olivecourt
Well-Known Member
This is absolutely not true. The only thing Iowa was good at under Lickliter was limiting the number of possessions per game. Everything else regarding defense was mediocre to poor.
If Iowa could defend......
- Thread starter HaydenHawk56
- Start date
This is absolutely not true. The only thing Iowa was good at under Lickliter was limiting the number of possessions per game. Everything else regarding defense was mediocre to poor.
Maybe they will improve on D, i hope they do. The answer will have to be:
1) going forward, recruiting long athletic players that are versatile and skilled. The type of players that would fit the fast-paced offensive style as well. This would change everything.
2) 15,500 at carver every game. They need homecourt advantage. The fans in those seats need to stand and cheer, it's not a movie theater.
3) Strategically, find an identity. Will Iowa be a halfcourt man-man D scheme? Or a base 2/3 zone? 3/4 court trap? I think Iowa should model the defensive mindset after the offensive goal: that is to run, get out in transition. Use a deep bench and wear down the opponent, turn the game into a track meet and set up other offensive pieces off that. We have to recruit many talented guards and wing players to be an affective full court pressure team. That is what I would like to see out of Iowa. Aggressive defense, looking to get out in transition (not going for steals at the expense of easy baskets). What's great about a good full court press is that a) you get steals and b) you limit the shot clock. If Iowa can press without getting a steal or getting burned, the other team will set up their offense with 15-20 seconds on the shot clock.
1) going forward, recruiting long athletic players that are versatile and skilled. The type of players that would fit the fast-paced offensive style as well. This would change everything.
2) 15,500 at carver every game. They need homecourt advantage. The fans in those seats need to stand and cheer, it's not a movie theater.
3) Strategically, find an identity. Will Iowa be a halfcourt man-man D scheme? Or a base 2/3 zone? 3/4 court trap? I think Iowa should model the defensive mindset after the offensive goal: that is to run, get out in transition. Use a deep bench and wear down the opponent, turn the game into a track meet and set up other offensive pieces off that. We have to recruit many talented guards and wing players to be an affective full court pressure team. That is what I would like to see out of Iowa. Aggressive defense, looking to get out in transition (not going for steals at the expense of easy baskets). What's great about a good full court press is that a) you get steals and b) you limit the shot clock. If Iowa can press without getting a steal or getting burned, the other team will set up their offense with 15-20 seconds on the shot clock.
I disagree. It is true that their main attribute was limiting possessions by using long shot clocks. But they played strong defense. You can laugh, but lame Iowa players in that era (like Devan Bauwinkel) played above average / good defense. Iowa gave up more layups last night than I had ever seen under lick and you can't dispute that (against an average team). Defense was what Lick coached and it seemed like his entire emphasis. I remember one of those Iowa teams beating MSU at carver and holding the spartans to 36 points. I know the entire style was weird and awkwardly slow paced, but does that matter? they played strong D.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
Wow, can't agree with you here. Lick ball took the air out of the and limited possesions. Iowa won games when it took other teams out of rhythm by slowing down the game, not because they played "good" defense. Offense was an afterthought and it was atrocious to watch.
The defense isn't as bad as it is made out to be. Iowa's half court offense is the worst part of this team.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
You have said enough for me to say I have heard it all with this analysis...amazing take on Lick ball.
All I'm saying is that Lick and Fran are almost opposites as coaches. A couple of years ago, the fanbase was growing tired of Lick, and the team was not producing at all, so they fired him and made a change. Now we have Fran, who I am really excited about and I think will be able to recruit with the powers of the league. But both have their strengths and weaknesses. To deny it is ignorant! Lick could not recruit or motivate his players at all. At all. Those are probably the two most important aspects of basketball coaching. He is a good midmajor coach but not at the Big 10 level and that showed. But he could/can coach (in game, tactical sense). To me, Fran is the opposite. While his recruiting is still unproven, I think he has shown he can recruit. But he has not shown that he can coach. The defense is bad and (I love fran) but that reflects upon him. When was the last time Iowa ran a called play on offense? If he recruits psi slamma jamma and we run teams off the court, then I'll be ready with my season tickets. But he won't in a realistic sense. The coaching (in game) aspect needs to be better. They need to play better team basketball and grow as a unit, in this sense, talent is irrelevant.
I agree. To an extent, this is what I'm trying to say. It's not a priority of Fran seemingly. I feel like Fran is trying to live up to the "fast paced up tempo" label so dramatically that the defense is really suffering.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
Honestly, how can you compare the two in coaching when you admit that Lick could not recruit, but Fran is trying to coach some of his players still?
Kind of an oxymoron if you ask me.
Fran has built programs, something Lick never did and it has shown in recruiting and record. Fran has been coaching with the leftover players, but it is funny that the best players on the team are the ones that Fran has brought in.
Then you look at the 2012 class that is still nationally ranked, 21st on ESPN the last time I checked.
So where did Lick's recruiting classes come in? I believe it was no higher than 8th in the conference on any given year...correct me if I am wrong.
Iowa has a ton of holes on their roster, the five coming in next year fill every role/position that Iowa lacks aside from another slashing wing type player. The last time I checked, it has been years since Iowa has been able to go two-deep at more than three positions in any given year.
I think the defensive philosophy is there, but not the players capable of playing the defense that Fran wants. Hopefully, next year Iowa will be able to make another step and play in the halfcourt, offensively. That way Iowa would be able to control the game in transition and in the halfcourt. The defense at Iowa has not been good as long as I have been alive, so I am not going to hold my breath that it is going to get better anytime soon.
Lick's recruiting classes were crap. That is what I am saying. Fran has recruited well in the past, and had success at small schools in small conferences. He got Melsahn Basabe to commit to him at Sienna. Imagine if Basabe developed on the same path and he was at Sienna? It wouldn't be fair against that competition. That doesn't mean Fran can coach though. All he does is get angry on the sidelines.
You make a great point Sportstalent, that I fail to address. Fran does not have a roster full of "his guys" by any means. And he is well on his way to finally having that, so we shall see. The verdict is still out on his ability to coach basketball. But to be great and consistently great in college basketball you have to have a great coach. And great coaches have to recruit and strategize. Coach K does it all, Thad Matta does it all, Tom Izzo does both.
I'm saying that to me, Lick showed he can do one, Coach in game and not recruit. And as of right now, Fran has shown that he can do only one ( recruit and not coach). That is my interpretation. But, we don't know yet about the coaching. Next year will be the real start of the judgement on that front. Once he has his roster in place.
You make a great point Sportstalent, that I fail to address. Fran does not have a roster full of "his guys" by any means. And he is well on his way to finally having that, so we shall see. The verdict is still out on his ability to coach basketball. But to be great and consistently great in college basketball you have to have a great coach. And great coaches have to recruit and strategize. Coach K does it all, Thad Matta does it all, Tom Izzo does both.
I'm saying that to me, Lick showed he can do one, Coach in game and not recruit. And as of right now, Fran has shown that he can do only one ( recruit and not coach). That is my interpretation. But, we don't know yet about the coaching. Next year will be the real start of the judgement on that front. Once he has his roster in place.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
You know Iowa beat Purdue last season, if you are going to hang your hat on Lick beating MSU, then Fran compares very well on the coaching aspect so far.
My main point being that Fran has had far less talent in his first two seasons than just about any coach ever to coach at Iowa.
Fran took losing mid-majors and won conferences, Lick steps in at Butler and didn't have to build anything, they were already good.
I just don't agree that Lick is a better in game coach when he had the records he did with more talent in the beginning. Fran has had to bring in his best players to date.
There is no differnce in beating MSU and then beating Purdue. If you really think Iowa competed more with Lick than with Fran, I don't think many will agree.
Iowa right now is playing their best ball of the season and will be competitive in most of their games, I think something to look at would be margin of loss under Lick and Fran after three years and see who is on the better track.
Coaching and recruiting are important, the thing is coaching is much easier the better one can recruit. Lick simplified things by recruiting players that could handle only limited roles, period. Look at year three how Iowa finished under Lick, it is very, very doubtful Fran falls flat on his face losing by an average of 20+ pts. Also, I just don't see defections taking place, that speaks to the type of coach Fran is versus Lick.
To say all Fran does is get angry on the sidelines, is off-base.
My main point being that Fran has had far less talent in his first two seasons than just about any coach ever to coach at Iowa.
Fran took losing mid-majors and won conferences, Lick steps in at Butler and didn't have to build anything, they were already good.
I just don't agree that Lick is a better in game coach when he had the records he did with more talent in the beginning. Fran has had to bring in his best players to date.
There is no differnce in beating MSU and then beating Purdue. If you really think Iowa competed more with Lick than with Fran, I don't think many will agree.
Iowa right now is playing their best ball of the season and will be competitive in most of their games, I think something to look at would be margin of loss under Lick and Fran after three years and see who is on the better track.
Coaching and recruiting are important, the thing is coaching is much easier the better one can recruit. Lick simplified things by recruiting players that could handle only limited roles, period. Look at year three how Iowa finished under Lick, it is very, very doubtful Fran falls flat on his face losing by an average of 20+ pts. Also, I just don't see defections taking place, that speaks to the type of coach Fran is versus Lick.
To say all Fran does is get angry on the sidelines, is off-base.
twinhawkfans
Well-Known Member
This could be the dat Mel goes off, looks good early. I hope so, I extremely dislike Bo Ryan and Wisky!
