In partnership with CBSSports.com
The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns
The place for off topic discussion on Hookem
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
lol, he is absolutely terrible at getting his team a good look coming out of a TO and citing two examples is not proof otherwise.
Also, the guy's been here since 1998, those are his players and if they are incapable of executing the play that he draws up then he either needs to (a) draw up something that they can execute and/or (b) find players that can execute the play.
Two examples that contradict a contended fact might not disprove the contention, but they are evidence to call the contention into question.
I'm not saying Barnes is a great play caller, because he's not, but sometimes I would suggest that you watch other teams try to do things. When they lack experience, they don't look any better than this team.
I don't know what Barnes being in Austin for 15 years has to do with teaching a teamful of inexperience to do the right thing in a half-season. You dumb it down too much and its easy to stop.
“Kansas may wind up number one in these polls, but that would be so unfair to Texas...” -- Len Elmore, 2/13/11
Do we have enough schollies to make that happen? I didn't think we did. With a roster of:
PG: Kabongo, Felix, Taylor
SG: Lewis, Holland
SF: McClellan, Frazier, Papapetrou
PF: Randle, Holmes, Lammert, Bond
C: Ridley, Ibeh
That would be 14 scholarship players and I thought you are only allowed 13? Unless someone like Bond were to transfer, which would be possible if Randle were to commit....
Yeah, one would have to leave. But if the above occurred the 2 most likely candidates would be Holland & Bond & I don't see how Bond plays at all next year if Randle came aboard. When you add that to the fact that he's from the northeast & that he'd be a junior, it makes him the most likely candidate.
Kabongo is gone.
My point was that this has been a problem throughout his tenure here and that our youth should not absolve him of criticism since he was the one responsible for putting us into a situation where we're relying on extremely inexperienced players that are 3-4 year guys and not elite talents.
It sucks that we lost Myck, but most coaches seem able to handle their rosters well enough where they don't end up with the least experienced team in D1.
Fact of the matter is that the results over the past 4-5 seasons do not match what the man is being paid and the kind of success of a program of our stature should expect. Regardless of the mechanisms by which those facts came into being, the buck stops with him.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Hoop98 18 months ago
While that's likely, it won't be determined until he comes back and we see how he plays...
Yeah. Bond's asset was that he was a great rebounder, especially offensively. But Holmes has proved to be just as effective on the glass and he's able to be an offensive threat. So as of now Bond is just used when there's foul trouble because Lammert is more effective offensively and he's, for the most part, held his own on the glass.
Exactly, if Randle comes aboard then Randle takes Holmes' spot & Holmes' takes & improves Bond's role. Anything left over after that at the 4 spot would go to Lammert & Papi.
We're also seeing Holmes move a lot of his game away from the basket. There will be a lot of 3s he'd have a hard time covering, but I can envision a chunk of minutes every game with a big lineup with Ridley/Ibeh/Lammert, Randle, Holmes and 2 guards.
Probably just use a zone
I'll freely admit that I don't know sh** about basketball, but I love watching it, and I'm glad you guys make it a point to add it to the board. Love reading about it and learning more about prospects from y'all. Please don't stop
"I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existence."
I really support that sentiment. I don't have any up votes till midnight, but I will catch up with you then - not that it matters.
They could definitely do that but if they were able to add Randle I believe they'd feel they'd always have a better option on the wing than to slide Holmes there for any extended time.
Also, don't think that the Texas staff isn't pointing out how freely they're allowing Holmes to play to Randle.
agree, I laughed when I saw the "take away player x" stuff. Well, hell yeah, same for any team.
Of course they come from the players! The players, while on offense make turnovers, NOT while they're on defense. The offense is the problem, or at least the bigger problem - IMO. Not long ago we led the country in defensive FG percentage and block shots; sounds like we played pretty good defense. Although I know there is more to it than just FG percentage.
If you watched last night's game, you would have seen the initial stretch where we had 8 straight possesions with turnovers. I didn't see a single one that had anything to do wtih spacing or offensive scheme, rather they were poor passes and poor player decisions. Barnes is clearly not getting the job done this year, but given the unusual circumstance of having the team leader and QB sidelined unexpectedly weeks before the season, I like the fight that this team has shown. Losing Holmes last night didn't do the team any favors either. I'm not one for excuses, but this season hasn't exactly had many bounces go Texas' way for a young roster (which is Barnes fault).
There are plenty of inexperienced teams every year, and they can usually manage to get a single win in conference.
Name the last D-1 team to have NOTHING but sophomores and freshmen on the roster. Now tell me how many were in a BCS conference, and how many wins they had in conference play.
There are several other well-known coaches whose rosters were decimated after tournament runs the last few years. Connecticut, Ohio State, Florida, and others. Difference is, they missed the NCAAs, and Barnes did not. Then they bounced back. I expect Barnes to do the same thing.
When you say, the roster should be balanced enough to withstand early entries, the fact is that they have had several over the years and kept things going. They had a total rebuild after 2007, but had Durant, and Augustin step in. It was only after 2011 that they have had a total reconstruction, and you and others say, that shouldn't happen. If you have guys leave after a year, it's going to happen eventually.
What do you think the stature of Texas basketball is as a program? Duke, UNC, Kansas, generally get their guys to stay, like Texas football has gotten guys to stay the extra year. That makes a huge difference. Kentucky is embracing the total rebuild and has been grabbing enough raw talent to do it, but they're not exactly lighting the world on fire this year. Well, Texas basketball isn't on a level at Duke, UNC, or KU, and can't recruit like Kentucky. Barnes has had a top-10 decade as a program, but he hasn't brought home a NC. Ultimately, I think that's a major reason why people are so ticked at him. That, and football and baseball disappointments making it look like the Texas program stinks.
I am not saying that this isn't a disappointing season, but I have not seen signs that the team has given up, or stopped listening. McClellan got benched, and has come back with his best game of the season last night. They could have packed it in when they were down 12, but instead, they kept battling.
Barnes's record the last four years (before this one) isn't any worse than his first four, when he was building up. The guy has had one losing season in 25 years of coaching. If this isn't the bottom, then there is a problem, but I think it is.
Boston College has one senior and one junior on the roster. Neither start, the senior averages 12 mins. Yet they've managed a conference win in the ACC. That took me 5 mins, I'm sure I could find more if I wanted to, especially if I wanted to go back through the years.
In a world with early entrants, having young teams with little to no upperclassmen is quite common.
What does this prove to you? Would 1-4 be acceptable, but not winning is bad?
The point isn't that this is a bad team.
The point is that this team has been so ridiculously inept to have yet to get a single win in conference. Its very hard to not accidentally win one, even if you're complaining about youth as your excuse.
Do you have any idea the elite company Texas is in to have yet to win a single game in conferece? In the major conferences there's Texas, TCU, Penn State, Georgia Tech, and LSU. And of those, only Penn State and Texas have losing records overall.
This isn't just a bad team that's young and inexperienced. Something is broken.
OK, what do you think it is?
No doubt, they've blown games they should have won. But they were competitive with UNC, Michigan State, UCLA, KU. None of those other teams you listed has hung multiple times with teams like those.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports