Yep, at some point the "We really REALLY care about winning!" argument carries no weight when you consistently don't win and don't do anything about it.
Media Discussion of Spider Hoops
- Thread starter MolivaManiac
- Start date
we don't have as much big-game ready talent as I hoped. that's on Mooney. maybe we did have enough (or maybe not) with Sherod and a healthy Gilyard, but we don't have them. maybe we'd have enough with Buck and Khwan. that's partially on Mooney too. it's tough to overcome things like that, but it's his job.
but while I know every loss is considered Mooney's fault here, watch the last 3:00. coaches don't make shots. coaches don't get stops. it wasn't strategy problems in my opinion. players didn't make plays. when they do, they deserve all the credit. when they don't ... I doubt they're making excuses like it was the coach's fault.
I like Jim, he was a good AD. But his decision to give Mooney (or any coach) a 10 year deal is killing the program. I don't expect anything from him going forward except trying to make the best of his horrific decision.
According to teamranking: We loss to Longwood #312, Hampton #239, Wyoming #228, ORU # 309 and our strength of schedule is #264. What is he talking about?
There are a variety of things that need to be done to establish a top level program. If I’m the athletic director, I ask myself “what do top programs need to have to be successful” and I come up with a list. That list is basically:
1. Have a great coach to recruit and develop players
2. Have top-notch facilities
3. Establish a cohesiveness between athletics and administration so coaches can recruit a wider pool of student athletes
4. Put yourself in positions to play games that get as much exposure as possible.
We don’t need to complete item 1 on the list in order to get to item 2, item 3, etc. All these items are their own seaparete entity that all need to be checked off. So our athletic department hasn’t done number one on the checklist yet, but that doesn’t mean they can’t work to doing the other items. This athletic department is VERY committed to success in basketball. We are in the process of completing item 2 on the list, have had positive signs for item 3, and hopefully working on improving item 4 as possible. It’s just for whatever reason they’ve been stubborn about letting Mooney go. As soon as they even realize that Mooney is not the answer, then we’ll get another thing checked off on our list and get one step closer to becoming a championship caliber program.
Even though firing Mooney is only one factor - albeit a very important one - it’s not the only factor we need to get to the level we want to be.
1. Have a great coach to recruit and develop players
2. Have top-notch facilities
3. Establish a cohesiveness between athletics and administration so coaches can recruit a wider pool of student athletes
4. Put yourself in positions to play games that get as much exposure as possible.
We don’t need to complete item 1 on the list in order to get to item 2, item 3, etc. All these items are their own seaparete entity that all need to be checked off. So our athletic department hasn’t done number one on the checklist yet, but that doesn’t mean they can’t work to doing the other items. This athletic department is VERY committed to success in basketball. We are in the process of completing item 2 on the list, have had positive signs for item 3, and hopefully working on improving item 4 as possible. It’s just for whatever reason they’ve been stubborn about letting Mooney go. As soon as they even realize that Mooney is not the answer, then we’ll get another thing checked off on our list and get one step closer to becoming a championship caliber program.
Even though firing Mooney is only one factor - albeit a very important one - it’s not the only factor we need to get to the level we want to be.
I agree @spiderman. It ultimately always comes down to the players making plays/shots on the court. I will say Mooney's teams have a very real trend of "playing tight" down the stretch of games for years. I know that's not a strategy thing specifically but everyone can feel it from the players to the fans in attendance.
Right. At some point when teams behave the same year after year, with different players on the court, you have to ask whether something the coach is doing or not doing is causing those results.
agreed, the crowd expects the worst now and I think that puts extra pressure on the players. in general I like having Golden as our best offensive player all game long, but not at crunch time. you need a guard or wing to be the man, and Gilyard can't do it hurt. the other options aren't good enough yet.
"If you were John Hardt, where did you take Earl Grant to dinner this weekend?"
Yeah, it was sarcastic, but Andrew got it and went with it.
Bob just dismissed it and said he's going to answer a serious question.
Last edited:
Time and time again we get late game leads by playing aggressively. We stop being aggressive, lose the lead, and either lose the game or barely hang on. We play not to lose instead of doing whatever we did to get us the lead.
That's strategy.
I think folks know I am one of the most ardent believers that players have to play and make shots -- I was on that particular horse on the ORU game specifically.
However...
We constantly, and I mean constantly, give up streaks of consecutive baskets made at the end of games. Like teams go 8 for their last 9 or something like that. I attribute that to us never changing anything on defense, so by the end of the game, the other team knows exactly how to attack it and get good shots. And then there's the matador defense by our interior players who never challenge a shot.
However...
We constantly, and I mean constantly, give up streaks of consecutive baskets made at the end of games. Like teams go 8 for their last 9 or something like that. I attribute that to us never changing anything on defense, so by the end of the game, the other team knows exactly how to attack it and get good shots. And then there's the matador defense by our interior players who never challenge a shot.
might be right, knee. I can't come up with any other explanation. but yes, other teams make plays late against us. we're not answering.
I didn't see a change in aggressiveness though, Rick. we took shots ... some early in the clock. we went inside. we found Gilyard in the lane open. we just missed everything.
I didn't see a change in aggressiveness though, Rick. we took shots ... some early in the clock. we went inside. we found Gilyard in the lane open. we just missed everything.
S-man. Well said. I know we all love our players but it is pretty clear that our talent is just not where it needs to be. I saw that on opening night when Longwood looked to have every bit the talent we did.
But I agree, the players I doubt our blaming Mooney. They are blaming themselves for not executing but they are being put in a lose-lose situation because we just don't have the talent needed to compete with even bad teams on our home court. And that is on Mooney.
Looks like all boxes have been checked off except the winning box. Waiting to check the winning box.
I'd like to see someone provide some stats of the last 5 or 6 minutes of each game and how many points opposition scored versus us. More specifically limit this to games we were actually in by being either + or - 5 points within those 5 to 6 minutes. I think this might be revealing. I can think of ORU, ODU, Wyoming as a start - all winnable games that we went cold end of game. I think Wyoming was even worse - probably w/in the last 3 minutes.
Stats guy - do you have metrics to produce this out of your data base?
Stats guy - do you have metrics to produce this out of your data base?
Lots of discussion of Spider Hoops with the media today:
Interview of Golden, Wojcik:
Interview of Mooney:
Interview of Gilyard on Espn Richmond Radio:
Interview of a Fire Mooney Mafia Member on a Dayton Flyers Fan podcast. Start at 19:30 minute mark.
Podcast by a George Mason Fan. Listen from 2:10 min mark - 2:35 min mark . He put us in bottom tier of teams so he didn't spend much time talking about us.
Interview of Golden, Wojcik:
Interview of Mooney:
Interview of Gilyard on Espn Richmond Radio:
Interview of a Fire Mooney Mafia Member on a Dayton Flyers Fan podcast. Start at 19:30 minute mark.
Podcast by a George Mason Fan. Listen from 2:10 min mark - 2:35 min mark . He put us in bottom tier of teams so he didn't spend much time talking about us.
Last edited:
Nice job by the Mafia. Sounds like there's a cement shoe fitting in the near future.
Mooneys mood on Sportsline tonight sounded like someone disinterested and
ready to get out of town, especially the beginning of the show. When answering
Asst Coach Ivan about St Joe's, it sounded like "hey I know we are going to lose,
so here is a few tidbits."
ready to get out of town, especially the beginning of the show. When answering
Asst Coach Ivan about St Joe's, it sounded like "hey I know we are going to lose,
so here is a few tidbits."
The Spider Sportsline must have a listening audience of about 7. I quit listening last season. Much to do about nothing and Ivan grated my very last nerve.
I did call in as well and the same thing happened to me. I think it is very possible that people who do the show read the board and see where someone like me said they will call in and ask a critical question of Mooney. They likely do this and then don't take calls. Good God this program is such a joke and so soft. I feel like most serious basketball programs will allow fans to call in and be critical of a losing head coach. Not us though with coach thin skin.
The show has traditionally only taken a handful of calls (3 maybe?) for as long as I can remember. Bob said it well, the AD views it as a paid advertisement.
I don't care much for the format but limited REAL calls is nothing new and don't think it's worth crafting into a conspiracy theory.
I remember leaving UL games when I was young and tuning into the raddio call-in show immediately after the game. Always entertaining listening. Wish we had something similar.
I don't care much for the format but limited REAL calls is nothing new and don't think it's worth crafting into a conspiracy theory.
I remember leaving UL games when I was young and tuning into the raddio call-in show immediately after the game. Always entertaining listening. Wish we had something similar.
Yes, recall sitting in my dorm and listening to Dick Tarrant's straight talk. That was interesting. I haven't listened to Mooney in probably 5 years. That would be great if we could get a real coach that wasn't scared of his own shadow and could discuss basketball.
Yep, the school doesn't have to do a show at all, so I get that there's not going to be a lot of interest in paying for a public forum for people to then bash the coach or the program.
At the same time, though, don't act like you want people to call in -- which Bob does all the time by giving out the number several times and literally inviting calls -- and then only allow Ivan on every week to blow non-existent sunshine up Mooney's butt. If a few people other than Ivan called last night and didn't get on, it seems like a disingenuous situation.
At the same time, though, don't act like you want people to call in -- which Bob does all the time by giving out the number several times and literally inviting calls -- and then only allow Ivan on every week to blow non-existent sunshine up Mooney's butt. If a few people other than Ivan called last night and didn't get on, it seems like a disingenuous situation.
Someone needs to change this mindset if we are going to achieve our athletic goals. This show should be primarily for the benefit of fans. Instead, it seems to be only a shield from the possible ire of fans and a vehicle to provide protection/propagation of the status quo of a program in disarray. If Mooney needs to make changes to correct the direction of the program, why would it be harmful to discuss matters which are questioned by his critics? How can those in charge possibly view the show as an advertisement since only already loyal spider fans listen to the show?
It's not a conspiracy theory to suggest that the show make changes to become of such a nature that it appeals to the fans, especially now when most all view the show as a sham. The show provides no relevant information and refuses to bring up anything the least bit controversial or worthy of debate. Such a lack of honesty and integrity would not happen in any academic program. It is intellectually dishonest and of no value to fans. It should not be allowed in any program at the university, athletics included.
I quit listening to the show a few years ago when I realized that Ivan's introductory question set the environment that the program wanted it to be and after I sent in 10 emails in which none of my questions were even alluded to. I realized then the sham that it is.
I am not sure who has been in charge, but I think that person needs to be replaced. I have thought it the responsibility of Bob Black who feeds this mindset with his obsequiousness and mousiness, but now I am not sure.
Agreed. Why even give out the phone number if you are not going to take the calls?
this is what threw me, BSH. you say you've been reading this board a long time, yet strenuously disagreed with me that you'd get your call through. anyone here over a month knew that wasn't happening.
Similar threads
