Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

UNLV2001

New Mexico at UNLV

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Agreed but I think it's possible that Muss could leave the place in tatters with his current approach. There could really be a lack of foundation and the program could need a drastic rebuild.  

I'm starting to consider that this approach may yield more consistent results than the traditional 4 year/freshman class. With the traditional, you might get one future star in each class, who maybe contributes his 1st year, and several good 3 year role players.(I'm obviously discounting the freshman year for most high school recruits). This is a good system as long as you don't have any "bust" recruiting years; if you have 2 in a row or even 2 out of 3 sub-par recruiting campaigns, many coaches would be in trouble. These are 17-18 year old kids, it can be/is a crap shoot.

With Musselman's current approach, he will be bringing in many kids who have 2 years of eligibility remaining but they will be an important part of the program for 3 years. Most importantly, the coach knows, or at least has a really good idea, of what he's getting. He's getting a much more mature recruit who has already survived their freshman year and made the transition to college ball. He also gets to spend an entire year with the kid in his program before the player ever steps on the court during a game. Cynically, I think another upside is that once a recruit has used their redshirt year, you don't have to worry about them bolting for greener pasture. I'm sure he will also be mixing in a few new freshman every year, but only if he think they can be very good.

I know some have an inherent dislike of this approach because it's not the old school "right way", and some fans lament not seeing a freshman develop over a 4 year career. I get that. But mostly, I want to see high level winning basketball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, kingpotato said:

I'm not suggesting that Muss's way is "wrong". He is an incredible coach. Iowa State has shown that you can build a contender relying on transfers. I'd also imagine that I would be giving too much credit to Leon if I were to say that 9 out of 10 ADs would hire Muss over Leon.

Having said that, there are pitfalls to that strategy. If Leon leaves this year, he will be leaving behind a roster that can not only compete next year but future years, as well. If Muss leaves it will likely be a UNLV type rebuild. Even if guys like Caroline and the Martins don't graduate transfer, the roster is bare after next year.

I was typing, see my post above. 

I think that last part is impossible to say. He already has several transfers waiting in the wings and he'll be adding a new class this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Agreed but I think it's possible that Muss could leave the place in tatters with his current approach. There could really be a lack of foundation and the program could need a drastic rebuild.  

Muss comes in late signs HS players Oliver and Drew. Both potential 4 year starters. Next class signs Ramsey and Hall. Ramsey highly recruited but doesn’t pan, and Hall is a solid role player. Nevada loses Oliver to draft. He has verbals for two bigs next year and had it not lost Wooten to Oregon than that’s another solid four year player. The Pack on the radar of two great HS players to close out this recruiting cycle. Point being, he has been very selective with his HS recruiting only because his evaluation of transfers has been money. Hell, even the ones who leave here like Leland King are solid. Vegas’ largely HS roster took a huge hit because of various issues and attrition to draft. These days, chit happens. I like that Muss plays to win every game, gives two chits about his bench, and is overly competitive. The results speak for themselves. 

And I like Rice. He’s done a nice job at Boise. But he was lucky too. If he loses Hutchison to the draft this is all moot. Hell, it also lost a starting PG to Cal for no good reason other than that’s how it works these days.

IMO at this level just win. I’ll take two MWC titles in Muss’ three seasons. Chances are slim Nevada will retain him for many more seasons or even after this one. Would I trade a bunch of solid seasons for two MWC titles and NCAA appearances? No. That’s how it works these days. Only a handful of programs are safe. Just win now because there are no guarantees anymore. It’s all about the $$$.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ph90702 said:

Muss’ approach will leave the program in ruins when he leaves.  I believe I’ve said that before, and somebody is finally catching on.

You say lots of chit that rarely makes sense. Rice’s approach left Vegas in ruins. There are no guarantees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, renoskier said:

I'm starting to consider that this approach may yield more consistent results than the traditional 4 year/freshman class. With the traditional, you might get one future star in each class, who maybe contributes his 1st year, and several good 3 year role players.(I'm obviously discounting the freshman year for most high school recruits). This is a good system as long as you don't have any "bust" recruiting years; if you have 2 in a row or even 2 out of 3 sub-par recruiting campaigns, many coaches would be in trouble. These are 17-18 year old kids, it can be/is a crap shoot.

With Musselman's current approach, he will be bringing in many kids who have 2 years of eligibility remaining but they will be an important part of the program for 3 years. Most importantly, the coach knows, or at least has a really good idea, of what he's getting. He's getting a much more mature recruit who has already survived their freshman year and made the transition to college ball. He also gets to spend an entire year with the kid in his program before the player ever steps on the court during a game. Cynically, I think another upside is that once a recruit has used their redshirt year, you don't have to worry about them bolting for greener pasture. I'm sure he will also be mixing in a few new freshman every year, but only if he think they can be very good.

I know some have an inherent dislike of this approach because it's not the old school "right way", and some fans lament not seeing a freshman develop over a 4 year career. I get that. But mostly, I want to see high level winning basketball.

That was me. That approach is dying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, NevadaFan said:

You say lots of chit that rarely makes sense. Rice’s approach left Vegas in ruins. There are no guarantees.

His approach didn’t leave us in ruins.  Firing him midseason left is in ruins.  He could have been fired in March, and Menzies would have had a much better roster to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, toonkee said:

Agreed but I think it's possible that Muss could leave the place in tatters with his current approach. There could really be a lack of foundation and the program could need a drastic rebuild.  

If he leaves I’m sure that will be the case. If somehow he decides to stick around I think he can continue to have pretty good success with his current strategy.  He has signed two freshman for next season, so he is diversifying a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, renoskier said:

I'm starting to consider that this approach may yield more consistent results than the traditional 4 year/freshman class. With the traditional, you might get one future star in each class, who maybe contributes his 1st year, and several good 3 year role players.(I'm obviously discounting the freshman year for most high school recruits). This is a good system as long as you don't have any "bust" recruiting years; if you have 2 in a row or even 2 out of 3 sub-par recruiting campaigns, many coaches would be in trouble. These are 17-18 year old kids, it can be/is a crap shoot.

With Musselman's current approach, he will be bringing in many kids who have 2 years of eligibility remaining but they will be an important part of the program for 3 years. Most importantly, the coach knows, or at least has a really good idea, of what he's getting. He's getting a much more mature recruit who has already survived their freshman year and made the transition to college ball. He also gets to spend an entire year with the kid in his program before the player ever steps on the court during a game. Cynically, I think another upside is that once a recruit has used their redshirt year, you don't have to worry about them bolting for greener pasture. I'm sure he will also be mixing in a few new freshman every year, but only if he think they can be very good.

I know some have an inherent dislike of this approach because it's not the old school "right way", and some fans lament not seeing a freshman develop over a 4 year career. I get that. But mostly, I want to see high level winning basketball.

Part of his transfer strategy is to get them in house for a year to learn the system and develop chemistry with the other sitouts but if the NCAA changes the rules that might be a big blow to his system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, 4UNLV said:

Tony Cordasco‏ @TonyDasco

Jordan Johnson has been reprimanded by the MWC for criticizing officials after the Runnin’ Rebels loss to New Mexico Weds. #unlvmbb

5:30 PM - 19 Jan 2018

What did he say?  That's unfortunate because he's always the one calming down McCoy and trying to keep everybody cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ph90702 said:

His approach didn’t leave us in ruins.  Firing him midseason left is in ruins.  He could have been fired in March, and Menzies would have had a much better roster to work with.

No it did. It’s fact. IF is the key word in your argument. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, toonkee said:

What did he say?  That's unfortunate because he's always the one calming down McCoy and trying to keep everybody cool.

He basically violated MWC sportsmanship rules by publicly criticizing the referees.  I didn't hear what he said but, as an older player in his last year he should know better.

edit:  I believe this is his first reprimand for this violation so no further penalty.  If he does it again he will have to sit out a game.  Marvin could choose to dole out his own punishment but, who knows.  Maybe the public reprimand was sufficient.  Like I said I didn't hear what he said but, I'm sure Marvin knows and will deal with it appropriately.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NWRebel said:

He basically violated MWC sportsmanship rules by publicly criticizing the referees.  I didn't hear what he said but, as an older player in his last year he should know better.

edit:  I believe this is his first reprimand for this violation so no further penalty.  If he does it again he will have to sit out a game.  Marvin could choose to dole out his own punishment but, who knows.  Maybe the public reprimand was sufficient.  Like I said I didn't hear what he said but, I'm sure Marvin knows and will deal with it appropriately.  

Why would there be a punishment?  All he did was call out the refs for saying that they don’t allow them to be as physical as the other team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...