs (especially his) rather than advance the department. Winning is an afterthought. A very good bureaucrat though, seems to fit this admistrations view of things and the last one as well.
|
2008pards
|
Folks
If I do the math right, according to last nights Game Notes, Tammy is 162-242 (.401 winning%) in her coaching career. She is 49-174 at LC which is .220 winning %  WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Franks, how does she keep......?
As far as McCutcheon, I really don't know his role and to what extent he is involved in the coaching decisions, I just assumed as the AD, he would be responsible for results in his department; Athletics, not college "feel good" ambassador. Isn't he charged with fielding the best possible teams and coaches for each team? He sure does look the part but perhaps he's not as focused on W & L's as we are. I understand there is more to college athletics than winning, but it's gets pretty demoralizing to work and work and work only to have people around you or in leadership roles above you who aren't capable and/or committed to excellence. Maybe Bruce needs a gentle reminder that women's sports mean as much to the women playing them as men's sports do to the men playing them. Just a thought.
|
The Maroon
|
| Lafalum wrote: | | good question, I have thought for years his main objective was to preserve jobs (especially his) rather than advance the department. Winning is an afterthought. A very good bureaucrat though, seems to fit this admistrations view of things and the last one as well. |
I don't entirely agree, I think a lot of his personnel decisions (Campbell, Bohn, the fh coach whose name escapes me) have been excellent. I don't like that he gets people into long-term contracts--especially since I think Fran pushed him into a corner by calling him on his way back from a job interview and he caved. I would've called his bluff..."Take the Lasalle job bud"....
Maybe the Tammy situation is more clear cut than I have chosen to see it. It will certainly be so if they lose tonight.
|
|
|
