Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (3 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 57  Next >

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69

Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 9:09 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


What is going on with this program? I don't follow it and thus won't comment on it, but they certainly don't look like a program that is either doing well or doing better.

Did the inexcusable disintegration of that program under the late Yow and Jed Fowler truly extend that deeply?
__________________________________
Come toward the light....

Last edited 1/7/2013 9:10 AM by CalStabbinsGhost

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 9:21 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



CalStabbinsGhost wrote: What is going on with this program? I don't follow it and thus won't comment on it, but they certainly don't look like a program that is either doing well or doing better.

Did the inexcusable disintegration of that program under the late Yow and Jed Fowler truly extend that deeply?
In her last years, Yow's health was a factor. She stayed too long and the program suffered when Yow felt she could dictate her successor and for one of the few good decisions of the Fowler era, Coach Fowler said no. The bitterness of former players that Glance was not hired has not helped the program.

Recruiting declined under Yow and Harper's decision to hire her husband and put him in charge of recruiting is a disaster and will cost her and her husband their jobs.

This is not a team, this is a collection of female basketball players. At least under Yow, they could try to win one for Kay and put aside their differences.

Harper has been at N.C. State long enough to determine if she can recruit and coach at ACC level. She was a good coach at Western Carolina, but has failed at the ACC level.

 


As for me and my house, we will support NC State
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 9:24 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



asheson50yardline wrote:
CalStabbinsGhost wrote: What is going on with this program? I don't follow it and thus won't comment on it, but they certainly don't look like a program that is either doing well or doing better.

Did the inexcusable disintegration of that program under the late Yow and Jed Fowler truly extend that deeply?
In her last years, Yow's health was a factor. She stayed too long and the program suffered when Yow felt she could dictate her successor and for one of the few good decisions of the Fowler era, Coach Fowler said no. The bitterness of former players that Glance was not hired has not helped the program.

Recruiting declined under Yow and Harper's decision to hire her husband and put him in charge of recruiting is a disaster and will cost her and her husband their jobs.

This is not a team, this is a collection of female basketball players. At least under Yow, they could try to win one for Kay and put aside their differences.

Harper has been at N.C. State long enough to determine if she can recruit and coach at ACC level. She was a good coach at Western Carolina, but has failed at the ACC level.
yeah aside from being her husband, does he bring anything to the table? I read he's 6-7 so aside from being a BB player size.

Last edited 1/7/2013 9:25 AM by BlackRazor

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 9:30 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


Ugh..... 0-3 to start ACC play is not good.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 9:46 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


I think DY gave Kellie another year to show some progress. We ended last season losing to App State in the WNIT. Not good.

I was 100% for the hire but things are not working out.

However, the season is not over and we play the holes on Thursday. A win would do wonders.

I will be there.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:06 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



JesseBolt wrote: I think DY gave Kellie another year to show some progress. We ended last season losing to App State in the WNIT. Not good.

I was 100% for the hire but things are not working out.

However, the season is not over and we play the holes on Thursday. A win would do wonders.

I will be there.
Since DY has been here, she has had bigger priorities to concentrate on. Mens basketball and football are the revenue producers, so they needed the attention first. Now that we have new blood in those areas, I believe prime attention is going to be paid to WBB. I can't fault the hiring of Harper at the time. We were in a difficult position and it was probably worth the chance. The only thing that really bothered me was the move to bypass the nepotism policy. Anyway at the time we had the choice of Glance, Harper, or someone of similar background. We were not going to double or triple outlays for salaries. Unfortunately, the Harper hire has not worked out. That has put the program in even a worse condition than when she was hired. Now it will either take some real big money to fix it or we will have to settle for a perennial bottom level program. I really believe DY will fight hard to restore the program her sister ran successfully for many years.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:11 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



chicwolf67 wrote: Ugh..... 0-3 to start ACC play is not good.
Can't recall if our men had starts like that.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:20 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


I really thought that BF would be our next WBB coach. This article states she makes just under a million dollars a year. WOW. I wonder what UNC, Duke, and FSU are paying their WBB coaches. Is it close to a million a year? If so, then we will have to pay it if we want to win ACC championships, and make runs for the big trophy.
seniorwolf60 wrote:
cp3001 wrote: I would go after the Maryland coach. They are leaving the ACC and she just might want to stay in the ACC. However she has already worked for Yow and that may be good or bad.
It would also take some very serious money as reported here.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:28 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



apackfan69 wrote: I really thought that BF would be our next WBB coach. This article states she makes just under a million dollars a year. WOW. I wonder what UNC, Duke, and FSU are paying their WBB coaches. Is it close to a million a year? If so, then we will have to pay it if we want to win ACC championships, and make runs for the big trophy.
seniorwolf60 wrote:
cp3001 wrote: I would go after the Maryland coach. They are leaving the ACC and she just might want to stay in the ACC. However she has already worked for Yow and that may be good or bad.
It would also take some very serious money as reported here.
I hope we do that in FB & men's BB before we worry or pay $ like that for women's BB.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:33 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


If it cost a million a year for a women's basketball coach then the program can continue to be at the bottom. Football needs an indoor facility.
apackfan69 wrote: I really thought that BF would be our next WBB coach. This article states she makes just under a million dollars a year. WOW. I wonder what UNC, Duke, and FSU are paying their WBB coaches. Is it close to a million a year? If so, then we will have to pay it if we want to win ACC championships, and make runs for the big trophy.
seniorwolf60 wrote:
cp3001 wrote: I would go after the Maryland coach. They are leaving the ACC and she just might want to stay in the ACC. However she has already worked for Yow and that may be good or bad.
It would also take some very serious money as reported here.

 


As for me and my house, we will support NC State
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:46 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



seniorwolf60 wrote:
JesseBolt wrote: I think DY gave Kellie another year to show some progress. We ended last season losing to App State in the WNIT. Not good.

I was 100% for the hire but things are not working out.

However, the season is not over and we play the holes on Thursday. A win would do wonders.

I will be there.
Since DY has been here, she has had bigger priorities to concentrate on. Mens basketball and football are the revenue producers, so they needed the attention first. Now that we have new blood in those areas, I believe prime attention is going to be paid to WBB. I can't fault the hiring of Harper at the time. We were in a difficult position and it was probably worth the chance. The only thing that really bothered me was the move to bypass the nepotism policy. Anyway at the time we had the choice of Glance, Harper, or someone of similar background. We were not going to double or triple outlays for salaries. Unfortunately, the Harper hire has not worked out. That has put the program in even a worse condition than when she was hired. Now it will either take some real big money to fix it or we will have to settle for a perennial bottom level program. I really believe DY will fight hard to restore the program her sister ran successfully for many years.
No doubt that the money makers should get the attention first. I love both of her big hires. 

When the time comes, DY has proven here and at MD she can find the right coach, no matter the sport.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:52 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



asheson50yardline wrote: If it cost a million a year for a women's basketball coach then the program can continue to be at the bottom. Football needs an indoor facility.
apackfan69 wrote: I really thought that BF would be our next WBB coach. This article states she makes just under a million dollars a year. WOW. I wonder what UNC, Duke, and FSU are paying their WBB coaches. Is it close to a million a year? If so, then we will have to pay it if we want to win ACC championships, and make runs for the big trophy.
seniorwolf60 wrote:
cp3001 wrote: I would go after the Maryland coach. They are leaving the ACC and she just might want to stay in the ACC. However she has already worked for Yow and that may be good or bad.
It would also take some very serious money as reported here.

I would love to see Rivers and Williams reach into their pockets and get the indoor practice facility funding started.

Regardless of how it is funded, I do not think it would stop/hinder DY from making a bigger move in WBB.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 10:58 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


I suspect things are running its course with Harper. I figured she'd be gone this year or next year, but if we continue to tank it looks like it is this year. Her recruiting hasn't been what is needed, and nothing about this sort of speculation is going to help that any.

For those thinking we're going to pay $1M for women's basketball for an established name, I'd suggest looking at the hires in other sports, particularly the non-revenue ones. I suspect we're going to go with another young coach who has successfully run a program. We'll try and find one who has a reputation as a good recruiter and someone with some recent success.

The hire will probably look a lot like Harper (but with a national rep as a good recruiter). Harper shows that there is risk with this type of hire. Some work out, and some don't.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/7/2013 11:04 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 


The AD (Fowler) should NEVER have agreed to let Kellie have her husband on staff for a myriad of reasons.   I mean, how can you be objective in your staff evaluations if it is your husband? (or son, as has occurred in many basketball and football staffs at other schools)

Of course, we're talking about Jed.  So I'm not a bit surprised.  But I am disappointed that no one higher than Jed's pay grade stepped in to say, "um........NO."
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/7/2013 11:08 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



ribread wrote: I suspect things are running its course with Harper. I figured she'd be gone this year or next year, but if we continue to tank it looks like it is this year. Her recruiting hasn't been what is needed, and nothing about this sort of speculation is going to help that any.

For those thinking we're going to pay $1M for women's basketball for an established name, I'd suggest looking at the hires in other sports, particularly the non-revenue ones. I suspect we're going to go with another young coach who has successfully run a program. We'll try and find one who has a reputation as a good recruiter and someone with some recent success.

The hire will probably look a lot like Harper (but with a national rep as a good recruiter). Harper shows that there is risk with this type of hire. Some work out, and some don't.

I agree. There is value out there in the coaching ranks. It just has to be identified. I think we will have to end up paying more than the current outlay, but the million dollar thing is ridiculous. Besides, the high pay doesn't guarantee success either. Check out the story of Carolyn Peck and Florida. I don't know of any WBB program that covers their expenses. The question is how much money the schools and their supporters are willing to lose.

Just for reference, I am reposting the Bloomberg article from 2011 on the subject.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/8/2013 9:33 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 


interesting comments from Harper, Kastanek and Burke in Technician
www.technicianonline.com/sport...1a4bcf6878.html

“The biggest thing is: Where is our focus at?” Kastanek said. “Is it at just beating one team, and then we are satisfied, or is it at being a great team in general?”

“A great basketball team gets motivated and excited for every opponent they play,” Kastanek said.

“This was tough, we couldn’t get anything going on the offensive end,” Harper said. “We weren’t taking good shots, but also we were taking rushed shots.

“I thought we were too soft on defense at the start of the game, and Miami played with so much confidence and was able to dictate the pace of the game,” Harper said. “I thought in the first half our offense dictated how we played on defense.”

“I feel like our guards really just look for me,” Burke said. “I feel like a lot of my points come from our guards being unselfish.”

FB prediction (2010) 3-9, 1-7 (2011) 5-7, 2-6 (2012) 7-5, 4-4, (2013) 7-5, 4-4
MBB prediction: (2010-11) 21-9,10-6 (2011-12) 19-12, 7-9 (2012-13) 24-7,12-6


Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/8/2013 9:50 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 


^ Wow those comments are very telling. It would seem Harper would make a starting lineup change or two at this point.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 8:48 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 


ACC WBB Digest's weekly updateis out. No surprise that State is the "Trending Down" team right now.
Trending Down: NC State. A game after giving #3 Duke all they wanted in Raleigh, the Pack flopped against the one team in the ACC that had underachieved more than they had to date. All it took was one second-half stretch for the Pack to lose its focus and the Deacs to pounce, building a comfortable lead. The same thing happened against Duke; the game was neck-and-neck until Duke went on a couple of small runs to establish breathing room, and NC State had to scramble hard just to stay barely competitive. The Pack don't have anything resembling a killer instinct and seem to lack motivation and focus during games.
Here's what they writeabout the UNC-NC State game Thursday:
UNC @ NC State, 1/10/13. The Heels have not exactly played beautiful basketball, but the bottom line is that they're making enough plays to win. The Wolfpack have the talent to match up with them as well as the size, and Reynolds can be a significant home court advantage. I wouldn't say this is a must-win game for the Pack, but it's close to one if they want to be competitive in the ACC this year. For the Heels, it's a chance to stay at the top of the standings at the expense of an arch-rival. This will let us know if Carolina can pull together on the road against a tough team.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 8:51 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 


These quotes are the most telling to me, and I think they underlie what will eventually be Harper's undoing. 
wolfer79 wrote: interesting comments from Harper, Kastanek and Burke in Technician
www.technicianonline.com/sport...1a4bcf6878.html

“The biggest thing is: Where is our focus at?” Kastanek said. “Is it at just beating one team, and then we are satisfied, or is it at being a great team in general?”

A great basketball team gets motivated and excited for every opponent they play,” Kastanek said.

“This was tough, we couldn’t get anything going on the offensive end,” Harper said. “We weren’t taking good shots, but also we were taking rushed shots.

“I thought we were too soft on defense at the start of the game, and Miami played with so much confidence and was able to dictate the pace of the game,” Harper said. “I thought in the first half our offense dictated how we played on defense.”

“I feel like our guards really just look for me,” Burke said. “I feel like a lot of my points come from our guards being unselfish.”

Last edited 1/9/2013 9:05 AM by loneycafe

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 8:55 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 



loneycafe wrote: These quotes are the most telling to me. The Kastanek ones are especially interesting given what I've heard about Harper's recruiting pitch. 
 
Given that our recruiting sucks, what is our recruiting pitch?
Go Pack!!!!
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/9/2013 9:08 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



asheson50yardline wrote:
CalStabbinsGhost wrote: What is going on with this program? I don't follow it and thus won't comment on it, but they certainly don't look like a program that is either doing well or doing better.

Did the inexcusable disintegration of that program under the late Yow and Jed Fowler truly extend that deeply?
In her last years, Yow's health was a factor. She stayed too long and the program suffered when Yow felt she could dictate her successor and for one of the few good decisions of the Fowler era, Coach Fowler said no. The bitterness of former players that Glance was not hired has not helped the program.

Recruiting declined under Yow and Harper's decision to hire her husband and put him in charge of recruiting is a disaster and will cost her and her husband their jobs.

This is not a team, this is a collection of female basketball players. At least under Yow, they could try to win one for Kay and put aside their differences.

Harper has been at N.C. State long enough to determine if she can recruit and coach at ACC level. She was a good coach at Western Carolina, but has failed at the ACC level.
I agree with some of that.  You's health hurt recruiting- but Glance might have been able to right the ship after Yow retired.  Unfortunately, Fowler chose a pretty young thing and many who applauded that decision are now saying "no!" to going after Glance.  There's no way to know for sure if things would have been better with Glance- but it doesn't seem likely that they would have been worse.  She certainly would have support from Yow's players, and she would have done better at recruiting than Harper has.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/9/2013 10:28 AM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



Engineer65 wrote:
asheson50yardline wrote:
CalStabbinsGhost wrote: What is going on with this program? I don't follow it and thus won't comment on it, but they certainly don't look like a program that is either doing well or doing better.

Did the inexcusable disintegration of that program under the late Yow and Jed Fowler truly extend that deeply?
In her last years, Yow's health was a factor. She stayed too long and the program suffered when Yow felt she could dictate her successor and for one of the few good decisions of the Fowler era, Coach Fowler said no. The bitterness of former players that Glance was not hired has not helped the program.

Recruiting declined under Yow and Harper's decision to hire her husband and put him in charge of recruiting is a disaster and will cost her and her husband their jobs.

This is not a team, this is a collection of female basketball players. At least under Yow, they could try to win one for Kay and put aside their differences.

Harper has been at N.C. State long enough to determine if she can recruit and coach at ACC level. She was a good coach at Western Carolina, but has failed at the ACC level.
I agree with some of that.  You's health hurt recruiting- but Glance might have been able to right the ship after Yow retired.  Unfortunately, Fowler chose a pretty young thing and many who applauded that decision are now saying "no!" to going after Glance.  There's no way to know for sure if things would have been better with Glance- but it doesn't seem likely that they would have been worse.  She certainly would have support from Yow's players, and she would have done better at recruiting than Harper has.
Wasn't Glance the recruiting coordinator when Yow was coach? Didn't she do the majority of our recruiting particularly during the last 5 or 6 years on the staff? If recruiting faltered during that time and she was the main recruiter as well as part time interim head coach, then how did Yow's failing health become the prime factor in the fall off of recruiting? I'm just thinking there were a number of issues involved. If Glance had taken over, we would have had a more experienced coach, but there is not much to say the program would be in a lot better shape talent wise.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 10:37 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 



loneycafe wrote: ACC WBB Digest's weekly updateis out. No surprise that State is the "Trending Down" team right now.
Trending Down: NC State. A game after giving #3 Duke all they wanted in Raleigh, the Pack flopped against the one team in the ACC that had underachieved more than they had to date. All it took was one second-half stretch for the Pack to lose its focus and the Deacs to pounce, building a comfortable lead. The same thing happened against Duke; the game was neck-and-neck until Duke went on a couple of small runs to establish breathing room, and NC State had to scramble hard just to stay barely competitive. The Pack don't have anything resembling a killer instinct and seem to lack motivation and focus during games.
Here's what they writeabout the UNC-NC State game Thursday:
UNC @ NC State, 1/10/13. The Heels have not exactly played beautiful basketball, but the bottom line is that they're making enough plays to win. The Wolfpack have the talent to match up with them as well as the size, and Reynolds can be a significant home court advantage. I wouldn't say this is a must-win game for the Pack, but it's close to one if they want to be competitive in the ACC this year. For the Heels, it's a chance to stay at the top of the standings at the expense of an arch-rival. This will let us know if Carolina can pull together on the road against a tough team.
for those who follow this closely, is that true about the Pack matching them in both talent & size?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/9/2013 11:18 AM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 



BlackRazor wrote:
loneycafe wrote: ACC WBB Digest's weekly updateis out. No surprise that State is the "Trending Down" team right now.
Trending Down: NC State. A game after giving #3 Duke all they wanted in Raleigh, the Pack flopped against the one team in the ACC that had underachieved more than they had to date. All it took was one second-half stretch for the Pack to lose its focus and the Deacs to pounce, building a comfortable lead. The same thing happened against Duke; the game was neck-and-neck until Duke went on a couple of small runs to establish breathing room, and NC State had to scramble hard just to stay barely competitive. The Pack don't have anything resembling a killer instinct and seem to lack motivation and focus during games.
Here's what they writeabout the UNC-NC State game Thursday:
UNC @ NC State, 1/10/13. The Heels have not exactly played beautiful basketball, but the bottom line is that they're making enough plays to win. The Wolfpack have the talent to match up with them as well as the size, and Reynolds can be a significant home court advantage. I wouldn't say this is a must-win game for the Pack, but it's close to one if they want to be competitive in the ACC this year. For the Heels, it's a chance to stay at the top of the standings at the expense of an arch-rival. This will let us know if Carolina can pull together on the road against a tough team.
for those who follow this closely, is that true about the Pack matching them in both talent & size?
Apparently somebody didn't do much homework before writing that preview. UNC isn't particularly dominant in front line size. Rolle is 6-6, but we can match up otherwise. They don't have anyone on the team under 5-9, though. As for talent, four of their players were ranked in the top 30 coming out of high school and at least two others were top 60. We are nowhere close to that in talent.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/9/2013 12:43 PM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 



seniorwolf60 wrote:
BlackRazor wrote:
loneycafe wrote: ACC WBB Digest's weekly updateis out. No surprise that State is the "Trending Down" team right now.
Trending Down: NC State. A game after giving #3 Duke all they wanted in Raleigh, the Pack flopped against the one team in the ACC that had underachieved more than they had to date. All it took was one second-half stretch for the Pack to lose its focus and the Deacs to pounce, building a comfortable lead. The same thing happened against Duke; the game was neck-and-neck until Duke went on a couple of small runs to establish breathing room, and NC State had to scramble hard just to stay barely competitive. The Pack don't have anything resembling a killer instinct and seem to lack motivation and focus during games.
Here's what they writeabout the UNC-NC State game Thursday:
UNC @ NC State, 1/10/13. The Heels have not exactly played beautiful basketball, but the bottom line is that they're making enough plays to win. The Wolfpack have the talent to match up with them as well as the size, and Reynolds can be a significant home court advantage. I wouldn't say this is a must-win game for the Pack, but it's close to one if they want to be competitive in the ACC this year. For the Heels, it's a chance to stay at the top of the standings at the expense of an arch-rival. This will let us know if Carolina can pull together on the road against a tough team.
for those who follow this closely, is that true about the Pack matching them in both talent & size?
Apparently somebody didn't do much homework before writing that preview. UNC isn't particularly dominant in front line size. Rolle is 6-6, but we can match up otherwise. They don't have anyone on the team under 5-9, though. As for talent, four of their players were ranked in the top 30 coming out of high school and at least two others were top 60. We are nowhere close to that in talent.
Rolle has almost no offense other than put backs, but she is a pretty good shot blocker.  Other than Rolle, size shouldn't be a big factor, but talent is a different story.  The holes hav far more talent on their team--even if Sylvia doesn't know what to do with it.  Hopefully, the Pack can find a way to win this one.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 12:47 PM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 



seniorwolf60 wrote:
BlackRazor wrote:
loneycafe wrote: ACC WBB Digest's weekly updateis out. No surprise that State is the "Trending Down" team right now.
Trending Down: NC State. A game after giving #3 Duke all they wanted in Raleigh, the Pack flopped against the one team in the ACC that had underachieved more than they had to date. All it took was one second-half stretch for the Pack to lose its focus and the Deacs to pounce, building a comfortable lead. The same thing happened against Duke; the game was neck-and-neck until Duke went on a couple of small runs to establish breathing room, and NC State had to scramble hard just to stay barely competitive. The Pack don't have anything resembling a killer instinct and seem to lack motivation and focus during games.
Here's what they writeabout the UNC-NC State game Thursday:
UNC @ NC State, 1/10/13. The Heels have not exactly played beautiful basketball, but the bottom line is that they're making enough plays to win. The Wolfpack have the talent to match up with them as well as the size, and Reynolds can be a significant home court advantage. I wouldn't say this is a must-win game for the Pack, but it's close to one if they want to be competitive in the ACC this year. For the Heels, it's a chance to stay at the top of the standings at the expense of an arch-rival. This will let us know if Carolina can pull together on the road against a tough team.
for those who follow this closely, is that true about the Pack matching them in both talent & size?
Apparently somebody didn't do much homework before writing that preview. UNC isn't particularly dominant in front line size. Rolle is 6-6, but we can match up otherwise. They don't have anyone on the team under 5-9, though. As for talent, four of their players were ranked in the top 30 coming out of high school and at least two others were top 60. We are nowhere close to that in talent.
thanks, yeah the talent part was surprising but I wasn't sure if the size part was true too.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/9/2013 1:33 PM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/6 L Wake Forest 56-69 



Engineer65 wrote:
asheson50yardline wrote:
CalStabbinsGhost wrote: What is going on with this program? I don't follow it and thus won't comment on it, but they certainly don't look like a program that is either doing well or doing better.

Did the inexcusable disintegration of that program under the late Yow and Jed Fowler truly extend that deeply?
In her last years, Yow's health was a factor. She stayed too long and the program suffered when Yow felt she could dictate her successor and for one of the few good decisions of the Fowler era, Coach Fowler said no. The bitterness of former players that Glance was not hired has not helped the program.

Recruiting declined under Yow and Harper's decision to hire her husband and put him in charge of recruiting is a disaster and will cost her and her husband their jobs.

This is not a team, this is a collection of female basketball players. At least under Yow, they could try to win one for Kay and put aside their differences.

Harper has been at N.C. State long enough to determine if she can recruit and coach at ACC level. She was a good coach at Western Carolina, but has failed at the ACC level.
I agree with some of that.  You's health hurt recruiting- but Glance might have been able to right the ship after Yow retired.  Unfortunately, Fowler chose a pretty young thing and many who applauded that decision are now saying "no!" to going after Glance.  There's no way to know for sure if things would have been better with Glance- but it doesn't seem likely that they would have been worse.  She certainly would have support from Yow's players, and she would have done better at recruiting than Harper has.
Glance is past history. However based on what I saw with my own eyes my answer to Glance would have no as well. We got way too far behind unc and duke with Glance running a lot of the ship.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 1:58 PM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 


I was surprised about the talent part, too. At the same time, it is interesting to have an outside observer's take on the program. Perhaps the publisher can chime in more about his assessment of State's talent level here? 
BlackRazor wrote:
seniorwolf60 wrote:
BlackRazor wrote:
loneycafe wrote: ACC WBB Digest's weekly updateis out. No surprise that State is the "Trending Down" team right now.
Trending Down: NC State. A game after giving #3 Duke all they wanted in Raleigh, the Pack flopped against the one team in the ACC that had underachieved more than they had to date. All it took was one second-half stretch for the Pack to lose its focus and the Deacs to pounce, building a comfortable lead. The same thing happened against Duke; the game was neck-and-neck until Duke went on a couple of small runs to establish breathing room, and NC State had to scramble hard just to stay barely competitive. The Pack don't have anything resembling a killer instinct and seem to lack motivation and focus during games.
Here's what they writeabout the UNC-NC State game Thursday:
UNC @ NC State, 1/10/13. The Heels have not exactly played beautiful basketball, but the bottom line is that they're making enough plays to win. The Wolfpack have the talent to match up with them as well as the size, and Reynolds can be a significant home court advantage. I wouldn't say this is a must-win game for the Pack, but it's close to one if they want to be competitive in the ACC this year. For the Heels, it's a chance to stay at the top of the standings at the expense of an arch-rival. This will let us know if Carolina can pull together on the road against a tough team.
for those who follow this closely, is that true about the Pack matching them in both talent & size?
Apparently somebody didn't do much homework before writing that preview. UNC isn't particularly dominant in front line size. Rolle is 6-6, but we can match up otherwise. They don't have anyone on the team under 5-9, though. As for talent, four of their players were ranked in the top 30 coming out of high school and at least two others were top 60. We are nowhere close to that in talent.
thanks, yeah the talent part was surprising but I wasn't sure if the size part was true too.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 1/9/2013 2:14 PM

RE: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 



loneycafe wrote: I was surprised about the talent part, too. At the same time, it is interesting to have an outside observer's take on the program. Perhaps the publisher can chime in more about his assessment of State's talent level here? 
True.

Wonder if the players in certain programs just take it more seriously? I recall reading here about how the players seemed more interested in the trips they took than actually winning games before KH was coach. And then saw some posts about the fitness level of some of the current players. Players not that worried about their fitness levels or more concerned about travel plans each year & we've seen the results. It appears a # of the women just look @ playing BB @ NCSU as their PE requirement.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 1/9/2013 2:41 PM

Re: WBB 2012-13: (8-7, 0-3) 1/10 unc-ch 7pm ACCDN on youtube 


I don't think anyone can have a nationally recognized WBB program without a solid dose of talent. Even with the top 100 listings each year, there probably aren't more than 3 or 4 who can join good teams and be impact players their first year. There just is not that much overall top talent available. Once the top 5 or 6 teams in the country finish selecting the talent they want, the competition for the rest begins to get real tough. Sometimes there is a regional factor where a very talented player wants to stay close to home. But we are totally out of that consideration due to the proximity of Duke and UNC. So if we don't have any advantage in attracting talent because of geography, and we don't have an advantage because of being a perennial top program, how are we going to attract the talent to compete with our peers? It has to be in the coaching and the support for the program. There was a time when Baylor was not where they are. There was a time when Notre Dame was not where they are, so program turnarounds are not impossible. But no matter who we might hire, we are not going to vault to the top immediately. However, we should not be in a position of slowly sinking to the near bottom like we are doing now. We are in danger of starting the conference schedule with a 0-7 record unless a completely reformed team shows up.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 57  Next >