slufanskip Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 I understand your question and I agree there has to be a point ... but IMO it would be a very difficult decision to make ... I guess the point to make the change is only when you believe the younger guys or the guys waiting to play are better. If you don't believe they are ... then IMO you cannot make the change. I still say you don't sacrifice one game to play the younger guys ... you only play them if you feel they give you the best chance to win. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 AJ, I think the young players have more talent - the issue is does Brad trust them or not during a game. I really do not want to get into this argument about earning or not earning playing time in practice. Some of you think that players actually do earn their playing time in practice - truth is some players do not. If they are the star and they have an off practice do you really think they won't play? Don't kid yourself - they will play. Now if the star talks back to the coach or dogs it all the time then he might get benched for some short period of time such as not starting but coming in after 5 minutes. Young players on the other hand have to have good practices all the time or else they are said not to be working hard enough - go figure. The only constant is coaches need to win games to keep their jobs and so they are always going to error on the side of the known quanity even if it means holding a young player back - got to earn your dues. Now I am not sure what has happened lately with the Bills - but do you really think the upperclassmen all of a sudden started dogging it in practice or do you think Brad simply realized he was going nowhere fast with them and he better shake things up to try to get some better results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Skip - but at what point do you say I need to do something different because things are not getting better. Yes it is tough call to do this to the upperclassmen but they helped cause the situation by not delivering. It has always been my understanding that coaches strive to bring in better players than they have - therefore, the question of are the younger players better is already answered particularily if the upperclassmen are not delivering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseugnekillib Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 imo, when SLU was 2-10, part of the problem was that the freshmen weren't ready, but were force into long minutes. The piss poor record wasn't all the seniors making. As stated earlier, RB and TF could not match last year's production because of injuries and the freshman weren't ready, a really bad combination. I believe the seniors deserved a shot at performing in the C-USA, where they had success last season. I also think the switch over to youth was about right.....2/3 of the way thru the season. Unfortunately, SLU had insufficient talent at the soph/junior level to compensate for the underperforming seniors and inexperienced freshmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Tseugnekillib -the problem was the freshmen were not getting any minutes at all. In Brad's mind they were not ready but the problem was neither were the upperclassmen. Until TF was determined that his bb days were over, Ian was seeing very little time. RB's injuries were unfortunate but he was still eating up big minutes. IO was playing lots of minutes and while he was doing better than last year and better than the other upperclassmen, he still was not able to provide the key floor leadership and performance needed. It was not until about 4 games ago game did you see more of the younger players get real minutes and really only in the last two have they been playing alot. Look at the results - a close loss to DePaul who is a possible NCAA tourney team and road victory over USF. The only point I have been trying to make is that what Brad has finally done - I applaud - but he could have done it earlier and maybe we would be even farther along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tseugnekillib Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 imo, the freshmen weren't ready earlier....witness DP. Obviously, there is no perfect measuring stick as to when a true freshman is ready. You don't have one, nor do I. Brad has 20+ years of college coaching to assist in his decision making. His measuring stick is no doubt more accurate than mine(average-joe-fan) and possibly yours. When does a freshman's progress overtake a regressing upperclassman? Depends. It's a matter of opinion.....do you like your steak rare, medium rare, or medium.... I sure Danny Brown's rapid progress was because he had a year of prep school under his belt. I believe most people seriously underestimate the transition from high school to serious D1 competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Simply when you feel as a coach they are the better players or the ones that give you the better chance of winning. I don't know when that should have been ... I don't attend practices accept for a couple at the beginning of the season, so it is hard for me to say when I think it should have happenned. But if Brad was saying some of them didn't practice well and you have proven veterans who may not be playing as well as they had in the past but showed glimpses ... and you have a young player who you feel doesn't practice very well ... how on earth do you play that young player ... what would you have to go by to assume he could do better if he doesn't even practice well. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLUMS81 Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 I for one thought AD had emerged as our new secret scoring weapon after his 29 point performance last year. Obviously, not the case. Most coaches, like most stockbrokers, probably base their strategy on track records and likelihood of success when making their decisions. Brad has stated that he believes in upperclassmen taking charge of a team and getting the majority of playing time. In general, this is a reasonable concept that works for a lot of successful teams. It assumes that players improve from year to year. I'll bet that RB, IO and TF are less than thrilled with their performance this season. If Brad's use of younger players at the start of the game helps to win games, then so be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Skip and Tbill - look back at my posts. I have only talked about playing the younger guys once the season clearly became a bust. I never advocated playing them from the start. When we were 2-10 and our performance was showing nothing but consistency - poor offensive play - then I think you have look towards the future. That was the point I was trying to make. At the risk of opening up a new argument I would assert that IO's play last year was inconsistent and his tendency to turn the ball over and take ill advised shots was something he was always doing so why be surprised that he did it this year - I admit he had been the most consistent player of th this team this but that really is not saying much at least to this point. RB's offense tailed off last year in the second half and his defense was always somewhat soft so why be surprised that his scoring and defensive performance has been what it has this year - I understand he has been injured but why play somebody who is not able to perform at a high level due to injury unless they are just so good you are better off with them at 75% but that is not something you can say about RB. AD was a streaky shooter and tended to turn the ball over at times in his previous years here so why be surprised that his scoring has been very inconsistent and his decisions at times questionable when handling the ball. The point I am trying to make is play them until it becomes clear that the season is not going to be a success - then try to salvage what you can for the future and try to keep some fan enthusiam - what do we really have to hang our hats on from this year - no post season play, no decent win totals, just the hopes of the future. That is why I wanted to see the younger players see more minutes and I am glad Brad has finally started doing that. I personally would have liked it a little earlier but lets not split hairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Majerus Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 You think stock brokers base their strategy on long term track records and potential future results? They're salesmen; not investment gurus. Not to flame; just to help a fellow fan rethink, and possibly save his retirement nest egg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheA_Bomb Posted February 11, 2005 Share Posted February 11, 2005 Good point on Troy-Boy he was a waste and needed about 5 minutes to get a shot off for the rest of his career at SLU. Even blind squirrels find a nut every now and then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 I agree the change has to be made sometime ... but only when you believe the younger guys give you the best chance to win the game. If you are sacrificing your better players to get playing time for kids ... you are throwing the game. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.