The Catch-22 of CKC's system

[madtownvol]

[Sorry for starting another thread about CKC's system but this is less about its basketball merits and more about coaching and team identity]

I just realized perhaps what CKC’s steadfast commitment to the system might really be about.

A VN astute poster (sorry I can't remember who) suggested that CKC's lack of "street cred" might be making it hard for her to gain players' respect.

I am going to take that "street cred" idea in another direction.

What assets do high level coaches generally have to attract top talent? It is usually some combination of the following (and which forms their "street cred"):

1. Having been a very successful college and/or pro player.
2. Having a legacy effect (I played under or assisted a legendary coach)
3. Their own track record of success as a HC.

Now compare CKC to someone like Kara Lawson who checks all three boxes (with #3 being her NBA and Olympic coaching experience, plus the mass exposure of her ESPN pundit gig). Some legend coaches like Staley and Mulkey have all three while others, like Auriemma and Schaefer have an abundance of #3.

In contrast, CKC is relatively disadvantaged in regard to assets 1 and 2, and, per #3 her D2 success, and coaching awards, may not impress top tier recruits.

So, she promotes the “system" which will be so much "fun" to play in and will be so unstoppable when "you" become part of "it." So what happens when recruits discover that the "system" ain't much fun at all and it is very stoppable?

Identity crises all around.

I think this problem (and its resolution) is more complex than I have been acknowledging. What does CKC have to sell if not her system?

She has to convince recruits that she can help them become better players, win titles and get to the pros based on her own coaching skill set. That is tough sell, particularly in comparison to her competing SEC coaches. And NIl $ can only go so far.

CKC may not be able to abandon the system until she has built a more impressive coaching record at this level. But can she accomplish that goal while relying on the system? Old timers know the phrase "Catch-22" and I think that is what we have here.

The trick will be modifying the system to make it more viable while still keeping it relatively distinctive from what everybody else is doing. I am just not sure how that gets done.

More optimistically, if CKC can accomplish something seemingly impossible (at the current moment), like getting to a F4 with Oliviyah Edwards leading the way, the "Big O" could do for her what Kevin Durant has done for Coach Barnes.

 

[Amb3096]

What's difficult to comprehend is why the setback this year? Last year, they set a really good foundation for how disruptive this style of play could be, and they put the fear of God in a lot of teams that were more highly regarded than them. On paper, Kim did all the right things. I think it boils down to the new players she brought in and the culture that was forming on the team...both of which are probably toxic. I think "the system" could work with some tweaking, but more importantly, a more mature group of players. I'm not blaming the freshmen, but the upperclassmen (namely, Cooper, Whitehorn and Spearman) needed to lead by example even if they weren't vocal leaders. So you then have Whitehorn kicked off the team for acting like a fool, and bring in the volatile Barker, and your culture goes down the drain. You can almost see it in the face of someone like Latham, who just wants to work hard and play the game, but is surrounded by these distractions.

 

[madtownvol]

What's difficult to comprehend is why the setback this year? Last year, they set a really good foundation for how disruptive this style of play could be, and they put the fear of God in a lot of teams that were more highly regarded than them. On paper, Kim did all the right things. I think it boils down to the new players she brought in and the culture that was forming on the team...both of which are probably toxic. I think "the system" could work with some tweaking, but more importantly, a more mature group of players. I'm not blaming the freshmen, but the upperclassmen (namely, Cooper, Whitehorn and Spearman) needed to lead by example even if they weren't vocal leaders. So you then have Whitehorn kicked off the team for acting like a fool, and bring in the volatile Barker, and your culture goes down the drain. You can almost see it in the face of someone like Latham, who just wants to work hard and play the game, but is surrounded by these distractions.

A few have suggested that CKC benefited from the cultural foundations that Kellie had established. I think there is merit to that claim.

I think Tess, Sara, Jewel, and Hollingshead were very important in maintaining the "This is how we do it around here" ethos. Sam Spencer seemed like a really mature, level-headed team leader who I bet reinforced those ideals.

So, the big influx of new players definitely poses a challenge. Heck even Pat Summitt went through a rough patch with her "baby vol" class and struggled with discipline issues well into their sophomore year.

No question, CKC has put together a volatile mix of players (and helicopter parents) and I am not sure she has the perceived authority and street cred to reign it in (though she is clearly trying with her strong stand on Ruby and now Barker).

Broken record time, I think last years under achieved. The UConn was a high point but they had some real lows in their 8-8 SEC record. That team had great balance across the board and I think they were savvy enough to cover up some of the weaknesses that come with the "system."

 

[Amb3096]

One last thing to say about the culture. For the love of God, can coaches PLEASE implement a team rule that says that you can't date your teammates? Look, no good will ever come of this. It will probably end, and it will surely get ugly. Stop sh!tting where you eat! Your coach and teammates will thank you for this.

 

[OrangeBeachVol]

Hopefully Kim and the asst coaches have learned some 'player evaluation' lessons this season. It may be seasons end before the culture can be dealt with, whatever that will be.

 

[Amb3096]

A few have suggested that CKC benefited from the cultural foundations that Kellie had established. I think there is merit to that claim.

I think Tess, Sara, Jewel, and Hollingshead were very important in maintaining the "This is how we do around here". Sam Spencer seemed like a really mature, level-headed team leader who I bet reinforced those ideals.

So, the big influx of new players definitely poses a challenge. Heck even Pat Summitt went through a rough patch with her "baby vol" class and struggled with discipline issues well into their sophomore year.

No question, CKC has put together a volatile mix of players (and helicopter parents) and I am not sure she has the perceived authority and street cred to reign it in (though she is clearly trying with her strong stand on Ruby and now Barker).

Broken record time, I think last years under achieved. The UConn was a high point but they had some real lows in their 8-8 SEC record. That team had great balance across the board and I think they were savvy enough to cover up some of the weaknesses that come with the "system."

I think there's merit to the claim that the locker room was clearly broken at some point in the offseason/early season, and that CKC pretty much buried her head in the ground. In addition to anything Kellie may have done to create/maintain a certain team atmosphere through their behavior, I think that also is a reflected in the players she recruited. Tess/Sara/Jewel/Jill/Sam were all mature players. None of them would be doing gun signals or other nonsense like that. I have my doubts about the crop that CKC brought in this year. What I DO find surprising is how much Cooper and Spearman have regressed to the point of being bigger liabilities than they are assets. Jersey, I don't know. Nothing about her personality or demeanor seems like reason for concern, She seems like a lovely girl. But her track record speaks for itself, and where there's smoke, there's fire.

If they (and Barker) weren't on the team but you still had someone ike Tess or Jill, I can't see this team performing any worse than they have thus far. They probably wouldn't have lost to MSST or TAMU at home. I think the issue with Kim is that she set the precedent with Ruby, failed to show a wilingness to sacrifice wins early in the season in the interest of reinforcing a strong team culture. Instead, she lost the team, and is losing games anyway.

 

[volfan102455]

Interesting take - in hindsight, CKC would have benefited with several more years at Marshall building credibility verses jumping directly to a school like Tennessee.

 

[volfan102455]

And you are right - she does not check any of those boxes.

 

[1reVOLver]

In addition to @madtownvol 's clear 3 characteristics of high level coaches who attract top talent, there are two more factors worth considering. First is one that used to get a lot of boastful attention in these pages: “family atmosphere”. Since the inception of the portal and especially the arrival of NIL, that rarely gets a mention. The combination of freedom of movement and pay for play have elbowed culture out of its once prominent position. There’s not much any coach can do to counter that shift.

The second factor is well within a coach’s realm. Loyalty is critical to players' trust in and respect for a coach. It is a two way street. Under great pressure to explain a loss to an inferior team, CKC publicly blamed her players. Had she done so in the confines of the locker room, and offered encouragement and solutions along with criticism, bonds of trust might have been strengthened. By broadcasting a very public humiliation, she probably shredded whatever was left of mutual loyalty.

 

[Amb3096]

In addition to @madtownvol 's clear 3 characteristics of high level coaches who attract top talent, there are two more factors worth considering. First is one that used to get a lot of boastful attention in these pages: “family atmosphere”. Since the inception of the portal and especially the arrival of NIL, that rarely gets a mention. The combination of freedom of movement and pay for play have elbowed culture out of its once prominent position. There’s not much any coach can do to counter that shift.

The second factor is well within a coach’s realm. Loyalty is critical to players' trust in and respect for a coach. It is a two way street. Under great pressure to explain a loss to an inferior team, CKC publicly blamed her players. Had she done so in the confines of the locker room, and offered encouragement and solutions along with criticism, bonds of trust might have been strengthened. By broadcasting a very public humiliation, she probably shredded whatever was left of mutual loyalty.

I think it still points back to what kind of culture you've created in the locker room. UConn, SC, UCLA, LSU, Texas, and Oklahoma all have transfers who are in the starting 5, but the transfers assimilated to the team's culture, not the other way around. Strong leadership ensured that. The opposite happened at Tennesssee. Really, it feels like it was just one transfer (Barker) who completely cratered the entire team environment. Maybe she needed a coach who was going to be more strict with her, but Kim certainly didn't meet that expectation.

 

[Lucy]

In addition to @madtownvol 's clear 3 characteristics of high level coaches who attract top talent, there are two more factors worth considering. First is one that used to get a lot of boastful attention in these pages: “family atmosphere”. Since the inception of the portal and especially the arrival of NIL, that rarely gets a mention. The combination of freedom of movement and pay for play have elbowed culture out of its once prominent position. There’s not much any coach can do to counter that shift.

The second factor is well within a coach’s realm. Loyalty is critical to players' trust in and respect for a coach. It is a two way street. Under great pressure to explain a loss to an inferior team, CKC publicly blamed her players. Had she done so in the confines of the locker room, and offered encouragement and solutions along with criticism, bonds of trust might have been strengthened. By broadcasting a very public humiliation, she probably shredded whatever was left of mutual loyalty.

Yep, yep, yep!

 

[Rooster1]

Unfortunately the next game will likely highlight the catch-22 nature of this team as LSU is an extremely bad matchup for UT irregardless of any systemic issues. They are an elite transition team and extremely fast. UT will need to catch them on an off shooting day to keep this one close. They are relentless rebounders and play great defense at a high temp rate. Will/can the LV’s match their energy?

 

[volfan102455]

Unfortunately the next game will likely highlight the catch-22 nature of this team as LSU is an extremely bad matchup for UT irregardless of any systemic issues. They are an elite transition team and extremely fast. UT will need to catch them on an off shooting day to keep this one close. They are relentless rebounders and play great defense at a high temp rate. Will/can the LV’s match their energy?

I just don't want to see another record set for the largest margin of defeat.

 

[madtownvol]

Unfortunately the next game will likely highlight the catch-22 nature of this team as LSU is an extremely bad matchup for UT irregardless of any systemic issues. They are an elite transition team and extremely fast. UT will need to catch them on an off shooting day to keep this one close. They are relentless rebounders and play great defense at a high temp rate. Will/can the LV’s match their energy?

This team has fallen into a predictable pattern. Based on those tendencies, I expected them to put up a pretty good fight against Oklahoma. I am afraid the pattern, if not broken, points to (another) blow-out loss against LSU.

 

[Rooster1]

I just don't want to see another record set for the largest margin of defeat.

The PMAC is an extremely tough venue to play LSU at. It could get away from UT quickly if the team is not dialed in from the start.

 

[Amb3096]

This team has fallen into a predictable pattern. Based on those tendencies, I expected them to put up a pretty good fight against Oklahoma. I am afraid the pattern, if not broken, points to (another) blow-out loss against LSU.

LSU matches Tennessee in athleticism, but they play smarter and more cohesively as a team. I'm not expecting a quality viewing experience for LV fans.

 

[Rooster1]

LSU matches Tennessee in athleticism, but they play smarter and more cohesively as a team. I'm not expecting a quality viewing experience for LV fans.

They also shoot the ball at a much higher clip, some of which is system driven, but much of which is the result of just having better shooters. And that says nothing about their tenacity on defense and rebounding, which they have in spades. It’s a bad matchup. Did I mention Flaujae’s mom?

Focus on page 2/8 and 3/8. Add in the hostile home venue and you get the point.

https://storage.googleapis.com/secsports-prod/upload/2026/02/20/ca28dd3f-e255-4199-a46e-76f2dd9249a6.pdf

In the immortal words of Oddball, “Nobody said nothing about locking horns with no tigers baby”.

 

[glv98]

I think it still points back to what kind of culture you've created in the locker room. UConn, SC, UCLA, LSU, Texas, and Oklahoma all have transfers who are in the starting 5, but the transfers assimilated to the team's culture, not the other way around. Strong leadership ensured that. The opposite happened at Tennesssee. Really, it feels like it was just one transfer (Barker) who completely cratered the entire team environment. Maybe she needed a coach who was going to be more strict with her, but Kim certainly didn't meet that expectation.

Even given her well known history, this is just not fair to Barker. And I can't believe that I'm defending her like this, but we don't know that she's "the problem" esp after Kim minimized her absence yesterday and Indicated she'd be back soon.

IMO players are getting too big a share of blame in general. The narrative is the system doesn't work because the players don't believe. I think that's backwards. The players don't believe because the system doesn't work. Maybe they're not selfish brats, maybe they're just caught in a confusing nightmare that requires extreme physical commitment but is ill suited for the task at hand, and led by an inexperienced Leader who doesn't communicate well. Maybe the lack of belief is earned and not just churlish behavior.

That's why I believe just swapping out players and expecting different results is a pipe dream. I've said often the problem with this system is not just our players, it's the opponent's players They're simply too skilled for this to ever work on a sustained basis, which is one of the main reasons this system has fallen out of favor every time it's cropped up.

 

[Amb3096]

Even given her well known history, this is just not fair to Barker. And I can't believe that I'm defending her like this, but we don't know that she's "the problem" esp after Kim minimized her absence yesterday and Indicated she'd be back soon.

IMO players are getting too big a share of blame in general. The narrative is the system doesn't work because the players don't believe. I think that's backwards. The players don't believe because the system doesn't work. Maybe they're not selfish brats, maybe they're just caught in a confusing nightmare that requires extreme physical commitment but is ill suited for the task at hand, and led by an inexperienced Leader who doesn't communicate well. Maybe the lack of belief is earned and not just churlish behavior.

That's why I believe just swapping out players and expecting different results is a pipe dream. I've said often the problem with this system is not just our players, it's the opponent's players They're simply too skilled for this to ever work on a sustained basis, which is one of the main reasons this system has fallen out of favor every time it's cropped up.

I'm of the mindset that the truth is somewhere in the middle. The system worked much better last year. It wasn't perfect, but you could see the potential. So what changed?

I wasn't thrilled about Barker joining the team...not because I didn't think she was a good player, but because it was clear that she would be the type of player that would be a locker room nightmare for a coach to manage...let alone a coach like CKC who hasn't demonstrated the fortitude to reign in these types of personalities. If she was going to play for Geno or Dawn or Kim Mulkey, it's different. She would be sitting on the bench until they were satisfied. But Kim is not doing that, and I think it's to the detriment of the team.

The system...I'm not completely off of it. I think there are elements that can be incorporated into a successful gameplan, but it can't be a one trick pony. And it certainly can't be a one trick pony that none of the players are buying into. It's Kim's fault for not coming up with a gameplan that suits her needs, but at the same time, it's also the players' fault because they knew coming in what the system was. For players like Spearman and Cooper who had career years playing this system, it's even more surprising to see them regress.

 

[Rooster1]

As good as some of the portal players are skill wise, like Barker is, there is something to be said about recruiting the types of players we all like to refer to as gamers rather than malcontents. Chemistry is a hard subject matter, for good reason.

 

[glv98]

I'm of the mindset that the truth is somewhere in the middle. The system worked much better last year. It wasn't perfect, but you could see the potential. So what changed?

I wasn't thrilled about Barker joining the team...not because I didn't think she was a good player, but because it was clear that she would be the type of player that would be a locker room nightmare for a coach to manage...let alone a coach like CKC who hasn't demonstrated the fortitude to reign in these types of personalities. If she was going to play for Geno or Dawn or Kim Mulkey, it's different. She would be sitting on the bench until they were satisfied. But Kim is not doing that, and I think it's to the detriment of the team.

The system...I'm not completely off of it. I think there are elements that can be incorporated into a successful gameplan, but it can't be a one trick pony. And it certainly can't be a one trick pony that none of the players are buying into. It's Kim's fault for not coming up with a gameplan that suits her needs, but at the same time, it's also the players' fault because they knew coming in what the system was. For players like Spearman and Cooper who had career years playing this system, it's even more surprising to see them regress.

Ain't getting old for the birds? Everything reverts to the boring mushy middle. I think you're right, we end up with some kind of hybrid of '"the system" and the way every coach under 50 already wants to play: fast, tough defense with occasional pressing, and lots of threes. But not the extremes of nonstop trapping and the crazy arse subbing.

I totally get the argument that every player knew exactly what they were signing up for. But we've also established that the system requires exactly the right kind of players and preferably 10 of them that are interchangeable. That's one of its inherent flaws, So any incompatible combinations are going to blow it up. Inevitably it would be a crap shoot to get the right combination year over year, and this year's combination was just off. . Add that they have not been provided any alternative plan that does wor,k and I can see a lot of player unhappiness. It's one of many ways the system is too fussy for its own good

 

[glv98]

As good as some of the portal players are skill wise, like Barker is, there is something to be said about recruiting the types of players we all like to refer to as gamers rather than malcontents. Chemistry is a hard subject matter, for good reason.

See the Kelle Harper years with Walker Puckett Darby Striplin Wynn etc. We have been down that road before and not happily

What we need are all around players who are both highly skilled and highly motivated. Like say a Raven Johnson, a Joyce Edwards, a Sarah Strong, etc. It just so happens there's a shortage of those and unfortunately the LVs are way back in the queue for them.

 

[Rooster1]

See the Kelle Harper years with Walker Puckett Darby Striplin Wynn etc. We have been down that road before and not happily

What we need are all around players who are both highly skilled and highly motivated. Like say a Raven Johnson, a Joyce Edwards, a Sarah Strong, etc. It just so happens there's a shortage of those and unfortunately the LVs are way back in the queue for them.

Yes of course, completely agree. But I was thinking more along the lines of “gamers” with some skills. Not necessarily AA’s, but players you might find in the starting lineups at an Iowa, Louisville, Michigan or some such team that are gamers and fill out a starting rotation around a few noteworthy star types. Puckett, Darby, Wynn, Striplin etc. as you mention were gamers of course, but whom amongst that group would have been a starter on a legit top 12ish team?

 

[1reVOLver]

But I was thinking more along the lines of “gamers” with some skills. Not necessarily AA’s, but players you might find in the starting lineups at an Iowa, Louisville, Michigan or some such team that are gamers and fill out a starting rotation around a few noteworthy star types.

If I’ve understood you correctly, examples would include Toomey at UNC and Shade at UConn. Not superstars by any stretch, but both are above average contributors.

 

[Rooster1]

If I’ve understood you correctly, examples would include Toomey at UNC and Shade at UConn. Not superstars by any stretch, but both are above average contributors.

If I have expressed my thoughts properly, gamers would be players that while not stars, would find their way into a starting lineup for most or many quality top 12 type teams. Everyone knows these types, they come with no baggage and are highly self motivated. Gamers.