I think we finally understand one another, Billy Gillispie.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 9:11 AM EST in Basketball Comment 80 comments

Losing to Louisville is a frustrating experience whatever the sport, but in basketball, it is particularly exasperating. I don't care if the Cardinals are the relative equivalent of the New England Patriots or the San Antonio Spurs, it hurts Cat fans deep in their soul. In basketball, fortunately, losses to the Cardinals happen far less than half the time, so we only have to go through this catharsis once or twice every few years.

I learned a few things yesterday about our team, and about Billy Gillispie. Billy Gillispie is not going to play zone. Ever. If you see him play zone, what you are seeing is a man on the way out the door, so in that sense, I am glad we haven't seen it. "Now, Tru," you may ask, "what about this is a revelation? He has told us from the outset he didn't like a zone defense. Besides, this has been discussed ad nauseum." OK, let me explain.

Louisville is a poor shooting perimeter team. Their known weakness is a zone defense, and it has been used to defeat the Cardinals several times this year. It gives a team that has less talent and athleticism a chance to hide their deficiencies and force perimeter shots. Every coach in America with a team similar to the Wildcats as currently constituted would have played some zone at least. Every coach, that is, except one -- Billy Giilispie. Gillispie not only didn't play "some zone," he hasn't played one second of zone, ever, since coming here. Not on an out of bounds play. No zone press. "Zone" may not be a four-letter word in your vernacular, but it absolutely is in Gillispie's. Even in a game where almost any college basketball coach in America would tell you that a zone is the appropriate defense, Gillispie never considered it even for one tiny second, if what happened on the court reflects his thinking.

While it may not seem that I am breaking any new ground here, you have to think past the obvious. When faced with a challenge, most people will try to defeat that challenge by any fair means possible. That is the kind of coaching we have come to expect in college basketball -- coaches making moves and countermoves, adjusting the defense, changing the offense and personnel rotations, tinkering with this and that in order to gain a competitive advantage. This game was the ideal game for Gillispie to show his pragmatism in order to gain a competitive advantage -- a game against a poor perimeter shooting club that has better athletes and a deeper bench. That makes the decision a no-brainer for virtually every college basketball coach I have ever heard of, except, apparently, one -- Billy Gillispie.

It is said that when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. That's how it is with coach Gillispie -- his solution to every problem is "Play my way, and play harder." Billy Gillispie is obviously not a pragmatist. He is taking the position that Kentucky is going to win basketball games playing his way, and he is not changing his way for any reason whatsoever. None. Ever. If a team has a weakness, most coaches will look for ways to hide it or minimize its impact. Not Gillispie. No matter how big the game, how high the stakes, who his personnel are or who's life depends on it, there is only one way in the Kentucky universe to play college basketball with him as UK coach, and that is Billy Gillispie's way. Period. The End.

Now, think about this for a minute, and what this means. Gillispie is staking his entire career, his livelihood, his coaching reputation and millions of real dollars on "his way." Gillispie is "all in," as they say on the World Poker Tour. He is "all in" on his basketball philosophy, and will not let circumstances dictate a change. Gillispie isn't a pragmatist, he is absolutely single-minded and utterly inflexible, an idealist of the highest order. "My way or the highway" is not his credo -- it is "My way, win or lose." There is no highway. If there were, half our current team would be playing pick-up ball planning transfer along with Alex Legion. Billy Gillispie is so fixed on doing it his way that the result of the game is secondary to the way it is played. That is not to say he doesn't care about winning -- I'm sure he does. But what we are seeing here is a man that is willing to put his job and future on the line rather than sacrifice even the tiniest mote of his basketball principles on the altar of near-term success.

Folks, I have to tell you, that is both frightening and ~~fascinating~~endearing. Part of me loves anyone with so much faith in what they do that they are willing to go "all in" with it every day. It is a winning attitude, and people who do this are often wildly successful. But as with most things where relentless dedication to a philosophy is the basis, there is a dark side. Gillispie is not only gambling his future on his beliefs, but potentially, the future of the Kentucky program as well. I confess, I am not sure I would have supported such a man coming here if I had known more about him prior to his arrival. Kentucky fans have no recent experience with a coach like that, and even though Gillispie's philosophy appears to be closer to the legendary Adolph Rupp than any modern coach I have seen, I really doubt if even the Baron was this intransigent. Then again, Rupp was only a few years from retirement when I became a Kentucky fan, so I didn't know him well, nor in his heyday. And even if Gillispie is the second coming of the Baron, will that philosophy translate to modern college basketball?

What is clear is that Gillispie has not been successful yet transferring this set of beliefs to his charges. He recognizes the effort and so do I, but the problem is, the players have so far been either unwilling or unable to embrace Gillispie's core philosophy. The result is what we can see 6-7, with losses to unheard-of programs and being taken to the woodshed by three of our four most bitter rivals. Even with Kentucky nearing full strength, the Big Blue Nation is left wondering if the Cats can actually be competitive in the SEC, or if we will be overrun like we were yesterday.

I have no idea how this is going to work out. I fear for the Coach, though, because this is not TAMU or UTEP, where you can come in and sacrifice an entire season to install your philosophy. Kentucky fans simply aren't long-term thinkers, and this is 30+ years of adult Wildcat fandom speaking. I am willing to go through Hell, if necessary, to get to where we want to be, but how many are truly willing to go with me? Gillispie is quickly losing the local media, who desperately want to help him. He has lost the national media, who are now skeptical of his prior success. The rumor mill churns on, generating more spectacular "they says" with every loss. Can any coach survive in this ... maelstrom?

I have a feeling we are about to find out.

0 recs | Comment 80 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Very interesting perspective...

... and that's about the closest thing I've seen maybe making some sense of this.

"Frightening and fascinating" -- wow, what a great description. Thanks for leaving the strikethrough on the second word, for basketball fans outside of the Big Blue Nation who just can't unglue their eyes from the screen.

It takes a bold man in this age of long-range assassins and 3-point shooting to simply refuse to play zone coverage... ever. Frankly, it comes close to boggling the mind. He must be, literally, the only coach in D-IA basketball to espouse this philosophy.

I feel like I must be watching a modern hoops version of Karate Kid, where Mr. Myagi forces Daniel to "wax-on, wax-off" and paint his house "side-side" for days on end, refusing all questions until exasperation is answered with revelation, which finally comes in the form of a karate combo Daniel beautifully demonstrates thanks to his his newly acquired painting skills.

Like Myagi and his skinny little protege, I wonder if maybe there'll be a moment when Gillispie finally sees what he's been waiting to see; he'll grin, wink, pull his team into the huddle and then send them back out to finally play some zone.

He can't really refuse to ever play a lick of zone, can he? Can teams at this level survive without zone? It's impossible to play perfect man all night. Eventually someone will be out of position or the wrong guy gets doubled and a wingman on the perimeter is wide open for the trey. Saw plenty of wide open shots given to Louisville, and again saw the tired legs in second half.

Mystifying. Frightening. Fascinating.

He's definitely all-in, but you know the risk of that kind of gamble.

Orange & Blue Hue http://www.orangeandbluehue.com

by Gatorpilot on Jan 6, 2008 10:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't have any answers ...

because quite frankly, neither I nor anyone I know of in the Big Blue Nation have any experience with a coach like this.

In fact, I think it's safe to say that no program of Kentucky's stature has any experience with a coach like this. It is ... extraordinary.

I have met some gamblers in my life, but if my perspective is correct, Gillispie might need the NASA Vehicle Assembly Building to house his testicles. This man has balls big enough to cause a solar eclipse or set the planet off it's orbit.

I sure hope for his sake and ours it works out. I'm all in with him, but I have nothing at all at stake except some emotional attachment. I can't recall ever feeling that my fandom was quite so ... inadequate.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 10:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought it was a good fight

I got to hear BG post-game statements and he seemed pretty bitter about blown assignments. Despite that, my feeling was that the Cats put up a great fight and showed a lot of heart.

What no one expected was a Cardinal team that looked like the team ranked preseason top 10. Had the Cards not gotten back to full strength, were Caracter and/or Sosa still sulking; any number of variables could have not improved and the Cards don't have the depth to run down the Cats.

My take on it: congratulate the Cats on a hard fight and encourage them to keep giving 100%.

by CarolnDave on Jan 6, 2008 10:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely ...

the Cats played hard. No one disputes that, and this game was one in which we were simply overmatched. No mystery why we lost, and even if Gillispie had played a zone, my take is it would have made no difference to the outcome.

I will always encourage the Cats, but this article is about Gillispie, not the game. Getting into his mind has not been easy, and part of being a Cat fan is understanding what is happening on the court. Up until yesterday, me and ... well, virtually everyone has had difficulty comprehending the coach.

But now, I think I have his measure. We'll just have to wait and see if this entire thing works out, but I will never abandon my team. Never. And Coach is an integral part of that team.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 10:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Just Another Coal on the Fire

but think about it this way, BCG is not married. He doesn't have any kids. He doesn't have to think about the security of a family so perhaps he is willing to gamble all because he has only himself to pack up & move on if things don't work out.

That my friends is a dual-edged sword. All or nothing! WHEW!

I am not sure how many of us today could, or even would, commit so totally to our philosophy in day to day life. Some might even venture the word psychopathic in his determination. I'm not quite there yet, but I am keeping a close watch.

by Bluegilla on Jan 6, 2008 11:16 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

watching Gillispie is very strange...

He always has this parental look as if to say, "I know my kids are terrible, but I love them anyway and am trying to teach them right from wrong". It is the detached look of priest or a cop. I never understood this look until Trus' post of this morning. As a parent, I can totally relate to this. I agree with the idea that this guy will either be one of the greatest KY coaches ever, or will go down as one of the worst. No in-between.

by I am legend on Jan 6, 2008 11:21 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Regardless how

you put it,you just can't make Ckicken Salad out of Chicken manure.And that is what is being attempted with this current team.Even with the best facilities in all of college basketball,if you don't have the talent,you can't win.A coach can draw up the X's and O's,but if he does'nt have the personnel to complete it,the result is a loss.
What has led to losses this year is not being able to shoot consistently,and failure to execute properly(turnovers).Games that were won,were games when the shots went down,and fewer turnovers,and stupid fouling.
UofL had 46 free throw attempts yesterday,and the game turned into a freethrow shooting contest in the last 5 minutes.If UK shoots better than the 25% they shot early in the second half,and the defense holds UofL to 40% rather than the 65% they had,its a whole different game.

by UKats on Jan 6, 2008 12:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Agreed...

Those post was right on and I've been thinking of this all year. It is a very military situation at least in training and these recruits are going to do it his way or they are going to fail, fail, fail, until they get it right. I'm not sure if it is going to pretty for Coach G or for the fanbase but it is going to be interesting how it develops the next few seasons.

And really this is the stubbornness that Rupp had... Which is nearly terrifying because whether we Kentucky fans want to admit it - The Baron as a new coach coming into this program wouldn't make it today.

by trich on Jan 6, 2008 12:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Too Correct.....Unfortunately

You are, as usual, a genius of observation and evaluation. Your opinion on what BCG is all about is perfect.

The most appropriate observation you make is that the UK fans do not have the patience to wait for the new system to work. They want proof of performance now. Question is......will Barnhart be able to weather the storm and wait for results?

I suspect with the conflict on the contract, that
Barnhart will support a "one and out" scenerio. If only 1/2 of all of the rumors on the off court behavior of BCG is true, then he won't have any support from the aministration to give him the time he needs to recruits that will adopt his style.

A new coach is a certainty. Can you imagine then how difficult it will be to get anyone to come and coach at UK? It would only be a past player that would risk coming to this environment.

We are in deep trouble.

by woohop on Jan 6, 2008 12:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I hope ...

you are wrong about that. I don't think Barnhart would consider firing Gillispie after his first year no matter what (failing some demonstrable moral turpitude). The consequences are simply too catastrophic.

The real question is, can Barnhart himself survive a major uprising? I really don't know the answer to that.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Near Suicide.

It would be near to suicide for the program in the short term were Barnhart to let the Coach go. It was his hire and as he said in several forums he was the one man search committee. It was the biggest hire of his term so far and admitting essentially that you screwed the pooch this early... Ouch.

Who would the alternative be other than recruiting a new coach within "The Family"?

This Coach can do the job if the fans don't hyperventilate and some of the people on the other side of the Old Coach's debate don't bask in the schadenfreude too much.

by trich on Jan 6, 2008 1:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I totally agree ...

I just hope our fellow fans can hang tough.

If we think this season has been tough so far, I'm not sure we have seen the bottom yet. God, I hope so.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

We have not seen the bottom

Unfortunately the road doesnt get any easier The S.E.C. season is going to be long and painful. I know that things will get better. B.C.G. needs time that is all. Next year at this time we will have forgotten about all this. Winning takes care of all your problems. GO CATS

by sgray62 on Jan 6, 2008 2:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Excellent Perspective

Rick Pitino was 6-7 after his first 13 games at UK.

But there was no Internet then so he was allowed time to implement his system and style.

After that 6-7 start, he finished 213-43 (83+ %) those 8 seasons.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 2:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Right you are

Absolutely right fortyyearcatfan. I've been a fan since the fall of 1957. My first year the Cats won it all under Rupp, and I was hooked for a lifetime.
UK has lost what 25 games in the previous two seasons. Surely we knew that this year was going to be a downer. Isn't that really why the previous coach left? Would he have done better with his players(isn't Patterson Gillispie's only player?) than the present coach? Probably, a little. When is Gillispie going to put in his system? This year? Next year? When? Must he sacrifice the underclassman to the past. I don't think he's going to change the seniors. They've played a different brand of ball too long.
He should do exactly what he's doing for the underclassman. I can remember years ago Pitino putting in his style of play without the players to play. Remember when they went to Kansas and got slaughtered? Pitino coached for the long term and it paid off.
Gillispie will be just fine

by 58Fan on Jan 7, 2008 2:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll disagree a little

I think Billy is like that, either that, or like the gardener in "Being There" a person who appears profound but isn't.

I think he is as profound as you say. I do think "former player" is correct; if Billy Gillispie doesn't work out, we will see Travis Ford on the UK sideline, and he will be an incredible success.

Don't like Ford and want Pelphrey instead? Fine. I just don't think that the situation is as dire as you say with those two waiting in the wings.

As for his insistence on man to man: every team needs it's "go to" defense and offense. This team hasn't learned to play Billy's man to man yet. I believe once Billy has players who have played his man to man successfully for a year or two, he will teach a one three one or a matchup zone. But he has to have ONE defense that players play well.

I've said this all over the internet and I'll say it here. We were left a team of four or five two guards, a "point forward" and some leftovers on the front line. We aren't quick, and we aren't good shooters from the outside. We don't really have a point guard or a center. Who will win with a team without a point guard or a center, without quickness, ball handling or shooting skills?

by bigsky on Jan 6, 2008 2:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Disagree About SEC Season Being Tough

The 1990 Cats were 10-8 in SEC play, despite a much tougher SEC and a weaker UK team.

If healthy, the 2008 team CAN win 10 SEC games.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 3:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Can anyone remember?

I don't recall Pitino ever playing a zone in those early years. This seems to be the same complaint we had back then. Pitino was Full court press or nothing....even when we faced a team that was easily beating the press.

I am not one to sacrifice a season to instill an offence either, however we seem to forget that the coach we once worshiped used many very similar tactics...dedication to the offence, Game day practices, sparing with the compliments.

I liked how that guys term as coach turned out... I am willing to bet that the new guy knows what he is doing.

I am willing to wait and see.

by sylvar on Jan 6, 2008 3:04 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

1997 And 2007 Rosters

97 UK roster left over 2 C - 2 F - 5 G. Recruits were 1 C - 1 F - 1 G with G added.

07 UK roster left over 2 C (if Morris back) 3 F - 5 G. Recruits included 1 C - 1 F with F and G added.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 3:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Talent in 2006 and 2007

Let's compare talent between this year and last year. These players played both years in the UofL game, Bradley, Jasper,Crawford,Porter,Meeks,and Stevenson. So compare those here last year and others on this years team. Randolph Morris was the center, now Patterson is the center playing out of position, He should be a power forward. I'd give the edge to Patterson because of his offensive ability.
Last year Bobby Perry played the three spot. Of the remaining players this year who even comes close to comparing with Perry? No one
Lukasz Orbzut was the backup center. Who on the bench can compare to Woo? Carter? Williams? No one. Sherray Thomas was a power forward. Who on this years bench can play power forward as well as Sherray? Can't think of anyone.
Kentucky's bench this year does not even come close to the ability of Perry,Woo,or Thomas. There has been a big drop in overall talent and experience.

by 58Fan on Jan 7, 2008 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Correction

Porter did not play this year.

by 58Fan on Jan 7, 2008 12:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Patterson over Morris?

The game Saturday is proof that at this point Morris is an upgrade over Patterson. Experience and size go to Morris. Defensive ability also goes to Morris, at this point. The only area I would give Patterson a slight edge in is rebounding.

The two playing together would be would be the most desirable situation, and would solve many of UK's problems.

by Ken Howlett on Jan 7, 2008 1:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Morris and Patterson

You might be right Ken, but I see Patterson as being the better scorer even as a freshman. And Morris had foul problems, he spent loads of time on the bench. True if Morris were here it would solve a lot of problems.

by 58Fan on Jan 8, 2008 3:01 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Perry, Thomas, Woo

Funny... a couple years ago I used those three as perfect examples of people who had no business in a Kentucky uniform.

You ask who compares to Perry on this team? I'll take just about any of them. Maybe not from a leadership perspective, but playing ability I put him just above AJ Stewart at this point.

Woo? I think Carter compares very favorably to Woo. The difference is, he doesn't have a foreign accent and a silly name to make him likable.

Thomas? Again, I'd compare to AJ Stewart or Mark Coury. They're on about the same level.

As you pointed out that Porter didn't play... I meant to ask if there had been any comment on him not playing? Its another example of BCG's inexplicable substitution patterns. The kid plays 30+ minutes a game up to this point and doesn't even see the floor against UofL? Odd in my book.

by chirop1 on Jan 7, 2008 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

More Perry, Thomas, Woo

Just my opinion, but what if Woo, and he alone were on this team? I'm convinced he would be starting center with Patterson at power forward. Not that Woo was great, he wasn't, but he was a body who at times gave some useful minutes. As to Carter, he is a non-player. He has no lateral movement. If he gets a rebound it's because it came right to him, even then he's apt to drop it, or have it stripped.
What if Perry,and he alone, were on this team? I'm convinced he'd be starting at the three spot. He was a heady kid who hustled,and at times could score some points.
What if Perry,and he alone,were on this team? He might well get some time at power forward because he would be more physical that what's here now.
Agreed, those three were not up to the standards of the past. The problem is those on the bench are worse,at least for now. Some of them like Stewart may in time be pretty good players.

by 58Fan on Jan 8, 2008 3:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Correction

Should have said Thomas at power forward,not Perry

by 58Fan on Jan 8, 2008 3:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

what a crock

Give me a just a moment. I am supposed to buy into the premise that BCG has a philosophy of basketball that transends time and space and elevates itself to a higher plane of reasoning and/or metaphysical poppycock?

You know maybe, just maybe I could beat myself in the head with a hammer long enough that I could persuade any reasoning I have remaining to induldge this argument but I just have one glaring fly in the ointment so to speak.

I am to believe the genius of BCG and also accept the fact that his genius will not allow him to start Joe Crawford but his geniusness can play him for 35 minutes. His genius can play Meeks and Jasper when they're "available". Explain this psychobable first and then possibly I can make this ride to la la land and along the way say hello to the sugar plum fairy.

by modcpa on Jan 6, 2008 3:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

What would you have him do?

How would you fix the problem? If you know all the answers, let's hear them.

I've said it time and again. Tubby would have struggled to win this season. Add in injuries, bull headed seniors, new systems all players are trying to learn...

Einstein himself couldn't win with this team and I think his "geniusness" was not questioned.

by hoopchi on Jan 6, 2008 3:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

fix?

I never said I had the answers to fix the problem. I'm just not buying into the riverboat gambler that is BCG. (by default we can agree there is a problem.)

For better or worse I think he's one and done and as I've said many times I think it is off court problems that will be his downfall.

by modcpa on Jan 6, 2008 4:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Right...

These would be the off-court problems of which there is not one cellphone photo, story, reliable blog entry, even MATT JONES post about? (Billy Reed is NOT considered a reliable source, btw)

Yeah, don't stop believin', hatah.

The Online home of Big Blue Nation ...

by JL Blue on Jan 6, 2008 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sutton

Do you remember the Sutton years. Did you see any documentation to those "rumors". But the stories were in fact true. Just file it under the heading of smoke/fire.

by modcpa on Jan 6, 2008 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sutton years

there was not the internet of cell phone cameras during sutton's tenure. All you had to do was drive downtown and see Sutton's v12 Jag pulled on the curb in front of the bars to know what was going on...

by BeatUL on Jan 6, 2008 6:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I fail to see...

what his personal life has to do with this. He was hired to coach a basketball team. That's really all I care about right now. If he wants to blow steam in a bar on his own time and own dime what is that to me or any of us? As long as he does not break any laws his personal life to me is of no relevance to this conversation. Your original diatribe was discrediting his ability to coach. My response it that he has nothing to coach right now. I've coached basketball at every level from kindergarten to high school and I have had teams that just could not get it done no matter how hard I pushed them and worked with them. It's no fault of theirs they just did not have the needed ability to perform at the level necessary. That's what we have here. No amount of coaching is going to right this ship until we get some players to shore up some obvious holes (point guard, slashing forward, another big man). If you have no answer for that, then I don't see your gripe.

by hoopchi on Jan 6, 2008 10:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not A Genius (But)

Gillispie is a good coach. Not sure if he is Very Good (W 3 of 4) or Great (4 of 5) yet.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 3:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Let Him Coach

I would fix the problem by cheering the Cats on and letting Gillispie coach. 1 coach is plenty.

Ya don't need 100,000 (or a million) assistants.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 4:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

the ugly truth

i feel your pain. i had to watch the game up here in the northland with a very rabid cards fan who was still smarting from the football loss. it hurt and he rubbed it in.

i think tru hits some great points and i agree with much, but i am a little more optimistic.

quick points:

apparently BCG's method of teaching his system is like training a wild animal. he seems to be trying to bend the team to his will. we all need to realize that this team will most likely not pull out of the tailspin this season.
the cats will, if BCG history is true to form, be good next year. bradley and crawford will move on and the team will be young and better able to adjust to his system.
it is apparent now why tubby chose the end of last season to leave. if he was getting the beat down over 22 win seasons, what would he do with a team that was headed for a .500 record? the fact is that this team would not excel under any coach.
the cats will win a couple that will surprise us this year. no matter if they are a little down on talent, they are starting to learn BCG's system. and although there are not NBA players on the team, they show some talent and heart from time to time. the last 10 minutes of the first half were wonderful.

stay positive people. the cats will be back and all will be well...eventually.

by mateotemprano on Jan 6, 2008 4:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm not necessarily pessimistic ...

I just think I see what is going on at long last. As I said, I'm all about being there, and if Coach says this is the price for success, I'm right there cheering. I don't coach basketball, but I do have eyes, ears and a brain.

My experience is that Cat fans won't be patient. Maybe (hopefully?) I am wrong about that. I would dearly love to be.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 4:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Tru

Some Cat fans need to grow up. They're like little children asking when will Christmas get here. Some people a while back were all over Coach Brooks, now the're singing his praises. I predict that the same people who are all over Gillispie now,will in a couple of years, think he's the second coming. They go from one extreme to the other.IMO

by 58Fan on Jan 7, 2008 2:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I do not agree. Not at all.

After reading yours and all these posts what I do understand is UK fans are driven by emotion above all else (and that is ok, fans are supposed to be). Nearly all are swayed game to game and have little vision of the future, no understanding of the past and no understanding of the now. They (we) do not understand coaching and they (we) certainly do not understand what it takes to turn around a college basketball empire that was in dismal shape.

Myself, like the rest of the crowd need to be reminded to step back look at what is truly going on. Folks, it isn't "my way or the highway." BCG is not a riverboat gambler and he hasn't gone "all-in." Makes for good reading but it is void of reality.

The Present & Future: DeCourcy said it best in an article we all loved and held to (until a couple more losses brought out the short sightedness of UK fans once again): "Winning any particular game is not as important, in the long term, as establishing a method by which championships can be won. If Gillispie had his players running stairs on the day of the Gardner-Webb game, he likely had a reason. If the reinforcement of whatever principle moved him on that day eventually leads to a victory in some Elite Eight game, we'll never know. He will, though. And Kentucky will find itself back in the Final Four for the first time since 1998." If he were to write this today, he would have added something about playing m2m every minute of every game.

The Past: Again, I will defer to a man much more capable of verbalizing this than I am: "Kentucky did not get to where it is now in one off-season. It took years of mismanaging the program by the previous coach -- and the bosses who failed to properly direct him -- to get the Wildcats to the position where they could lose five of their first nine games. It took some stunningly uninspired recruiting and some dumb scheduling to get them here. It is going to require energetic recruiting and smart scheduling to move them forward. Most of all, though, this process demands patience. But that appears to be in shorter supply than elite talent." Remember my friends, BCG has already singed more talent in less than a year than Tubby did his previous four.

I applaud BCG for what he is doing. He is doing it the right way. Elite coaches are driven by the will to win and building a legacy. BCG is no different.

He didn't accept the UK job to come in and go 20-12 and get beat in the second round of the NCAAs year after year. He didn't come to UK to become another 10-loss-Tubby. He came to UK to rebuild a crumbling empire; to make it what it once was--the dominating force in college basketball.

Why do I say BCG is doing it the right way? He has tunnel vision of building long-term dominating success at UK and he is not going to let a wonderful & very vocal fan base or local media bantar change this. BCG is certainly not going to let short-term woes change what he knows it is going to take for UK to become dominate once again. Fellow Wildcats, do not buy in to this "my way or the highway" bantar.

This season is about the future. If UK plays every minute of every game in man-to-man defense it is because that is what is needed to rebuild UK into long-term domination of the SEC. It is not about being stubborn. It is not about "my way or the highway." It is about rebuilding; it is about changing a deteriorating program; it is about developing long-term success.

Folks, read DeCourcy's article again.. then read it again. Then email it to every UK fan you know. It is truly insightful; it is written by someone who truly understands Billy Gillispie and what is going on.

Lastly, I want to encourage my UK brethren with this. It is always darkest before the dawn. The prior regime drove us into this dark night. A new regime with proven success and ability to recruit elite talent is now at UK. They will bring us into the new dawn. UK is in the midst of a necessary yet painful transformation. When the metamorphosis is complete what you are going to see is the most athletic, talented and dynamic program in college basketball.

by BeatUL on Jan 6, 2008 7:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

A Few Errors In There...

UK never 20 W recently but 1990 (14 W).

Decourcy - any qualifications at all?

UK #1 recruits in 04 - #1 JC in 2005 - Top 15 in 06. Bad how?

Gillispie AVERAGES 20-12.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 10:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No errors...

I have no idea what you are talking about "UK never 20 W recently but 1990 (14 W)." Uhm.. ok

DeCourcy - read his article; all I said he verbalizes it well. No error.

Tubby's "great" recruiting class was signed 5 years ago. Oh, and that "great" class produced one of the worse 4 year periods in UK history.

"Gillispie AVERAGES 20-12." Uhmm.. ok. So?

No errors.. just logic and the truth.

by BeatUL on Jan 6, 2008 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's all very fine ...

except it is based on no more than your opinion, just as mine is. I'll give you an example:

After rereading you, I am convinced that in your haste to disagree with me, you didn't read what I wrote with care. I understand that it was a long piece and there is much in there to disagree with. But I never accused Gillispie of "my way or the highway," and you would know that if you read what I wrote. I also never used the term "Riverboat gambler," an I don't think there is any doubt at all that Gillispie is placing all his chips in one basket. Answers like "that's just my decision" are substantial evidence of that.

And how do you purport to know all this? Are you privy to Gillispies inner conversations? If it's just an opinion, why are you so certain that you are right and others are wrong? On what basis can you deny any room for doubt? My point here is that your opinion is no more valid than mine. Many people, me included, are not just inclined to take a person's word, especially after the reality doesn't quite live up to the expectations that Gillispie himself helped create.

You may be right, for all I know, but certainly your reasoning is no more compelling on its face. You assure us that Gillispie "knows what he is doing," but there is no evidence of that, not really. DeCourcy is a sportswriter, one I happen to respect, but I do know for a fact that both you and I are closer to the situation than he is. Why does he get to become the opinion authority and have the last word on Gillispie?

I still believe in the guy, I really do. I think he owes UK fans more than he is giving out, but that is surely a judgment call on Gillispie's part -- if he doesn't want to, he certainly doesn't have to.

My entire point was that pragmatism is simply not in Gillispie's wheelhouse, or if it is, he has not shown any so far. He has shown not one whit of inclination to adjust his philosophy to take advantage of opponent's weaknesses. If that is part of his plan, fine, but that just goes to reinforce my take that he is essentially a rigid idealist. That doesn't make him a bad coach, or even the wrong coach for UK -- it is simply a fact that we haven't had a coach like that since Rupp, and almost nobody is old enough to speak authoritatively on how Rupp was in his heyday.

I also suggest that rigid idealism may result in a season so bad that it becomes catastrophic. Even if I am willing to go "all in" with Gillispie, and I am, that doesn't mean the rest of the BBN will follow. My experience is that most of them will not.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 7, 2008 12:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

stop with the all in

I beg of you to stop using the "all in" catch phrase. It is a poker term and strategy and you have no idea what you are saying. You have a concept and a view from television but in reality this term is not appropriate for your discussion of BCG. I have played many WPT and WSOP events. Even played the main event in 03. Leave this concept alone. It has no place in this discussion.

by modcpa on Jan 7, 2008 9:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah ...

I really do know what I am saying, and it surely is appropriate to my point of view. Your poker experience is irrelevant, I have played for years and I know what it means.

What is the big deal here? In the context I use it, "all in" simply means he is committed to his philosophy, and is willing to stake everything on it.

In poker, that's exactly what "all in" means. It means you bet whatever you have, and if you lose, you are out of the game. The same is true with Gillispie -- if he loses his bet, if Kentucky doesn't improve under his system, he will be out. That is a fact. The only real variable, assuming he is actually unsuccessful, is when.

I'm sorry if you don't like my metaphor, but I think it's apt. YMMV.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 7, 2008 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Poker Knowledge

All I know about poker I learned from Casino Royale. And it certainly seems appropriate to me! ;-)

by chirop1 on Jan 7, 2008 1:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

all in

so you've searched the web and can now define all in. Whoopie. Bottom line is you still don't get it but carry on with the condescending.

by modcpa on Jan 7, 2008 10:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Chill

Dude, you need to chill with the attitude. Disagreement with someone's writing or choice of words is fine. But even if you disagree with someone on this board, it shouldn't be disrespectful. You said your piece, leave it at that.

by senowen on Jan 8, 2008 10:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ok. Let's see...

some various definitions of all-in from poker sites around the web:

"Having bet all of your chips in the current hand."

"When a player puts all of his remaining bankroll into a pot."

"When you have put all of your playable money and chips into the pot during the course of a hand, you are said to be all-in."

"Betting all of your chips in a hand."

"When a player bets all his chips in a poker game."

That's probably enough to confirm that Tru's analogy or metaphor or usage of the term "all-in" does apply here. Let's discuss the situation and not the way it is linguistically presented.

by hoopchi on Jan 7, 2008 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Coach G.

Could not have said it better myself!!! Go Cats!

by ajjessiefrm on Jan 7, 2008 5:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Other than that..

I thought it was a very well written piece.

by BeatUL on Jan 6, 2008 7:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Patient, but not Brain-Dead

When BCG was hired, I, as most Cat fans, expected a rocky season. Perhaps a little worse than last season, but DEFINITELY nothing as BAD as what's happening now!

I expected some adjustment difficulties, but after 13 games, dangnabit, this team should be showing some improvement. As of yet, I have seen absolutely NO IMPROVEMENT in the team or BCG's ability to bench coach.

I want to be patient, but patient for what? More of the same? His flippant answers in interviews provide little insight into what his strategy is and what he is doing to solve these problems so we can win games ASAP.

I am frustrated more than just with BCG's win-loss record at UK right now. His relations with the media and the fans are strained at best. He seems to be stubborn, pompous and flippant when dealing with the media and the fans. He needs to realize that the fans are an important and knowledgable part of UK basketball and they need to be informed and treated with respect.

I'm a diehard fan and nothing will sway my allegiance. But I hope BCG will become more UK-friendly the longer he is here.

by bevcat on Jan 6, 2008 7:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Oh give me a break...

he owes the media nothing. To insinuate that he does not view fans as important is just dumb. The one and only reason BCG's realtionship with the fans "may be" strained is because of UK's record. I say "may be" because most fans I know don't feel that way either. What I hope is that UK fans will become less short-sighted as this season continues.

by BeatUL on Jan 6, 2008 7:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

we just found out why BCG hasn't signed his contract yet. They must be trying to iron out the final details on exactly when and where he has to answer the media and fans when they feel they are "entitled".

Obviously there must be a hang up on an incentive program for the coach having everyone tell him how to do his job.

by wldcatsfreak on Jan 6, 2008 9:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

What Zone?

Coach Rupp had complete disdain for a zone defense. In fact, when he finally caved in and had his Runts play a zone, he refused to call it a zone.

Take a deep breath, Tru. We cannot afford to have those as knowledgable and passionate as you give up too early.

by longtime on Jan 6, 2008 8:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I haven't given up anything ...

at all.

I think you might need to reread what I wrote when you have more time. I don't think you understood what is in there.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 11:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

no clue

The only disdain Rupp had for a zone was he lobbied to have them outlawed. When the powers that be were determined to have them it was fine with Rupp..........and wala.....the 1-3-1 zone trap. Thank you. Thank you very much!

by modcpa on Jan 7, 2008 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

One Bad Year Equals What

The end of the program? While I do not like watching us lose, I can accept that we are going to struggle this year. We lost 25 games over the last two seasons. We have effectively the same team as last year. We have players that have horribly low basketball IQ but do have talent. We have a new coach and a new system. Expecting an improvement over last year is incredibly idealistic. Struggles should be expected. Struggles at this degree are disheartening, but not outside of the realm of possibilities given Bradley and Crawford's inability to function as team players. If we happen to have a losing record this year, at least we did not end up on probation like we did the last time.

I, for one, will be glad when UK basketball becomes fun again. One of my favorite seasons was the 1990 season. We played .500 ball, but were a blast to watch. That team knew what it was like to have the snot pounded out of them, as evidenced by the 13-19 record the year before. The players on this year's team have had nothing of that to motivate them. All of BCG's rebuilding projects have started from the trash heap. Give him time and, if you can't, go join those who questioned Barnhart about keeping Brooks. Perhaps those people should fire up www.firerichbrooks.com to go along with their www.firebcg.com sites. Oh, wait, that Ditch Rich movement has already been tried. We see how that worked out when someone has a bit of patience.

Tom Seaver

by Tom Seaver on Jan 6, 2008 8:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

BCG

I am really growing weary of the "off the court problems". I have a very good friend who lives in Lexington and I have to hear about this stuff from him - no proof whatsoever.

Folks - the man is a winner - period. I know that many of us think we are basketball geniuses, but I highly doubt any of us are being paid millions to coach basketball.

Let it ride, see if we feel this way by the end of the season or the end of next season.

"One and out" has to be the dumbest premise I have heard to date. BCG will get several years to right the ship. UK would not be able to withstand the backlash if he were released after this year.

by gacatfan on Jan 6, 2008 9:22 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Patience is a Virtue

Unfortunatly Kentucky fans by default are not very virtous. One thing that I have observed is BCG has, so far, shown no sign of letting the pressure of this job get to him, I have grown a little weary of the same "We continue to get better" one liner at every press conference.
I think it is very naive to think that we as fans have any control over the decisions made by the coach or the AD. Most of "The Nation" was ready to throw the Tubster overboard two years ago. Will we get better? Time will tell. I always have considered UK Basketball entertainment, even at 6/7 I have still found this year very entertaining which is something I could not have said last year.

by Idiod on Jan 6, 2008 9:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Decourcy No, Bilas Yes

Decourcy is a complete idiot.

I think Bilas said it better - You Wanted Change, You Got, Now Give Him Time (words to that effect).

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 6, 2008 10:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I think the past several posts

have shown that UK fans are not as "distressed" as these blogs seems to portray. I truly believe most fans realize BCG needs time to fix the mess the prior regime left the program in.

BCG knows waht he is doing and the whining I hear about BCG not pouring out all his thoughts to the fans is pathetic. Upset at BCG? Cry a river, build a bridge and get over it.

by BeatUL on Jan 6, 2008 11:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

May I respectfully suggest ...

a less combative tone.

People are entitled to their opinions, whether you agree with them or not. Please keep that in mind.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 6, 2008 11:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Clyde v. Everyone Else

Great dialogue. This "conversation" is exactly why this site is so vastly superior to any other UK blog or message board.

For those reading my take, I want you to remember back to when Morris signed with the Knicks. It was the day Tubby left. If you are like me you instantly pondered the upcoming season. Thinking, "who do we have coming back, and who do we have coming in?"

My initial thoughts were that we were going to be in for a long season. Undersized with Morris leaving, and with a short bench. I honestly thought 15-16 wins would be a nice number to shoot for.

Then Clyde is hired, and he miraculously saves Patterson. If you are like me, you had your computer tuned to KentuckySportsRadio to listen to the annoncement live. I was giving a friend blow by blow updates over the phone. When Patterson put on the UK hat, rapture. All is well, and all will be well.

Until one really looks at the roster, and sees a cavernous hole next to Patterson in the paint. The same bugaboo that has limited the success of the program for the last few years. Plus, the fact that Bradley and Crawford both suffer from low basketball IQ. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, it's just a fact. Neither is a very good decision maker in the heat of battle.

The euphoria over the signing of Patterson is soon bolstered, and given validity by many in the national media with the ranking of UK in many Top 25 ratings. This fact alone should cause one to question the collective basketball acumen of those who thought this team, presently constructed, is anything approaching a Top 25 team. Patterson is good, but not Carmelo Anthony good.

Then the summer of injuries began. Crawford has surgery to clean out his knee, Jasper has risky micro-fracture surgery, Carter's poor shoulder falls apart...again. But, some in the BBN seemed to be oblivious to the potential disaster these injuries could cause. Myself included. I thought, "they'll be fine in time for practice". Wrong.

We entered the season with high hopes of success and much grandeur. Afterall, we have a new coach, a new hamburger All-American, a Top 25 ranking, and Ashley Judd. What else could anyone ask for?

What we did not have was a grasp on reality. Think about it. We lose Morris, we lose Perry, and we lose the head coach, off of a team that lost 12 games. Sure, Jasper and Meeks showed definite promise. They both had some terrific moments in '07, but they are still only sophomores, and they haven't been taught how to win at this level, and exchanging a 3 year starter at center, for a freshman, is not a good tradeoff.

If everyone had been healthy at the start of the year, I am sure UK's record would be markedly improved. Say, 9-4. But the same roster problems would still exist, and the fans would still be upset. The expectations were simply too high in the pre-season for the fans to accept 9-4.

But if we think back to the day Morris signed with the Knicks, we all knew the season was going to be an arduous experience. Many of us have simply let our hopes muscle out our ability to think logically as it pertains to how this team would perform. The giddiness over Gillispie, and what he has accoomplished throughout his career, and the signing of Patterson, bolstered expectations beyond what is realistic. I am as guilty as anyone else of this miscalculation.

This all hit me upside my head while I was suffering through the UL game Saturday. I'm thinking, "UL is so much better than us it's not even funny". They have better, and more athletes, who are pretty damn good basketball players. If UK played well, and UL played average, they would still win 9 out of 10 games. UK simply does not possess the horses to compete with that type of team.

We don't have the players. It's as simple as that. Nothing has changed from the last few years. Well, one thing has changed. A new coach has come in, and is attempting to instill his system of basketball into an injury riddled, talent deficient, group of players.

These set of circumstances are not conducive to immediate success.

It's been that way since the day Morris left, and Barnhart hired Gillispie. But in my excitement with the Gillispies hire, and the Patterson signing, I forgot that this team has lost 25 games in the last 2 years, and no GROUP of players is coming in to solve the problem. Gillispie is not the "Mindfreak". He doesn't walk on water, or change water into Makers (that's for you Tru).

My jubilation outweighed my logical observations.

I generally am not one who over-expects. I don't bash coaches, I don't second guess every out-of-bounds play, or substitution. I think I am realistic enough to know that a lot has changed in the last 20 years in college basketball, and UK isn't going to win 28-30 games every year. No team can. But going in to this season, after the Gillispie hire, and the Patterson signing, I over-expected. Well, the chickens came home to roost Saturday in the form of a reality check courtesy of the most hated man in Kentucky. Uhh, close to the most hated, anyway.

I am going to, from this point forward, embrace this team for what they are. An extrememly flawed, marginally talented, hard working group of players. I expect them to get better, but not so much better that they will win the SEC East, or anything close to that achievement. But I expect them to progress to the point to where they are competitive with all the SEC teams. I don't think that is too much to ask for.

It is a hard and bitter pill to swallow. The '88-'89 season is still fresh in my memory, and it wasn't any fun. But that was a totally different set of circumstances. Emery Freight permeated every aspect of that season.

Now we have the future to look forward to. We know players are coming in. We know great seasons are in the offing.

Getting there is sometimes not easy, though. The dark, dark days of the late '80's were soon followed by many fun and entertaining seasons. Filled with victories and championships.

By the'92 Duke game, the probation years seemed like a distant nightmare. When in reality, that was UK's first year off of probation.

We're not on probation, but we are in jail. But soon the warden will open the cell door, and free we will be.

by Ken Howlett on Jan 7, 2008 2:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Good Points

No reason(s) for L to SD, G-W, or UAB though.

9-4 at the worst.

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 7, 2008 6:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Zone

I don't think your assessments on Zone are true.

I know one coach who will never play a zone, even against Louisville.

Ben Howland.

Never plays zone. If man to man is played properly, it shouldn't be a problem.

by Drake44444 on Jan 7, 2008 5:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

That's a good point ...

Howland very rarely plays zone these days, although he did play some zone at Pitt, mostly situationally, i.e. when he was facing a team like Louisville.

Even Jamie Dixon, who also doesn't like to play zone, will play it when the situation clearly calls for it. That just pragmatic coaching.

I am not saying, and it isn't my point, that man to man is bad or that we need to play zone. What I am saying is that you rarely, if ever, see coaches today who will not attempt to exploit the known weakness of a team because he doesn't like to play zone.

Howland has had no real need to play zone at UCLA with the personnel he has had since he was there. If he were facing a vastly superior team with a known weakness shooting the ball, my take is that he would zone, at least some. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just how I see it.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 7, 2008 7:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Good points all around

I saw the lengthy post yesterday and just couldn't bring myself to read it. Now that I'm at work... naturally I want to put the time in. Heh.

There are obviously two ways to look at our current situation. Various posters have made valid and coherent arguments both ways. Chalk me up to one of those that is willing to give the coach 3 years, but is extremely frustrated by a percieved inability or unwillingness to make in-game adjustments. From where I was sitting, BCG was out-coached by Mike Davis in the second half of that game. (Some would argue that to be a fireable offense in and of itself!!!) By the time we rolled around to Ricky P out-coaching BCG, I really wasn't surprised. The comeback at the end of the game really had nothing to do with a change on UK's part so much as a change on UofL's.

It burns me to the very core of my being that I fully expect Vandy to extend their winning streak against us this weekend. It hurts to look at our schedule for January and honestly believe that South Carolina at Rupp on the 26th may be our only "winnable" game. I want to believe... but man is it tough.

Every week I mention my wife's initial thoughts on Billy being out of his league... and every week she reiterates it to me ad nauseam. I'm waiting for him to prove her wrong so I can sit on the couch with a look of smug triumph...

by chirop1 on Jan 7, 2008 8:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

And meanwhile.....

UNC is continuing to cut into our lead as the all time winningest program. If my numbers are right, we led them by 34 to start the season. So far, they cut 9 games into that lead. Assuming that both teams continue to stay their current course, they'll cut that lead in half in one flippin' season. Give BCG two more seasons to get back to top form and that lead could be seriously threatened. I don't know about anyone else, but I can take a down year or two, but I'd be in the throes of despair if we lost our historical crown to the powder blue boys.

by richlthompson on Jan 7, 2008 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Tru's Take

I must admit the "riverboat gambler", and "all in" metaphors are applicable in this situation.

I keep coming back to the Norman Dale analogy. Dale insisted his team make x amount of passes before shooting. He stuck to his coaching philosophy even to the point of playing the end of a game with only 4 players.

Is Clyde doing the same? I don't know. But his conviction is not wavering. For that he is to be applauded.

The concern about Crawford not starting, to me, is ridiculous. He plays 30+ minutes most every game. Although, an argument can be made that UK cannot afford to "give away" any possessions. By having Coury in, instead of Crawford, the opponent only has to guard 4 players instead of 5.

Clyde clearly has issues with the medical staff. When answering questions about injuries one can hear the disdain in his voice.

It is very difficult to "out-coach" superior talent.

What must be remembered is that Gillispie is not Rupp, or Dixon, or Howland. What they do, or did, has no bearing on Clyde, or his philosophy. Clearly the man is not going to play zone, even though zone has been called for many times this year. I feel he is taking a short term pain, long term gain approach, which Tru notes is risky.

But really, how risky is it? Barnhart is not going to fire him. The worst Gillispie can expect is to rile the fans a bit. At this early juncture I doubt he is overly worried about fan reaction. He believes his gameplan will succeed, as it has at UTEP and TAMU. Well, some say this isn't UTEP or TAMU. So. It's still basketball, regardless of what the fan base thinks. At his other stops he did not have the outspoken fandom that exists here, but what does that really matter. He will be given time by his employer to implement his system and strategies. Barnhart doesn't make decisions based on emotion. Which is why UK pays him, and not the K Club to lead the athletic department.

by Ken Howlett on Jan 7, 2008 1:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

WOO, Sheray, and Perry

Chriop,

I agree with you that WOO BP AND ST were not really Kentucky level players but your ascertion that AJ stewart, and Mark coury could currently give what the former give on the court is silly.

Stewart has more promise than any of them due to his athleticism but neither he nor Coury as of right now could contribute as much as those three would give us IF they were back this season. The three previous seniors would not play for a great UK team but this team would be miles better than they currently are if they were in uniform today.

DEEETROIT BASKETBALLL!!!

by davw83 on Jan 7, 2008 3:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Unchanging Philosophy and Recruiting

An ancillary point that I don't think has been raised yet, at least in this thread, is how Coach's philosophy--work harder than everyone else, stick to the game plan, etc.--is affecting his supposed strength as a coach; his recruiting.

I'm all for getting the "right" players for my team, but this kind of marketing is sending a negative connotation to all those 4 and 5-star recruits.

And that says nothing to the idea that with Kentucky having a particularly bad year, recruits are now thinking, "Do I really want to be a part of this mess in Lexington?"

My take
Gillispie may be a great coach, but it's really too soon to tell.

What I do know, is that the best Generals assess both the enemy's and his own troop's strengths/weakness before he designs the strategy; not the other way around.

by Clandestine on Jan 7, 2008 3:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The best

generals also train their troops hard in boot camp and daily before going to battle to insure that they follow orders blindly and willingly. I don't think that boot camp is over yet with this team. Until they get out of proverbial boot camp, I don't see much improvement regardless of what adjustments the coach may make.

by hoopchi on Jan 7, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Strategy

I was referring to the General's decision to chose strategy prior to assessing the situation. To me, that reeks of arrogance and stubbornness.

by Clandestine on Jan 7, 2008 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not enough info

As is usual with this coach, I don't think we have enough information to judge BG's strategy to date. Yes, he clearly has not played zone as of yet. But, we can do no more than speculate as to the reasons why. Is it possible that he will never, ever, ever play zone at UK? I guess. But does anyone here know if he never, ever, played zone at A&M? I certainly don't know. Zone D is highly exploitable if played incorrect/stupidly. How do we know that BG hasn't tried to teach some zone D to no avail? How do we know that BG doesn't want to play zone D sometimes, but he doesn't think the current roster is able or willing to play it effectively. Maybe, as one previous poster suggested, BG just wants to get the team to play one defense effectively before he attempts to teach another one. I for one am not yet willing to speculate that BG is not playing zone based on some kind of "principle." When I see Ramel and Joe play 40 min. of mature basketball, when I see Meeks and Jasper at 100% and when I see Patterson with help on the inside, but still not see any zone, that's when I'll start to speculate along with you.

The sad part about all of this is that it could be cleared up very quickly by BG himself. He could say, I'm never, ever going to play zone. Or he could say, I'm going to play zone after they learn how to play man. Or he could say, I want to play zone, but they can't seem to get it in practice. I understand why BG won't say anything about the medical questions since I believe there is an NCAA rule against disclosing medical information for student athletes, besides there are ethical considerations when it comes to disclosing the medical progress of a young athlete. But I can't understand BG's unwillingness to a single g--d--- thing about what is going on with the team's practices/progress.

by senowen on Jan 7, 2008 3:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah ...

it all boils down to trying to read the tea leaves, I admit.

Unfortunately, as you say, we aren't getting much help from Coach.

by Truzenzuzex on Jan 7, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gillispie

Has never coached 100% his own recruits (yet) either at UTEP or TAMU.

The 2008 TAMU squad is 100% Gillispie recruits and 14-1 (I think).

by FortyYearCatFan on Jan 7, 2008 7:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Gillispie

I love our passion. That's what makes us UK Basketball. I support our coach until the he either he decides to leave or we make that decision for him.

Message to coach though...please be more careful off the court. You have told us this is where you want to be and its every coaches dream to coach here? Than live life off the court like you want your players on the court to do!

by jewagg11 on Jan 8, 2008 12:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Gillespie's Rigidity

I see rigidity in the coach's approach in two other aspects: (1) his apparent insistence that the ball must be passed to the center every time, and (2) his not calling time outs at critical points to make adjustments during a game.

This rigidity makes us very predictable and vulnerable to tactics of opposing coaches. They don't don't have to prepare against a zone; they can focus on backdoor cuts instead. Pitino's 3-2 put the 2 behind Patterson so he could catch the ball, then used the 3 to cut off the passing lanes to the wings. Then when UL trapped at mid-court at the beginning of the 2nd half, Pitino didn't have to worry about any counter from UK.

He'd better be a great, great recruiter if he is going to win at high levels with a predictable game, no alternative tactics and no in-game adjustments.

by Fortunatus on Jan 8, 2008 12:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs