wow ..Two steps forward, ten steps backward

[Ladyvol777]

MR is a steady player that isn't the problem. But she has limitations...She isn't mobile or agile around the basket. It was an interesting contrast with her and the MS big girl who couldn't run down court as easily as MR but was more nimble around the basket dribbling, pivoting, and scoring a couple times with MR unable to stop her (and me screaming for a guard to step in and force her to pick up her dribble). It would be nice if MR was more agile around the basket, but she isn't.

I agree about the guard to help her out the other teams dose to MR, and Tennessee never dose. I was watching last night and the guards had plenty of time to help her. I'v spent almost 50 dollars for 2 seats to the ND game, now I almost wish I had not.

 

[JFP]

DD has the advantage of most in that she doesn't really need the money.
Another year with a bench and better players will bring her a chance to
play a more pro type game. This could very well result in her going higher
in the draft as well as lasting longer in the league. Right now she isn't
putting the numbers up we saw with Simmons and Simmons has really
struggled in the WNBA.

 

[gule]

bet the crowd for ND will be < 6500

 

[teacherdean]

Well, don't you think Holly is doing all of those things? Surely, you are not implying that she does not watch film or talk with her assistants.

I don't think the issue lies in standard coaching tactics but the intangibles that make one coach more successful than another. I am sure if you tracked what Geno A. or Kim Mulkey, or Pat Summitt in her prime, actually do on a daily basis, the routine would not look that different from Holly's. I mean, Holly knows all of Pat's routines and tricks.

But, somehow these other coaches do it all much better and more effectively than Holly. Perhaps its personality (as coach Jumper emphasizes); perhaps it's just a certain level of strategic acumen; perhaps it is the way she manages and motivates (or fails to) players or some combination of the above.

And it gets really tricky because sometimes it can be the interaction between coach and setting. Why was Gail G. a success at Duke and a flop at Texas; how did Carolyn Peck win an NC at Purdue and fail at Florida?

I assume Holly is doing all the things I spoke of, however, the problem may be the delivery. Just because Holly coached under a great coach does not mean she has what it takes to produce outstanding results, look at the situation involving the asst. coach that followed Dean Smith at North Carolina, Billy Guthridge, he just did not have what it took. I believe that Holly has tried everything she can, however, it is simply not working. I agree with you, it is the intangibles that are a part of each coaches personality and makeup that can or cannot produce success. Those intangibles may produce success at one school but failure at another. Also a coaches style in a D1 program may produce an unsuccessful program but they may be a success at a lower level. Whatever the situation, the program is in need of a change in direction, it really does not matter what Holly is presently doing or not doing.

 

[LVJeff]

Not just that, but on the other end of the court, I envision that MR had a hard time establishing position. The two big posts probably each outweighed her by 50 pounds. They were huge. MR picked up to offensive fouls trying to force her way through them, but given their bulk and that they were both pretty tall, that was a tough physical matchup for MR.

The starting big girl impressed me with the array of post moves and her face up game. She played very well.

The one offensive foul I remember was total BS. A bulldozer couldn't have moved the Miss. big girl and all of a sudden she falls down and Russell loses her balance and falls on her. All my life I have despised flopping to draw a foul. If I were the official that player would get a technical. But the tactic works quite often.

 

[sisaq]

I see we're back to blaming Diamond...

I hope she goes to the WBNA this season. As the season progresses, she will probably realize she made the biggest mistake of her life transferring to play for Holly, so will cut her losses.

Who to blame next year...My money's on Jaime and Te'a. Anastasia and Evina can be blamed the following season...

I will never blame any player, I blame Holly period!!

 

[gule]

first you have to believe you can. All Holly says is that "I just don't know"

 

[sisaq]

first you have to believe you can. All Holly says is that "I just don't know"

You rite...Breanna's first year at Uconn was shaky when she played her first 3 games until Geno get in her face and get the best out of her. Be4 then, I watched her first 5 games and she scored like 5point,4point and after those few games, explode to 29points and never looked back and that was because of the great coach guarding her. Holly is not that kind of coach for TN.

 

[alexvol]

first you have to believe you can. All Holly says is that "I just don't know"

I am in the AMEN corner on this ^^^^

How is your health situation today ?

 

[LVJeff]

...I don't think the issue lies in standard coaching tactics but the intangibles that make one coach more successful than another. I am sure if you tracked what Geno A. or Kim Mulkey, or Pat Summitt in her prime, actually do on a daily basis, the routine would not look that different from Holly's. I mean, Holly knows all of Pat's routines and tricks.

But, somehow these other coaches do it all much better and more effectively than Holly. Perhaps its personality (as coach Jumper emphasizes); perhaps it's just a certain level of strategic acumen; perhaps it is the way she manages and motivates (or fails to) players or some combination of the above.

And it gets really tricky because sometimes it can be the interaction between coach and setting. Why was Gail G. a success at Duke and a flop at Texas; how did Carolyn Peck win an NC at Purdue and fail at Florida?

Very good points. I've thought since Holly took over she was struggling to chart her own path but didn't know how. She has difficulty reading game flow and momentum changes. Player performance is wildly inconsistent in some cases or consistently poor in others, indicating player confusion and possible communication issues. Installing an offense and teaching it successfully has so far largely eluded Holly - either the result of her own unfamiliarity with the concepts or, again, communication issues with the players. Holly has consistently stated after a poor game that the team had good practices - either she can't recognize a bad practice or she is unable to recognize that her practice structures aren't preparing the team for a game.

Ancient Chinese curse says may you live in interesting times. It's interesting times for LV fans isn't it?

 

[Tenacguy50]

I see we're back to blaming Diamond...

I hope she goes to the WBNA this season. As the season progresses, she will probably realize she made the biggest mistake of her life transferring to play for Holly, so will cut her losses.

Who to blame next year...My money's on Jaime and Te'a. Anastasia and Evina can be blamed the following season...

I'm not blaming Diamond. I just don't like her attitude period. But it's a fact the LV performed better, with Holly as coach, before Diamond arrived. Hope she leaves and takes HW with her.

 

[UCMiami]

Well, don't you think Holly is doing all of those things? Surely, you are not implying that she does not watch film or talk with her assistants.

I don't think the issue lies in standard coaching tactics but the intangibles that make one coach more successful than another. I am sure if you tracked what Geno A. or Kim Mulkey, or Pat Summitt in her prime, actually do on a daily basis, the routine would not look that different from Holly's. I mean, Holly knows all of Pat's routines and tricks.

But, somehow these other coaches do it all much better and more effectively than Holly. Perhaps its personality (as coach Jumper emphasizes); perhaps it's just a certain level of strategic acumen; perhaps it is the way she manages and motivates (or fails to) players or some combination of the above.

And it gets really tricky because sometimes it can be the interaction between coach and setting. Why was Gail G. a success at Duke and a flop at Texas; how did Carolyn Peck win an NC at Purdue and fail at Florida?

This is going be harsh, but:
1. To be a good coach you have to have a high basketball IQ. I have seen nothing in the TN teams that Holly has coached that suggests she has an understanding of what is really happening on the court during games - someone will get hot, and she will immediately sub them out so they can cool of for a few minutes. She'll call timeouts during TN runs and not during the opposing teams runs. Whatever happens during halftime, their doesn't seem to be an adjustment being made to how the first half went. Etc.

2. To be a good coach you have to understand multiple variations of offense, how to attack different types of defense, how to take advantage of the defense you are facing, and how to take advantage of your own players strengths. We all see that it has been a few years of complete disaster against zone defense, and it is hard to discern any cogent offensive strategy or adjustments being made.

3. To be a good coach you need to understand a variety of different defensive strategies and how to adjust to what opponents are trying to do. All i see is 'we need to keep in a defensive stance' and 'we need to rebound.'

4. To be a good coach with the above knowledge you also have to be able to teach that knowledge to your players, and the techniques required to perform. How to break down the footwork required in the post, how to funnel the offensive player where they don't want to go and into the help defense that is waiting. How to take a scouting report that says player A wants to drive right, so force them left and actually use your technique to force that player left.

5. And you have to be able to watch five minutes of practice and identify what each player is doing well and doing poorly and then break them down and correct the flaws you have identified and reinforce the things they do well.

6. And you have to demand and command attention to what you are teaching and execution of it in practice and in games. And there have to be consequences for not following those teachings.

7. Finally you can't teach effort and commitment, but you have to punish a lack of it. There was a story about a star player at Uconn who wasn't putting in enough effort in practice, so Geno didn't put her in the next game in the first half, which she found a little disturbing, but to make sure she got the message he walked up to her at half time and asked, How many points did you score in the first half? Zero. And how many rebounds did you get? Zero. Yeah, that's about how you performed yesterday in practice, isn't it? She was really angry with him, but the next practice and the rest of the year she busted her butt. She's now his assistant coach by the way.

So copying the practice schedule and drills and all the other things Pat did, is not going to get you anywhere if you don't understand why you are doing them and can't see what is actually happening and correct the errors during those drills. if you can't explain why you shouldn't make that pass that was just intercepted except to say don't make that bad pass, make a better one.

I used to think Holly's press conferences were just soft soap and she didn't want to be specific in public, but I really believe her now when she keeps repeating 'I just don't know why.' I really believe she doesn't because she just doesn't have a good basketball IQ or a good critical eye for what is happening on a basketball court. or the capacity to correct it when she does see it.

 

[madtownvol]

This is going be harsh, but:
1. To be a good coach you have to have a high basketball IQ. I have seen nothing in the TN teams that Holly has coached that suggests she has an understanding of what is really happening on the court during games - someone will get hot, and she will immediately sub them out so they can cool of for a few minutes. She'll call timeouts during TN runs and not during the opposing teams runs. Whatever happens during halftime, their doesn't seem to be an adjustment being made to how the first half went. Etc.

2. To be a good coach you have to understand multiple variations of offense, how to attack different types of defense, how to take advantage of the defense you are facing, and how to take advantage of your own players strengths. We all see that it has been a few years of complete disaster against zone defense, and it is hard to discern any cogent offensive strategy or adjustments being made.

3. To be a good coach you need to understand a variety of different defensive strategies and how to adjust to what opponents are trying to do. All i see is 'we need to keep in a defensive stance' and 'we need to rebound.'

4. To be a good coach with the above knowledge you also have to be able to teach that knowledge to your players, and the techniques required to perform. How to break down the footwork required in the post, how to funnel the offensive player where they don't want to go and into the help defense that is waiting. How to take a scouting report that says player A wants to drive right, so force them left and actually use your technique to force that player left.

5. And you have to be able to watch five minutes of practice and identify what each player is doing well and doing poorly and then break them down and correct the flaws you have identified and reinforce the things they do well.

6. And you have to demand and command attention to what you are teaching and execution of it in practice and in games. And there have to be consequences for not following those teachings.

7. Finally you can't teach effort and commitment, but you have to punish a lack of it. There was a story about a star player at Uconn who wasn't putting in enough effort in practice, so Geno didn't put her in the next game in the first half, which she found a little disturbing, but to make sure she got the message he walked up to her at half time and asked, How many points did you score in the first half? Zero. And how many rebounds did you get? Zero. Yeah, that's about how you performed yesterday in practice, isn't it? She was really angry with him, but the next practice and the rest of the year she busted her butt. She's now his assistant coach by the way.

So copying the practice schedule and drills and all the other things Pat did, is not going to get you anywhere if you don't understand why you are doing them and can't see what is actually happening and correct the errors during those drills. if you can't explain why you shouldn't make that pass that was just intercepted except to say don't make that bad pass, make a better one.

I used to think Holly's press conferences were just soft soap and she didn't want to be specific in public, but I really believe her now when she keeps repeating 'I just don't know why.' I really believe she doesn't because she just doesn't have a good basketball IQ or a good critical eye for what is happening on a basketball court. or the capacity to correct it when she does see it.

Yeah, that is a little harsh. Some of your points seem spot on to me but #1 just does not happen. Holly does enough players to pull someone who is hot (did she pull Jamie in the 1st half, NO!). If a hot player gets into foul trouble, then yes but that is imposed decision. And Holly does not call time outs when the team is on a run-- there are more than enough points to criticize without making up stuff. I think it is true that Holly does not always call TO when the opponents go on a run but she did against Ole Miss.

Per 3, adjusting defensive schemes is something that Holly generally does pretty well.

 

[Orange_Mamba]

Yeah, that is a little harsh. Some of your points seem spot on to me but #1 just does not happen. Holly does enough players to pull someone who is hot (did she pull Jamie in the 1st half, NO!). If a hot player gets into foul trouble, then yes but that is imposed decision. And Holly does not call time outs when the team is on a run-- there are more than enough points to criticize without making up stuff. I think it is true that Holly does not always call TO when the opponents go on a run but she did against Ole Miss.

Per 3, adjusting defensive schemes is something that Holly generally does pretty well.

Holly does call timeouts when we're on a run that seems like the only time she'll call a TO, because she always substitute from what's working.

 

[vol-un-tear]

What is a proven fact that is not likely to change because Diamond has been playing for three years now. She is not a good shooter. She is an athlete but her shot is not consistent and she is a career 40 percent shooter. She is not getting better so when she takes 15 shots you hope she makes five or six. Some nights she makes only 4. At some point you have to admit who she is a talented athlete with limited shooting ability. She likes to shoot but she seldom comes out of any game with an efficiency you must have. Team shot 35 percent last night not a percentage that will win games.

I miss the days when we had great players. Hell ide take Sydney Spencer or Abby Conklin over DD any day of the week! Those girls played with passion and heart! DD is way overrated!

 

[Volfan2012]

Not really blaming Diamond for our losses she is who she is. She is not a skilled basketball player. She is very athletic but when it comes to shooting the ball and making plays for the team she is not the player you can depend on. She was highly rated coming our of high school and has played no where near her ranking. My one complaint on her is why she feels it is necessary for her to take so many shots in a game when she hasn't proven to be a very good shooter. She is an average basketball player and not in the top ten overall players in the SEC.
Middleton shouldn't even be in the SEC unless your going to use her as a shooter from the two and work the offense so she can get open looks. She has no handle, very slow, and makes very bad decisions with the ball in her hands.
We lose because we shoot 35 percent in games and even when we hold the opponent to 40 still a loss if we don't turn them over more or get more rebounds both of which we haven't been able to do.
You can look at our players stats and go right down the list and only two players are doing anything when it comes to shooting the ball and they are Russell and Nared.
Diamond shooting 39 percent we can't win when she is shooting 15 to 18 shots at that percentage.

 

[gule]

Health is good today, thank GOD.

 

[NoBackBoard]

I'm not blaming Diamond. I just don't like her attitude period. But it's a fact the LV performed better, with Holly as coach, before Diamond arrived. Hope she leaves and takes HW with her.

Before Diamond, it was Simmons. Before Simmons, it was Stricklen.

We always hear the team will be much better when so and so leaves.

It hasn't happened yet.

 

[alexvol]

Health is good today, thank GOD.

Good to hear .

 

[UCMiami]

Yeah, that is a little harsh. Some of your points seem spot on to me but #1 just does not happen. Holly does enough players to pull someone who is hot (did she pull Jamie in the 1st half, NO!). If a hot player gets into foul trouble, then yes but that is imposed decision. And Holly does not call time outs when the team is on a run-- there are more than enough points to criticize without making up stuff. I think it is true that Holly does not always call TO when the opponents go on a run but she did against Ole Miss.

Per 3, adjusting defensive schemes is something that Holly generally does pretty well.

I don't watch that many TN games, a few more last year than this year so far, but I have a hard time figuring out her substitutions and I remember a few games last year especially where someone would have a three minute stretch where they made two of three for three of four shots in a row and the next dead ball they would be on the bench and the replacement player would have a turnover and two missed shots in the next three minute stretch and TN's offense would stall again. And there was no foul issue involved, just some preordained plan of how the minutes needed to be distributed. Maybe with a shorter bench, she isn't doing it as much this year?

And the use of time-outs in the games I have watched haven't made much sense to me either. Didn't see this last game, but it sounded like there was a strange TO call at the end from the game thread.

On defense I guess you are seeing something that I am missing.

 

[Coach Jumper]

Health is good today, thank GOD.

Good to hear it, my friend.