Next man/woman up ! or should I say OUT !.....

[Moooooo]

But, she hasn't had the recruits that Aston has had either. I just wonder if she would be successful with higher rated recruits. Anyway, just putting her name out there. I don't know.

The thing is, there is no guarantee she would sign higher-rated recruits at a school like Texas. Lots of folks believe (mistakenly, IMO) that every head coach at Texas regardless of the sport will have an easy time signing the elite players; it doesn't work that way, unfortunately. Any new head coach will be competing head to head with Baylor and Texas A&M for the top in-state recruits; they better be good at recruiting.

Definitely not knocking her specifically, as I haven't read much about her as a coach and recruiter. But, in this day and age, if a coach doesn't have a reputation as a "great" recruiter, then any AD is taking a big gamble on them being able to recruit at a high enough level to meet expectations regarding wins.

 

[jusme828]

The thing is, there is no guarantee she would sign higher-rated recruits at a school like Texas. Lots of folks believe (mistakenly, IMO) that every head coach at Texas regardless of the sport will have an easy time signing the elite players; it doesn't work that way, unfortunately.

As we found out with Goestenkors (even though I still believe her lack of recruiting Texas wasn't her fault).
I was just putting a female name out there that has had some recent success.

 

[kurupt]

The thing is, there is no guarantee she would sign higher-rated recruits at a school like Texas. Lots of folks believe (mistakenly, IMO) that every head coach at Texas regardless of the sport will have an easy time signing the elite players; it doesn't work that way, unfortunately. Any new head coach will be competing head to head with Baylor and Texas A&M for the top in-state recruits; they better be good at recruiting.

Definitely not knocking her specifically, as I haven't read much about her as a coach and recruiter. But, in this day and age, if a coach doesn't have a reputation as a "great" recruiter, then any AD is taking a big gamble on them being able to recruit at a high enough level to meet expectations regarding wins.

I would be happy with the sort of 2nd tier recruits that Texas has gotten of late with the Indiana coach because I know that she would more than likely get the most out of them. I just can’t say the same for KA.

 

[kurupt]

As we found out with Goestenkors (even though I still believe her lack of recruiting Texas wasn't her fault).
I was just putting a female name out there that has had some recent success.

I hate to rehash things but there has always been a misconception that Gail didn’t recruit well which isn’t true. The majority of them just ended up having career ending injuries. Also keep in mind that Imani was also a Gail recruit.

 

[HnH]

I would be happy with the sort of 2nd tier recruits that Texas has gotten of late with the Indiana coach because I know that she would more than likely get the most out of them. I just can’t say the same for KA.

So then you're talking about having a program like an Iowa State was historically, with 2nd tier recruits who buy into a system under good coaches and can usually finish in the upper half of the conference, make the NCAA tournament, maybe win a game or two ... but let's be honest, that's not the recipe for a nationally elite program, which in my mind should be the goal.

 

[Moooooo]

There are very few coaches out there now who are successful in all the phases that make fans happy: elite recruiting, high player development, individual player accomplishments (All-Americans), competing for and winning conference championships, consistent success in the post-season, and competing for and winning national championships. Good luck hiring one that comes out of a box with all those attributes.

Just look at our volleyball head coach, Jerritt Elliott. He inherited a program which had hit rock bottom under Jim Moore. Jerritt had to bring in better talent to be competitive in the Big 12, and elite talent to catch up to Nebraska. He did it, but I'm sure he would tell you it wasn't easy. In addition, he had to learn about being a head coach on the job, as he'd never been one. In 2006, he began a streak of getting his teams to the Elite 8 (which unfortunately ended in 2019). He reached his first Final Four in 2008, and was able to reach the Final Four in 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016). He won the national title in 2012, and finished as national runner-up in 2009, 2015, and 2016. Despite all that, you still have so many Texas fans complaining that he's not winning enough for their taste; they easily choose to forget all the hard work he put into building HIS program.

So, all that said to basically say I doubt Texas fans would be happy if our next basketball head coach (men's and/or women's) wins one post-season NCAA tourney game every now and again based on recruiting "average" talent. Just not realistic based on expectations due to success we've achieved in the past (even if that means elite success in women's hoops like 33 years ago).

 

[Moooooo]

I would be happy with the sort of 2nd tier recruits that Texas has gotten of late with the Indiana coach because I know that she would more than likely get the most out of them. I just can’t say the same for KA.

I think you'd be in the minority. And, there's just no guarantee a coach will mimic their previous strengths should they come to Texas.

Aston was hired despite having minimum head coaching experience, and no post-season success.; IMO, there wasn't enough in her resume' to gauge her player development, and X's and O's coaching. But, that's who Plonsky hired. We all had different opinions of that decision.

Yet, because of Aston's early success in recruiting at Texas, fans just assumed wins and championships would come easily. Having to compete against veteran, proven coaches like Mulkey and Blair was always going to be an uphill battle for Karen. And, any new head coach most likely won't enjoy instant success at Texas as they will have to work hard to bring in higher-level talent, and still compete against two coaches within a 100-mile radius who have national championships under their belts.

 

[BrewComLey]

I would be happy with the sort of 2nd tier recruits that Texas has gotten of late with the Indiana coach because I know that she would more than likely get the most out of them. I just can’t say the same for KA.

Since we're throwing names out here, has anyone suggested Steve Gomez of Lubbock Christian. I know he's not a Division I school coach but being in Lubbock he has Texas Connections, in a National Tournament every year, and has coached on the USA teams recently. The team has 3 losses this year: Texas, Baylor, and Mississippi State.

 

[kurupt]

So then you're talking about having a program like an Iowa State was historically, with 2nd tier recruits who buy into a system under good coaches and can usually finish in the upper half of the conference, make the NCAA tournament, maybe win a game or two ... but let's be honest, that's not the recipe for a nationally elite program, which in my mind should be the goal.

I want a coach that’s going to coach them up. Hiring the right assistant coaches will bring in the highly touted recruits.

 

[kurupt]

I think you'd be in the minority. And, there's just no guarantee a coach will mimic their previous strengths should they come to Texas.

Aston was hired despite having minimum head coaching experience, and no post-season success.; IMO, there wasn't enough in her resume' to gauge her player development, and X's and O's coaching. But, that's who Plonsky hired. We all had different opinions of that decision.

Yet, because of Aston's early success in recruiting at Texas, fans just assumed wins and championships would come easily. Having to compete against veteran, proven coaches like Mulkey and Blair was always going to be an uphill battle for Karen. And, any new head coach most likely won't enjoy instant success at Texas as they will have to work hard to bring in higher-level talent, and still compete against two coaches within a 100-mile radius who have national championships under their belts.

Personally I don’t really care about instant success, just bring in a coach that can run an offense please. The press conference the other day was head shaking material as usual when KA is explaining the teams ineptitude in that area.

 

[WCBBNUT]

"Competitive in the B12" is a rapidly descending bar, to put it nicely. Baylor is the only team in the top 25 right now.

Which is kind of odd considering the B12 crushed the SEC this year in the B12/SEC challenge.

 

[HnH]

Which is kind of odd considering the B12 crushed the SEC this year in the B12/SEC challenge.

The SEC isn't all that great either this year, but some of the results in the challenge were complete outliers compared to how the rest of the season has gone:

• West Virginia over Mississippi State. WV already had a loss to Creighton and has now been in free fall since mid-January and is currently on the bubble. MSU's only other losses are to Stanford and South Carolina, looking at a likely 3 seed.
  
• Oklahoma over LSU. This was a head scratcher as well. OK had looked horrible in losing to Houston, Wichita State and WKU. LSU has a bunch of good wins this season. Again, OK is a bubble team, LSU maybe a 5 or 6 as of now (though they just lost their best player to injury).

The B12 also benefited from the fact that South Carolina and Kentucky, the #1 and #3 teams from the SEC, didn't play in the challenge. Meanwhile, Ole Miss, Auburn, Alabama and Florida all played and lost.

 

[WCBBNUT]

The SEC isn't all that great either this year, but some of the results in the challenge were complete outliers compared to how the rest of the season has gone:

• West Virginia over Mississippi State. WV already had a loss to Creighton and has now been in free fall since mid-January and is currently on the bubble. MSU's only other losses are to Stanford and South Carolina, looking at a likely 3 seed.
  
• Oklahoma over LSU. This was a head scratcher as well. OK had looked horrible in losing to Houston, Wichita State and WKU. LSU has a bunch of good wins this season. Again, OK is a bubble team, LSU maybe a 5 or 6 as of now (though they just lost their best player to injury).

The B12 also benefited from the fact that South Carolina and Kentucky, the #1 and #3 teams from the SEC, didn't play in the challenge. Meanwhile, Ole Miss, Auburn, Alabama and Florida all played and lost.

A win is a win. The argument could be made that there is more parity in the B12.

 

[Seattle4UT]

A win is a win. The argument could be made that there is more parity in the B12.

For teams 2-10, yes. All teams are light years behind Baylor, sadly.

 

[WCBBNUT]

For teams 2-10, yes. All teams are light years behind Baylor, sadly.

Pointless comment but thanks. We understand you can’t get passed Baylor’s success. Cut. Paste. Cut. Paste.

 

[HnH]

A win is a win. The argument could be made that there is more parity in the B12.

Perhaps, but what good is parity when everyone is pretty mediocre?

 

[kurupt]

The SEC isn't all that great either this year, but some of the results in the challenge were complete outliers compared to how the rest of the season has gone:

• West Virginia over Mississippi State. WV already had a loss to Creighton and has now been in free fall since mid-January and is currently on the bubble. MSU's only other losses are to Stanford and South Carolina, looking at a likely 3 seed.
  
• Oklahoma over LSU. This was a head scratcher as well. OK had looked horrible in losing to Houston, Wichita State and WKU. LSU has a bunch of good wins this season. Again, OK is a bubble team, LSU maybe a 5 or 6 as of now (though they just lost their best player to injury).

The B12 also benefited from the fact that South Carolina and Kentucky, the #1 and #3 teams from the SEC, didn't play in the challenge. Meanwhile, Ole Miss, Auburn, Alabama and Florida all played and lost.

How are those wins outliers? Are you trying to tell me West Virginia couldn’t beat Mississippi st again on a neutral floor? And South Carolina’s a nice team but isn’t a world beater and Kentucky even with a healthy Howard is so so. IMO most of WCBB is mediocre this year, even the teams that are supposed to be great really aren’t that great.

 

[WCBBNUT]

Perhaps, but what good is parity when everyone is pretty mediocre?

Well I guess then you are saying the SEC is pretty mediocre too.

 

[WCBBNUT]

How are those wins outliers? Are you trying to tell me West Virginia couldn’t beat Mississippi st again on a neutral floor? And South Carolina’s a nice team but isn’t a world beater and Kentucky even with a healthy Howard is so so. IMO most of WCBB is mediocre this year, even the teams that are supposed to be great really aren’t that great.

I’m not arguing but would like to suggest that you could just as easily say there is more parity across the board.

 

[HnH]

How are those wins outliers? Are you trying to tell me West Virginia couldn’t beat Mississippi st again on a neutral floor? And South Carolina’s a nice team but isn’t a world beater and Kentucky even with a healthy Howard is so so. IMO most of WCBB is mediocre this year, even the teams that are supposed to be great really aren’t that great.

They were the very definition of outliers for both teams:
WVU was MSU's worst loss (by far) of the season so far.
MSU was WVU's best win (by far) of the season so far.

I agree that WCBB is down this year. We just saw this with Louisville losing 2 games over the weekend. Whoever gets the last #1 seed is probably going to be the weakest #1 seed in a very, very long time.

 

[HnH]

Well I guess then you are saying the SEC is pretty mediocre too.

Overall, yeah they are.

But they do have one team that's roughly equal to Baylor and another team that's in the top 10. The Big 12 has no one in the top 25 after Baylor.

I will say that the bottom half of the SEC is worse than the bottom half of the Big 12. In that sense, yes, there is more parity in the B12 because the separation between #2 and #10 is relatively small. The SEC has one team (Ole Miss) that's probably the worst team from a power conference ever.

 

[Seattle4UT]

Pointless comment but thanks. We understand you can’t get passed Baylor’s success. Cut. Paste. Cut. Paste.

You don’t speak for the Texas WBB community so shut your trap. As much as I dislike Baylor the facts remain they are the class of the Big 12. Your continued support of this fraudulent coaching staff is telling in how you don’t want Texas to succeed. You know it!

 

[WCBBNUT]

You don’t speak for the Texas WBB community so shut your trap. As much as I dislike Baylor the facts remain they are the class of the Big 12. Your continued support of this fraudulent coaching staff is telling in how you don’t want Texas to succeed. You know it!

Ha ha ha ha ha. Shut my trap? Oh bless your heart. You come here and post ad nauseam about Baylor, a team which represents less than 10 percent of our games each season. It’s a big word I know but ad nauseam means so often as to become annoying.

If you could just bring something insightful or even new, but I guess that’s just too much to ask.

Seattle the one hit wonder. Baylor. Baylor. Baylor.

Sure Jan. The Baylor thread is still active in here. Go enjoy your echo chamber.

 

[Dionysus]

You don’t speak for the Texas WBB community so shut your trap.

Watch yourself with this kind of talk if you want to continue posting here.

Read the Posting Guidelines:

Please be respectful of your fellow members, as well as the coaches and players. Personal attacks, name-calling and aggressive messages are not acceptable.

 

[loyallonghorn]

The B12 also benefited from the fact that South Carolina and Kentucky, the #1 and #3 teams from the SEC, didn't play in the challenge. Meanwhile, Ole Miss, Auburn, Alabama and Florida all played and lost.

I would add that neither did near-bottom Missouri and Vanderbilt participated in the Big 12-SEC Challenge.

Let's assume South Carolina, Kentucky, Missouri, and Vanderbilt ran the table against imaginary Big 12 teams, the Big 12 still wins the challenge 8-6, instead of 8-2.

 

[HnH]

I would add that neither did near-bottom Missouri and Vanderbilt participated in the Big 12-SEC Challenge.

Let's assume South Carolina, Kentucky, Missouri, and Vanderbilt ran the table against imaginary Big 12 teams, the Big 12 still wins the challenge 8-6, instead of 8-2.

My original comment was not intended to be a comparison of the B12 to the SEC or an analysis of the B12/SEC challenge. It was only to counter the notion that being "competitive in the B12" was a sufficient standard to aspire to. Last year TCU was plenty "competitive" in the B12, yet they didn't get an NCAA bid even with an 11-7 conference record. This is not the Big 12 of 8-10 years ago.

 

[loyallonghorn]

My original comment was not intended to be a comparison of the B12 to the SEC or an analysis of the B12/SEC challenge. It was only to counter the notion that being "competitive in the B12" was a sufficient standard to aspire to. Last year TCU was plenty "competitive" in the B12, yet they didn't get an NCAA bid even with an 11-7 conference record. This is not the Big 12 of 8-10 years ago.

I have to agree with that, HnH!

Massey provides the Big 12 as the #3 ranked conference overall, just a smidge behind the Big 10, with Pac-12 leading the way, far ahead of everyone else. SEC is nearer the last power-5 conference, ACC.

 

[WCBBNUT]

To be clear, I hope we aspire to be competitive with anyone. I hope we aspire to be the best, period. It just seems constantly posting about how we play against one team is awfully limiting. Once that point has been made - and it has indeed been made - then what’s the point of reposting as a response to everything? Most seasons we will play 30-ish games and maybe 3 will be against a particular B12 team. It could be 4 and that would certainly mean we are both having a good year.

A win is a win. A loss is a loss. I think it’s safe to say our goal as a program each year is to win as many games as we can and go as deep in the tournament as possible. Beating a particular team is simply one aspect of that goal.

Obviously anyone can post whatever they want within the guidelines. And anyone can respond to anyone’s posts within the guidelines. But if all you can post is “Baylor is better” over and over and over... eventually I think it’s reasonable for someone to post “OK. What else you got?”

Otherwise this board is gonna get awfully boring.

(edit: and putting a sh*t emoji next to everything I post is hilariously immature. )

 

[hoopsalot]

My original comment was not intended to be a comparison of the B12 to the SEC or an analysis of the B12/SEC challenge. It was only to counter the notion that being "competitive in the B12" was a sufficient standard to aspire to. Last year TCU was plenty "competitive" in the B12, yet they didn't get an NCAA bid even with an 11-7 conference record. This is not the Big 12 of 8-10 years ago.

I posted at least a year ago, maybe further back, my unhappiness with the current Big 12 configuration as it relates to women's basketball. I would say Volleyball, Soccer, and Softball also are negatively impacted though I do not follow soccer and softball closely. In my view, the lesser number of teams that might rise to top 25 or higher in any given year is a negative that outweighs the "fairness" of the round robin play. I also find the lower number of teams a little boring. I did not find much agreement then but I agree with myself more than ever. We had more variety in teams when Texas A&M, Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado were in the mix. Of course, it does not help that the recent performances of one of the previous standard bearer's, OU, has sunk to where OU may miss the tournament for the second year in a row.

 

[flash34]

So to change the subject slightly on a Monday afternoon.......help me understand the land thieves (dirt burglers) demise. I certainly glow with that observation but need more. I have watched Coale et al a few times this year and they aren’t very good. Better than last few but struggling. The players are what stands out.....just not as good as what Coale put out there for decades. I guess I like Coale better now than when they were beating us every year. But a little sad. Coale seems like a coach that time has passed by, Recruiting seems to be the issue. Anybody know why? Anybody know of any issue that has caused such a drastic drop?