Sigh

I'd rather luck my way to a Final Four than good coach my way to 35-1 and round 2 loss but maybe I'm crazy.

 

The knock on Bruce was he couldn't build a team to win in the tournament but could look good by having a glossy regular season. Now we have a guy that is being criticized for mucking up the regular season and "lucking" his way through the tournament. So this is an interesting turn of events. In an ideal world we want to do both, sure, but I like what this team is doing now in March, when the heat is on.

 

You've got to be good enough in the regular season to get there.

I won't say I "don't care" about winning the SEC, but it's all about getting in that tournament. Keep getting in and eventually you make a run.

 

Got a long way to go before we have "lucked our way to a Final Four." Your acting like I'm advocating for Trying to get Pearl back. Why not go for a coach who does a consistently solid job throughout the entire year? You make it sound like you can only be good during the season or during the tourney, but not both.

 

Let's be honest we had a damn easy draw. An Iowa team - while good - lost like 20 straight games and was used to second half collapses.. The most over seeded team in the tourney in Umass and and outmanned Mercer team that would beat Duke maybe 2 out of 10 tries.

 

The be honest, what he's done so far is what I expected with this group. The 16 was where I thought they should wind up at minimum. Now, I'm excited and all because it is a run to the 16, but I'm going to need a Michigan win to convince me of anything more.

Jo, I know you can't look at the last three years and what recruiting looks like for 14 and 15 and tell me you thing everything is going great program-wise. Yes, it's a fun and exciting run, but look at everything in whole. Maybe this is the catalyst to change things - I don't know - but as of now this little run is the outlier to the Cuonzo run, not the norm.

 

These are my thoughts, after much observation and ruminating:

1. Perhaps we have poisoned the well with Cuonzo, and we will part ways, amicably (and regrettably in my opinion) in a way that is beneficial to both parties.
2. I am convinced Cuonzo can and will have a successful career coaching basketball. What is his ceiling? I'm not sure yet. But he has proven in six years -- to me at least -- that teams want to play for him, that he can establish an identity, and he can develop players.
3. Maybe he is not a great X's and O's coach, but there are good X's and O's coaches out there. I see no reason he can't find one, if he is willing, and place them on the bench beside him.
4. Lastly, I am willing to trade a win here and there for the notion that I LIKE our coach and what he is about. I enjoyed Bruce -- like everyone did -- but interacted with him while holding my nose. My perspective on this issue has changed the last few years, from being a "win at all costs" proponent to something that balances academics, winning, character development and so on. This makes me naive in some ways, and I know it, but that's where I sit now.

 

Volfanjo, I really need to let the season end before I can properly reflect. At the beginning of the season, I said Sweet 16 or GTFO. He did that, but somehow he did it while managing to leave a feeling that it was a fluke.

Objectively, he has done nothing but improve while here. Also, NOT making the tourney last year was at least a fluky as making it this year. Sort of.

I need to think.

 

I like him, too. That said, this is probably the ceiling. I can't see him assembling a more talented team any time in the near future. Despite that, he barely made the tournament this year. And honestly, if the SEC isn't having a historically terrible year, he probably isn't even on the bubble at the end of the year. I just can't find reasons to be optimistic about anything concerning winning basketball games.

 

Also, Martin is no joke when it comes to academics and character. That is supposed to mean something.

 

I think season 2 was worse than season 1. I know win totals don't necessarily reflect that, but still.

 

I think whatever his "faults" are, are "correctable" faults. Meaning, he can hire this person to coach guards better, or hire this person to recruit such and such area better. The BIG PICTURE things he seems to understand, and he does seem to relate at an intimate (not just at a superficial level) to a certain type of player, like Josh Richardson, or Armani Moore.

Now, will he actually do these things? Is he so incredibly loyal and stubborn that he refuses change? Good and fair question.

 

Maybe. But why are we to believe he'll fix things when there apparently hasn't been an effort this far into his tenure? And why if he relates so well to the players is effort such a frequent issue? I get that it's not a problem currently, but every team he's had has stretches of just not giving a damn.

I don't want to be pessimistic with Cuonzo, but I also don't want to be unrealistic.

 

I'm not sure what makes you feel like he's going to get it done somewhere? Recruiting has been spotty, individual improvement limited (until now, which is likely about guys interviewing for jobs), making guys do what they are supposed to be doing, court discipline gone, effort level is maddening, defense is shaky (but better of late). There is a lot of evidence that the coaching has been lacking and it isn't just the Xs and Os. Motivation has been as bad as any of it.

If the team regularly played like it has for the past couple weeks for the majority of its games, the approach would be different from fans and I, personally, would agree. He gets player support but uses it for nothing, IMO. It's hard for me to see it getting better unless he begins applying lessons in a hurry.

 

Yep, agree with everything. Also, I'm happy that we have good kids and he emphasizes academics, but surely those things aren't necessarily mutually exclusive when matched with on court success and production. I'm not overly satisfied with the university paying for the country's most expensive mentor.

 

I agree. He inherited little Season 1. Season 2, they should have made the tourney even without Maymon. Much like they shouldn't have been on the bubble this year. But that sweet, sweet 16...

 

This is fair. And the "passing classes, not getting arrested" criteria SHOULD be a given at any serious university.

 

I have been told by many much closer to the program than me that Cuonzo has a hard time trusting others and tries to do too much himself. I think that is a major, if not only, reason the staff has stayed the same. There are areas of improvement, and he has not shown a willingness to correct them. Now, part of being the head man at major conference school is the ability to delegate and take more of a CEO role. He's got to adapt to that here.

I like what he's about as a person. Love it actually. Want him to be successful if for no other reason than to show that a good guy CAN win. And would love for that to happen here.

Now, in the past 24 days, if he so chooses, he's earned himself a year 4 and the necessary contract stuff (for recruiting) to see if this is a blip or if a corner has been turned. However, I do not feel any criticism I've had of him is unwarranted. It's been fair, and I think it's also fair to say I've been in his corner and have wanted him to succeed.

 

Until ten games or so ago this team looked dead in the water. Considering it's year three for Martin and his teams have all had that similar look and feel, most criticism was warranted.

Nobody owes him an apology for his team finally living up to their potential.

 

My biggest pet peeve in a coach. If you hire an assistant, let them do their damn job. If not, don't hire one.