i agree with you mostly. lately the d has been much better, but even after the USM, WV, UH, Utah and Bama losses this team won with bad d. When things began to turn around (USC, Ohio St and Ark wins) in my opinion are when davis became more adjusted. he helped on d, but i think we won those games more because of improved O (offensive rebounding). i know it was 2OT, but Ohio St scored 100 on us. the team improved more when minor settled down and bass became more consistent. finally, during the recent impressive run (MSU, UF, and Bama) perimeter d really stepped up--mitch especially. i am hoping for two final areas of improvement--1) consistent attack of the zone d with passes to flasher at the foul line and quick passes out of the double team on the blocks. 2) hitting outside shots.

I don't think you truly understand my point or the situation. I'm not pretending to be an expert. All I know is what I've seen with my own eyes, year after year after year. I've played basketball all my life, I've coached it, and I've watched enough basketball to understand the underlying concepts and know that this team lacks execution on certain aspects of the game. I've also seen enough talented teams with poor coaches and good teams with excellent coaches to realize the characteristics that differentiate the two.

Don't mistake my questioning for dwelling on the negative, that's far from what I'm doing. What you don't seem to understand is that while this team is winning, all it takes is one loss in the tourney and the season is over. Like Skip always did, you try to prepare your team for the post-season while making sure you get there. When doing this, you scout yourself and try to find you own tendencies and weaknesses. The tendencies and weaknesses that I see are some of the same I've seen over Brady's tenure. A well-coached team will exploit these. So while it may appear that all things are rosey, I'd rather remain guarded because I have been disappointed time and time again. And don't confuse this for someone who can't enjoy the winning as I'm enjoying it as much or more than the Brady lovers. In fact, I've already made arrangements for Oklahoma City and Austin, just in the hope that we end up there. I wouldn't say this is the action of someone who is dwelling on the negative.

I agree with you that in the end winning is winning and it doesn't really matter how you look. The problem is that well-coached teams win ugly when they have a bad night while many teams that aren't well-coached win or lose ugly on most nights. And having said that, for the most part, we've been winning lately without looking ugly - but that hasn't been the norm under Brady.

This is a ridiculous statement and you know it. Without a certain level of talent, it doesn't matter how well-coached you are.

And I have to go back to one other thing you said:

I may piss you off, but I can tell you one thing, if you knew me, you would only wish there were more fans like me. Not too many fans brought a walkman to school when they were 7 years old just so they could listen to LSU play in an SEC tournament game during lunch and between classes. Not too many fans make a deal with their brother when they're 13 to do all of the chores for 6 months just to be able to go to a game with their dad when it wasn't their turn to go. I could go on and on. I'm not trying to say I'm a better fan than you or anyone, I'm just saying that you will be hard pressed to find one who cares more than I do. And that is exactly the reason why I am concerned at this point. I can enjoy the winning and success as much as anyone, and I am. But, I will not withhold criticism just because we are in the midst of a great run, the same way I wouldn't withhold praise if we were in the midst of a bad run.

It just amazes me over and over how quick we are to forget as fans - the good and the bad.

Your judgements are misguided and completely wrong. And I am a fan, and as one, I have the right to critisize the bad as well as praise the good.

Go watch some game film and you will find my premise is based LARGELY on facts. And for a premise that you called ridiculous and not based on fact, you sure as hell providing nothing to the dispute it. Please forgive me for not being myopic. You're dismissed.

Thanks for your support USChater. Unfortunately, your comments are not welcome here because they are too rational and based too greatly on your first-hand experiences. How can you, as a rational being, and coach (former or current), be qualified to critisize or comment on another coach. Unless you are Phil Jackson, John Wooden, or Dean Smith please keep all criticism off this board.

[QUOTE=TD TIGER] you contradict yourself here:




LSU has beaten many well coached teams during this run and many have been very well-played, well-coached games. LSU has also won a couple of ugly games.


Name a team who's fanbase can't repeat the exact things you say. Basically, you're just apprehensive because odds are this team won't make it to the NC game nor will all but 2. That's the reality of it. I dont doubt you're a true LSU fan, its just you need to be a little more positive because if you can't be presently, you never will. Not as far as basketball goes.


and yes, you're overanalyzing and overlooking reality. LSU is one of the hottest teams in the country, playing their asses off for their coach, showing great team chemistry, growth and great progress. there is almost absolutely nothing to be critical about. Enjoy the success, even with hesistancy. None of us truly think we're going to win it all but we sure as hell can enjoy the ride.

Why isn't basketball held to the same standards at LSU as football or baseball?Hudson's intentional foul is inexcusable (and I coach class A hoops for four years).

LSU BB has had some fantastic recruiting during Brady's tenure, the primary reason for recent long overdue success.
LSU's underachievement (not consistently ranked in Top 25 when you're recruiting classes are ranked high, we even had a #1 class) has a few root causes.

Attrition & loss of key players that objected to Brady & his system.

LSU's predictability* on the court & Depth

*Brady is lacking as an X's & O's coach in the half court game & LSU needs more movement & creativity from its play sets & coaches who focus more on defense.

This recent run has been really exciting. A 20 win regular season, Wow. Let's hope we can get a good draw in the SEC & NCAA tourneys & a better half court game to help our advance in the NCAA.

Good post, Gumbo, and I agree. All these things you mention come about with time, maturity and playing together, building confidence in one another and the coaching. And this is what has happened. As I said in my earlier post, JB and the other coaches can preach these tenets and practices til they're blue in the face, which I am sure they have, but until that little light goes on in the head(s) of the player(s), it aint gonna happen!

your whole premise is flawed. what matters is wins. if brady recruits the best players in the world, and they have 10 nba talents on the team, and they underacheive terribly and still win, thats fine.

that is one factor among many, like motivation and recruiting. results are measured in wins, not how a fan thinks the Xs and Os are working. if they win on sheer one on one streetball talent, that is still winning. if the heat won by tossing the ball to shaq every time, would that be good coaching? of course, even though there wasnt even really any coaching happening. Xs and Os dont always matter much.

i wish i could help you discuss it, but i care about wins more than that stuff. so i see nothing to be critical of.

maybe every other team in the sec except bama and kentucky have terrible coaches. for now, lsu does not, the indisputable results are on the court.

I don't want to watch game film. I am not a coach, don't think I'm a coach and don't aspire to be a coach. I am a fan. I want my team to win and I don't care if the do it with donkeys and monkeys. You are a frustrated jock/coach who wants to win every single game or there must be something wrong. Sorry, not impressed.

Some of you guys slay me. I get the biggest kick out of all these "experts" on sports forums. Listen, John Brady coaches at a Div 1 school and has been quite successful. Most of us, here, are probably damn good at what we do but we are not experts in Brady's chosen field. Your (our) opinion of his abilities, strategies, personnel decisions, etc. carry absolutely zero weight. Nada. None. Zilch. I laugh at your pretentiousness.

I think it's universal around here that your opinion of LSU and LSU sports is respected. There's a lot to be said for your self-proclaimed title "voice of reason", because that is indeed what you are and have been.

However, you are wrong on your consistently stated 2 points:

1) People cannot criticize coaches on their X&Os knowledge because they themselves do not have the coaching experience/abillity.

2) People cannot expect their teams to win every game when their teams are obviously putting better talent on the floor than the opposition.

so with this theory, you can only be good or knowledgable at what you do for a living or what you went to school for? I, sir, laugh at your pretentiousness.

you can criticize, but you probably do not know more than a coach who is having success in the SEC.

you can criticize all day, but if the team is winning, it is sort of pointless. i mean, cmon, how hot is LSU right now? they have been pretty awesome the last few weeks.

you cannot win every game even with much better talent. do you even watch sports?

the worst occasionally beat the best. roger federer is maybe the greatest tennis player that ever lived, and he will lose this year. the patriots will not go undefeated. the yanks and red sox will each lose at least 50 games to inferior teams.

point: even if were revealed that john brady had never heard of a pick and roll or a give and go, nobody would care if he was winning, which he is now.

But my thoughts were not meant to be specific to Brady...

i will buy that, but sabanfan was specifically talking about brady in his post. an X/O discussion might find a more receptive audience when discussing a terrible or losing team/coach.

i get your point, but when you make an analogy with another sport its a bit of a stretch. IU went undefeated in 74?, Illinois may do it this year, St Joe's had undefeated reg season last year (not that it meant all that much).

i like xs and os. id prefer a coach thats good at xs and os, because other things being equal (which, granted, is not always or usually the case) you will win more often. but more than that, if youre coach is good at xs and os you always have hope for the program. when you get a good recruit or two (bass and davis---cj and shaq--stro) the sky is the limit. the final four, and not the sky, was the limit under dale---brady's limit MAY be lower. even if your xs and os coach isnt as good a recruiter, there is usually still the occassional great player from your city/state (bass, davis, tasmin) that youre likely to get anyway. and you also have the cycle that seems to occur giving you senior laden teams every few years that can be better that even well coached inexperienced talent.

#1: Fair enough, but see martin's caveat:

#2: Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Just for the record...

Indiana had two an undefeated regular seasons in 1975 (29-0) and 1976 (27-0), and 1976 was their perfect overall season (32-0).

U sure think u know everything

he's not the one claiming to know more than a top 25 D1 coach.