So now that we have finished out our conference schedule, I wanted to write out my thoughts on where we are as a program and why, what we can do to improve, and my concerns.
* disclaimer, this is a long post.
My concern:
2-10 is not good at all. And yes we heard the reasons of being young, inexperienced, or having a tough schedule, but my concern lies in constantly trying to justify a reason for these losses and here's why: this narrative never establishes clear goals. It has the "wait until next year" mentality that has perpetuated throughout Mooney's tenure. In all honesty, it's not that we are 2-10 this year that has disappointed me the most. Every team has its good and bad years, especially schools that are not in P5 conferences and can restock with 5 star recruits every year. It is the lack of accountability from both Mooney and Gill when he was AD, to state clear goals and expectations for this team. This really has been going on for 13 years (minus 2) of the same old story. It's gotten to the point where if we are competitive in a game, it is considered a "win" and hope for what's to come in the future. This should not be the standard in which we hold ourselves to. If you think this is the administration telling Mooney to behave like this, listen to a coach Huesman press talk. He has clearly stated that competing for national championships is our goal, has taken responsibility for losses, and doesn't mince his words. Listening to Mooney speak, it almost comes across as a "this is who we are as a program" kind of tone and complacency, as if we cannot achieve more.
What do I think is the biggest obstacle preventing us from being successful on the court:
I am not pretending to be an expert coach in the nuances and tactics of basketball, it's based on my observations of how we play compared to other teams
The biggest thing, I think, is Mooney's inability to adapt or change his approach. It's like he is trying to force a triangular block into a square hole. This positionless basketball approach may be beneficial with certain players or against certain teams but it has glaring flaws.
For one, I think we should make more of an effort to keep our big men in the paint and as close to the basket as possible. It's great that they can shoot threes, but what if they miss? Who do we have to get offense rebounds? Additionally, we become too dependent on outside shooting which can be very risky. I wish we had 2 Golden caliber big men on the court at the same time and having at least one remain near the basket.
Going off of this, we need a more balanced roster. Having 4 guards and 1 power forward can create mismatches if the team we are playing against has a true center or several players above 6'6". Going off my previous point, I think we should go for players who are like Derrick Williams who we had a few years ago, or like a Mo-Allie Cox or Justin Tillman for VCU. Someone who is a bully down in the paint.
We need to make more of an effort on offensive rebounds. When we shoot ball, every player retreats back, making no attempt to get the rebound unless there is a fortuitous bounce. This has to be due to coaches telling the players not to give up fast break points. But does that really necessitate all 5 of our players not going for the rebound? 2nd chance points are huge in basketball.
I don't think the coaches are to blame for every missed shot or loss, that's ridiculous. However, it's not the fact we lose, but HOW we lose that must constantly be reevaluated. It has been stated on this forum, opponents' forums, and by announcers ad nauseum that we have a huge deficit in rebounds and allowing second chance points, while creating little 2nd chance points for ourselves. A coach must consider WHY this is happening and make appropriate changes in tactics and recruiting. I believe this is happening because the offense and defenses schemes we are implementing are simply not conducive to this critical component of basketball, as well as the imbalance of positions we recruit for. I am more of a traditionalist when I say that big men should remain in the paint because they have the best chance to block shots and get rebounds.
To Mooney's credit, he's recruited Kevin Anderson, Justin Harper, Kendall Anthony, TJ, Buck, Shawn'dre, Fore, Gilyard, Golden, and Sherod, all of whom have or will win A10 accolades like POY, ROY, all conference/freshman team, etc. Yet, why have many of these players not been to an NCAA tournament yet? It is certainly not due to lack of talent. I really think it's because the system in which they play does not fit their style of play. For example, Sherod is a tremendous player, but a Justin Tillman will beat him in the paint any day because of the size and strength mismatch. Yet we have had Sherod play the 4 position before! Think about it like this: Shaquille O'Neill is one of the most dominant centers to ever play basketball, but would you want him playing point guard? Having positionless basketball places too much expectations on players to excel in such different capacities, which may extend beyond their physical limitations or skill set I.e. Having a 6'4 Sherod guarding a 6'9" Justin Tillman. That can be very difficult. Instead, we need a more clearly defined and balanced role for our players among our roster.
What can we do to improve:
I won't touch on this a lot because I've mentioned it before, but basicially it is Hardt telling Mooney to either change his approach or we will find a different coach. We cannot expect different results if we keep doing the same thing over and over again. Additionally, the practice facility/athlete complex is a must simply to keep up with our peer institutions in basketball and showcase our commitment to recruits. Also alignment between administration and basketball.
Where we stand:
At the end of the day, I am really proud of our University and basketball program and think we do a lot of things right. We run a clean program, have great players who represent this University well, and a coach who has shown some signs of good things. Also, other than this year, the previous years we have competed at a respectable level and even came close to an NCAA tournament. However, this should not be what we aim for. I get that for individuals who aren't fans of Richmond, probably think about our program the same way we think about a High Point University school, in that "they are who they are as a program and they shouldn't really expect much else. Just accept that fact that you will be a mediocre team in an above average basketball conference". I refuse to accept that we have hit our ceiling as a program and truly believe that we can achieve what other mid majors like Gonzaga or Butler have achieved. We just need to make the appropriate changes at a coaching level and institutional level, which shows that we are committed to success. Nothing worth having ever comes easy!
As always, go Spiders!
* disclaimer, this is a long post.
My concern:
2-10 is not good at all. And yes we heard the reasons of being young, inexperienced, or having a tough schedule, but my concern lies in constantly trying to justify a reason for these losses and here's why: this narrative never establishes clear goals. It has the "wait until next year" mentality that has perpetuated throughout Mooney's tenure. In all honesty, it's not that we are 2-10 this year that has disappointed me the most. Every team has its good and bad years, especially schools that are not in P5 conferences and can restock with 5 star recruits every year. It is the lack of accountability from both Mooney and Gill when he was AD, to state clear goals and expectations for this team. This really has been going on for 13 years (minus 2) of the same old story. It's gotten to the point where if we are competitive in a game, it is considered a "win" and hope for what's to come in the future. This should not be the standard in which we hold ourselves to. If you think this is the administration telling Mooney to behave like this, listen to a coach Huesman press talk. He has clearly stated that competing for national championships is our goal, has taken responsibility for losses, and doesn't mince his words. Listening to Mooney speak, it almost comes across as a "this is who we are as a program" kind of tone and complacency, as if we cannot achieve more.
What do I think is the biggest obstacle preventing us from being successful on the court:
I am not pretending to be an expert coach in the nuances and tactics of basketball, it's based on my observations of how we play compared to other teams
The biggest thing, I think, is Mooney's inability to adapt or change his approach. It's like he is trying to force a triangular block into a square hole. This positionless basketball approach may be beneficial with certain players or against certain teams but it has glaring flaws.
For one, I think we should make more of an effort to keep our big men in the paint and as close to the basket as possible. It's great that they can shoot threes, but what if they miss? Who do we have to get offense rebounds? Additionally, we become too dependent on outside shooting which can be very risky. I wish we had 2 Golden caliber big men on the court at the same time and having at least one remain near the basket.
Going off of this, we need a more balanced roster. Having 4 guards and 1 power forward can create mismatches if the team we are playing against has a true center or several players above 6'6". Going off my previous point, I think we should go for players who are like Derrick Williams who we had a few years ago, or like a Mo-Allie Cox or Justin Tillman for VCU. Someone who is a bully down in the paint.
We need to make more of an effort on offensive rebounds. When we shoot ball, every player retreats back, making no attempt to get the rebound unless there is a fortuitous bounce. This has to be due to coaches telling the players not to give up fast break points. But does that really necessitate all 5 of our players not going for the rebound? 2nd chance points are huge in basketball.
I don't think the coaches are to blame for every missed shot or loss, that's ridiculous. However, it's not the fact we lose, but HOW we lose that must constantly be reevaluated. It has been stated on this forum, opponents' forums, and by announcers ad nauseum that we have a huge deficit in rebounds and allowing second chance points, while creating little 2nd chance points for ourselves. A coach must consider WHY this is happening and make appropriate changes in tactics and recruiting. I believe this is happening because the offense and defenses schemes we are implementing are simply not conducive to this critical component of basketball, as well as the imbalance of positions we recruit for. I am more of a traditionalist when I say that big men should remain in the paint because they have the best chance to block shots and get rebounds.
To Mooney's credit, he's recruited Kevin Anderson, Justin Harper, Kendall Anthony, TJ, Buck, Shawn'dre, Fore, Gilyard, Golden, and Sherod, all of whom have or will win A10 accolades like POY, ROY, all conference/freshman team, etc. Yet, why have many of these players not been to an NCAA tournament yet? It is certainly not due to lack of talent. I really think it's because the system in which they play does not fit their style of play. For example, Sherod is a tremendous player, but a Justin Tillman will beat him in the paint any day because of the size and strength mismatch. Yet we have had Sherod play the 4 position before! Think about it like this: Shaquille O'Neill is one of the most dominant centers to ever play basketball, but would you want him playing point guard? Having positionless basketball places too much expectations on players to excel in such different capacities, which may extend beyond their physical limitations or skill set I.e. Having a 6'4 Sherod guarding a 6'9" Justin Tillman. That can be very difficult. Instead, we need a more clearly defined and balanced role for our players among our roster.
What can we do to improve:
I won't touch on this a lot because I've mentioned it before, but basicially it is Hardt telling Mooney to either change his approach or we will find a different coach. We cannot expect different results if we keep doing the same thing over and over again. Additionally, the practice facility/athlete complex is a must simply to keep up with our peer institutions in basketball and showcase our commitment to recruits. Also alignment between administration and basketball.
Where we stand:
At the end of the day, I am really proud of our University and basketball program and think we do a lot of things right. We run a clean program, have great players who represent this University well, and a coach who has shown some signs of good things. Also, other than this year, the previous years we have competed at a respectable level and even came close to an NCAA tournament. However, this should not be what we aim for. I get that for individuals who aren't fans of Richmond, probably think about our program the same way we think about a High Point University school, in that "they are who they are as a program and they shouldn't really expect much else. Just accept that fact that you will be a mediocre team in an above average basketball conference". I refuse to accept that we have hit our ceiling as a program and truly believe that we can achieve what other mid majors like Gonzaga or Butler have achieved. We just need to make the appropriate changes at a coaching level and institutional level, which shows that we are committed to success. Nothing worth having ever comes easy!
As always, go Spiders!
Last edited:
