 |
|
I did, I've been watching MU closely for a long time
Posted on: February 18, 2022 at 16:38:50 CT
FIJItiger MU
Posts:
147906
Member For:
22.52 yrs
Level:
Moderator
M.O.B. Votes:
2
The 2008-09 team was successful for vastly different reasons, aligned to the way that Mike Anderson schemes. They had tremendous depth, length and versatility at the guard position, and were built to pressure the ball.
The 2011-12 team had none of those things, which is why they struggled so much in 2010-11 under Mike Anderson despite having essentially the same roster in 2011-12 (Safford left to graduation and Bowers left to injury/nobody was added). Pressey/Dixon were small and easy to pass over the top of in press traps, Ratliffe was not an ideal point man like Carroll/Ramsey and it limited his effectiveness as an offensive player, and there was almost no depth meaning everyone had to play a very refined role and minimizing foul trouble was a big deal. In may ways, Mike Anderson ironically compiled the type of roster he couldn't win with and then handed it off to a different type of coach would could figure out a way to make it work.
People always want to talk about what coaches did elsewhere as a way of explaining why they weren't the driving factor. I didn't watch Haith coach at Miami or Tulsa, nor see any of Nestor's non-MU teams. I assume that is the case for virtually all MU fans. I have no idea what is going on in those programs coaching wise. I did watch all their games at MU so I have a rather large direct observation sample size to speak knowledgably on how they did here.
Edited by FIJItiger at 16:42:07 on 02/18/22
The 2011-12 team had none of those things, which is why they struggled so much in 2010-11 under Mike Anderson despite having essentially the same roster in 2011-12 (Safford left to graduation and Bowers left to injury/nobody was added). Pressey/Dixon were small and easy to pass over the top of in press traps, Ratliffe was not an ideal point man like Carroll/Ramsey and it limited his effectiveness as an offensive player, and there was almost no depth meaning everyone had to play a very refined role and minimizing foul trouble was a big deal. In may ways, Mike Anderson ironically compiled the type of roster he couldn't win with and then handed it off to a different type of coach would could figure out a way to make it work.
People always want to talk about what coaches did elsewhere as a way of explaining why they weren't the driving factor. I didn't watch Haith coach at Miami or Tulsa, nor see any of Nestor's non-MU teams. I assume that is the case for virtually all MU fans. I have no idea what is going on in those programs coaching wise. I did watch all their games at MU so I have a rather large direct observation sample size to speak knowledgably on how they did here.
Edited by FIJItiger at 16:42:07 on 02/18/22
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
I did, I've been watching MU closely for a long time - FIJItiger MU - 2/18 16:38:50