Print

[HiggiePiggy]

I wish they would do away with divisions in football and baseball also.  Especially in football. Top 2 teams of a conference should always face each other for the chance of playing in the playoff. 

[Kevin McPherson]

Maybe we should holler at Jolstens and have them run us off a few batches of self proclaimed SEC West Division Champion rings? Somebody get Bazzel working on the trophies too but tell him to venture out of the geography genre.

Not sure if it's Jolstens, but they still do it for football and baseball. Are those a joke? I'm torn on that, but will say that there is no harm in looking at over-laying what Arkansas's divisional finishes would have looked like had there still been and East and West like they still do for the other 2 sports. IMO, you can't have it both ways. If it's a laughing matter now that should apply to all 3 sports. I mean, you can play for an SEC title out of the East in football and not be one of the 2, 3 or 4 best teams in the league, hasn't that been an opportunity more than once? I know it was that way when the East was better in football and Bama was way down in 2 of the Hogs 3 SEC title appearances. Baseball affords teams that win divisions a chance for an advantageous SECT seed even if some of the head-to-head during the regular season didn't shake out that way. You could have a team in one division have a better league record and win a series against a divisional winner from the other side and still get a lower seed based on divisional finishes.

Why is not fair to overlay the old way to see how that might have shaped a different perception when other sports still get that benefit? Ima hang up and lissen.

[jry04]

Just going to correct some of the minimizing right here before getting to what we agree on ...

* Mike "may never miss the NIT again but may never make a Sweet 16"? That's strange dot-connecting since he's been getting his teams to NCAATs while not making Sweet 16s in 3 of the last 4 years.

* Mike did not inherit a McD AA, Powell got hurt and did not play in year 1, and the multiple 4-stars did not pan out aside from Madden who eventually did.

* This is season 8, and Gafford will make 2 draft picks in 8 years with Qualls very likely being a 3rd had he not wrecked his knee (many of his mid- to late-2nd-round projections had moved up to top 10 of second round projections just prior to him getting hurt). While Macon didn't get drafted, he's at least on track to be a player Mike can point to as a success story developing at Arkansas as a bridge to the league -- may or may not play out that way, but he's at least played in the league as an undrafted FA rookie. Isaiah Joe also getting a lot of attention from NBA folks as a freshman. It's not a great track record, not going to argue it's even a good one, but it's at least trending up.

* Arkansas has not been a "Bubble team every year" ... it was not a bubble team in '14-15, '16-17, or '17-18. Those teams all earned top-half NCAAT bids (a 5, a 7, and an and were safely projected in the Dance heading into the SECT.

* Agree that Arkansas has not been a Top 25 program and that when CMA was hired most fans would have thought after 8 seasons there would be more of that kind of measurable success. I've never said differently.

My mistake, I thought BJ Young was a McDonald's AA. Forgot he was snubbed. He was ranked #16 on ESPN, #21 on 247, and #25 on Rivals. He was a unanimous 5 star. Mike had him year 1 and BJ/Powell in year 2  with a weak SEC and missed the NIT. That was very underwhelming.

Only 1 NCAAT team Mike has had at Arkansas has not been a bubble team in the final 3rd of the season. The others had to win down the stretch to make it. They were not on the bubble on Selection Sunday, but they were over halfway thru SEC play. Most prognosticators said we couldn't go 0-1 last year in the SECT or we would miss or at best be in the first four game. We were 21-10 entering the SECT. The year before, the Hogs got an 8 seed, but with 7 games left were 6-5 in the league and coming off losses to unranked Missouri and Vandy. Credit to Mike having them win 6 of their final 7 to secure their bid, but that is the theme every year. Having to claw back to get in the conversation rather than being top 25 and a shoo-in.

My comment about Mike maybe never missing the NIT but likely never making the Sweet 16 in the future was to illustrate his high floor, but low ceiling. My point is he won't have terrible years or great years. Falling somewhere in between, like he has 3 of the last 4 years, is mediocre.

[Kevin McPherson]

My mistake, I thought BJ Young was a McDonald's AA. Forgot he was snubbed. He was ranked #16 on ESPN, #21 on 247, and #25 on Rivals. He was a unanimous 5 star. Mike had him year 1 and BJ/Powell in year 2  with a weak SEC and missed the NIT. That was very underwhelming.

Only 1 NCAAT team Mike has had at Arkansas has not been a bubble team in the final 3rd of the season. The others had to win down the stretch to make it. They were not on the bubble on Selection Sunday, but they were over halfway thru SEC play. Most prognosticators said we couldn't go 0-1 last year in the SECT or we would miss or at best be in the first four game. We were 21-10 entering the SECT. The year before, the Hogs got an 8 seed, but with 7 games left were 6-5 in the league and coming off losses to unranked Missouri and Vandy. Credit to Mike having them win 6 of their final 7 to secure their bid, but that is the theme every year. Having to claw back to get in the conversation rather than being top 25 and a shoo-in.

My comment about Mike maybe never missing the NIT but likely never making the Sweet 16 in the future was to illustrate his high floor, but low ceiling. My point is he won't have terrible years or great years. Falling somewhere in between, like he has 3 of the last 4 years, is mediocre.

A team's goal is to establish an unquestioned at-large bid by the end of the regular season, and Arkansas has done that in 3 of the last 4 years. Those '13-14, '16-17, '17-18 NCAAT bids ranged from Top 17-32 in the country. That's not mediocre -- all of that is at minimum good -- when measured against a 68-team field and from a more far-away view of 351 D1 teams. At the same time, there are no consistent human-poll rankings, Sweet 16s or better, SEC or SECT titles -- things that measure national relevance on a larger scale that in 8 seasons have not been sustained or met at all. You can be good and not good enough. Medicore? Bro, that bus don't run here!

[SexyBeast77]

My comment about Mike maybe never missing the NIT but likely never making the Sweet 16 in the future was to illustrate his high floor, but low ceiling. My point is he won't have terrible years or great years. Falling somewhere in between, like he has 3 of the last 4 years, is mediocre.

This gets to the heart of the matter. Those of us who acknowledge that Mike's floor is higher (than Heath and Pelphrey), still do not believe because "Mike has never had a losing season" that that means we are in the ascendancy. A lot of us don't really believe that Mike's team is going to do any better than we have in the last 8 years, and that low ceiling is why a lot of people would like to roll the dice on a change rather than be happy with this holding pattern.

[SexyBeast77]

A team's goal is to establish an unquestioned at-large bid by the end of the regular season, and Arkansas has done that in 3 of the last 4 years. Those '13-14, '16-17, '17-18 NCAAT bids ranged from Top 17-32 in the country. That's not mediocre -- all of that is at minimum good -- when measured against a 68-team field and from a more far-away view of 351 D1 teams. At the same time, there are no consistent human-poll rankings, Sweet 16s or better, SEC or SECT titles -- things that measure national relevance on a larger scale that in 8 seasons have not been sustained or met at all. You can be good and not good enough. Medicore? Bro, that bus don't run here!

Um, I don't think that is most team's goal. Their goal is to win their conference and not need an at large because they won so much.  And your argument doesn't hold up if we make it 3 appearances in what is about to be 8 years. That is not great when you look back at Eddie and Nolan and what is possible.

[Kevin McPherson]

This gets to the heart of the matter. Those of us who acknowledge that Mike's floor is higher, still do not believe because "Mike has never had a losing season" that that means we are in the ascendancy. A lot of us don't really believe that Mike's team is going to do any better than have in the last 8 years, and that low ceiling is why a lot of people would like to roll the dice on a change rather than be happy with this holding pattern.

And who are you preaching this to? I've never said he's met all reasonable expectations here, and thus, to question and doubt that he can or will after 8 seasons is something I have said over and over and over is fair and reasonable criticism, up to scenarios of a change after this season also being fair and reasonable to me.

But the part I bolded is the only thing I disagree with. Unless the bottom falls out this season, there should be no dice rolling. Better have an upgrade on board and all but signed if you cut bait. If the bottom falls out -- 5-13 or worse, core players bolting, fans completely jumping ship -- it would be malpractice not to look at making a change, but a decent finish relative to expectations for this season coupled with the last 4 years means a move needs a reliable option, not a roll of the dice. My opinions of course.

[hamARchy in the USA]

To Just make the NCAA tournament means we are one of the best 68 teams? Yay? Maybe slightly better considering the conference tournament upsets.  And we are actually pretty good but still irrelevant?
Re: Arkansas' finshes: How is this top Tier
2011 - 9th
2012 -7th
2013 - 5th
2014 -2nd
2015 - 8th
2016 - 3rd
2017 - 4th
2018 - 7th?

So we avg about 5th out of 14 teams. What tier is that? The mediocre tier?

He is who he always was ... and that's the problem.

http://forums.hogville.net/index.php?topic=396732.msg6076241#msg6076241

[Kevin McPherson]

Um, I don't think that is most team's goal. Their goal is to win their conference and not need an at large because they won so much.  And your argument doesn't hold up if we make it 3 appearances in what is about to be 8 years. That is not great when you look back at Eddie and Nolan and what is possible.

Um, duh that all team's ultimate goals are to win their leagues and conference tourneys for auto bids, but simultaneously the odds don't favor that and most teams want to remove any doubt by the time the regular season has ended by locking up an at-large bid. Arkansas has done that to the tune of 3 NCAAT bids in the last 4 years that have ALL fallen in the Top 17-32 range out of a 68-team field. That's not sneaking in or getting lucky, that's handlin' that biz, bro!

[nwahogfan1]

I'm pro facts and opinions that are based on facts and reasonable expectations. Facts support that CMA has done a good job at Arkansas and has the program in the top tier of the SEC consistently and has the program headed in the right direction.

Headed in the right direction.  Mike has been here 8 years.  Where do you see the heading.
 Seems pretty consistently just ok to me.  Being in the top tier of the SEC when we were only getting 4 teams in the dance isn't much to me.  Maybe getting into the top 3 NOW with so many good teams would mean something but we are heading no where.  I failed to see the heading upwards.  I see only going no where.  In 8 years where is a SECC or SECT ring?
   Or a NCAAT sweet sixteen or elite 8.    I guess my facts and your facts just do not line up.
 We are going no where.  We will beat a top 35 team just to be beaten by no bodies.  Mike does not recruit enough talent to win enough games to be relevant in the top 25 anymore.
 How may years has Mike been Ranked at the end of the Year.  I will say 0.   That is the FActs.
 We are not a top 25 team in 8 years because Mike is either not a good Coach or not a good enough recruiter.  That is the Facts. Facts also demonstrate a lack of national relevance and combined with the reasonable expectation that Arkansas should be a program that enjoys more of that than it has, I respect opinions and notions that suggest CMA is not living up to the full, reasonable level that Arkansas's program can achieve.

The facts and reality -- not me -- should tell you that Mediocre Mike narrative is fiction, as well as the notion that the program has been a disappointment and not elevated much more than when Heath and Pel were here as complete nonsense, too. Those opinions, and I read them a lot, are not buoyed by the data, the facts, or reality. If that makes me pro CMA in folks' eyes who need that downward-spiral narrative to be true, then so be it. 

[SexyBeast77]

Um, duh that all team's ultimate goals are to win their leagues and conference tourneys for auto bids, but simultaneously the odds don't favor that and most teams want to remove any doubt by the time the regular season has ended by locking up an at-large bid. Arkansas has done that to the tune of 3 NCAAT bids in the last 4 years that have ALL fallen in the Top 17-32 range out of a 68-team field. That's not sneaking in or getting lucky, that's handlin' that biz, bro!

But the sample is 8 years. We have suffered through 40 minutes of hell on my eyes for 8 years. Which btw, what is the strength of Mike Anderson's team anyways? We don't have a consistent offense. We mostly pass it around the perimeter and jack threes. We don't have a great defense. We certainly aren't a great freethrow shooting team. He's not a great recruiter. What is MA's strength? I don't think we desperately need to hold onto a .500 conference coach because we might get one that goes 2 games under. The MA tenure has run its course. Time to move on. 

[hamARchy in the USA]

Um, duh that all team's ultimate goals are to win their leagues and conference tourneys for auto bids, but simultaneously the odds don't favor that and most teams want to remove any doubt by the time the regular season has ended by locking up an at-large bid. Arkansas has done that to the tune of 3 NCAAT bids in the last 4 years that have ALL fallen in the Top 17-32 range out of a 68-team field. That's not sneaking in or getting lucky, that's handlin' that biz, bro!

If Heath would've been allowed to suck for another year his teams would've had a bid for the third straight year out of six.  At that time it wasn't acceptable to be an also ran.  Now it's to be celebrated ?

[HogBreath]

To Just make the NCAA tournament means we are one of the best 68 teams? Yay? Maybe slightly better considering the conference tournament upsets.  And we are actually pretty good but still irrelevant?
Re: Arkansas' finshes: How is this top Tier
2011 - 9th
2012 -7th
2013 - 5th
2014 -2nd
2015 - 8th
2016 - 3rd
2017 - 4th
2018 - 7th?

So we avg about 5th out of 14 teams. What tier is that? The mediocre tier?

Conference finishes are a lot like every thing else with the fast forty roller coaster...lots of ups and downs.
    `

[Kevin McPherson]

If Heath would've been allowed to suck for another year his teams would've had a bid for the third straight year out of six.  At that time it wasn't acceptable to be an also ran.  Now it's to be celebrated ?

Heath's 2 NCAAT teams did not have a win. The team that got in with 21-13 overall record finished tied for 8th out of 12 SEC teams with a 7-9 SEC record and was the LAST team picked to the NCAAT field -- a choice that was roundly criticized at the time by the national talking heads, and of course the Hogs were blown out by USC in the first round. Today, that team most likely would not have been invited to the NIT -- which now takes conference reg-season champs that don't get auto or at-large bids to NCAAT, then from there just like NCAAT its based off RPI/SOS. It's no longer about who can sell tickets. All of that, and on paper Heath recruited better than CMA so it goes even more to his shortcomings in results.

Plus, Heath had major internal problems with player academics and other off-the-court issues, and his style of play was so boring fans stopped coming in large numbers -- this was before high-def and big-screens were a norm, before basically all games were televised, and before the economic crash of 2008 -- just a few of the factors that along with a watered-down game over time have adversely affected attendance at CBB games from a global vantage point.

Again, not saying that CMA has met some of the resonable expectations, but he's been vastly better than both Heath and Pel on many fronts. He's also been good in the SEC while getting his 3 NCAATs in the last 4 years into Top 17-32 seedings out of 68-team fields.

[Kevin]

 Chop it up anyway you want. Throw the first two years out. It all proves one thing, cma is an average coach. He will do just enough to keep his job. 

If average I what you want then he is your coach

[hamARchy in the USA]

Heath's 2 NCAAT teams did not have a win. The team that got in with 21-13 overall record finished tied for 8th out of 12 SEC teams with a 7-9 SEC record and was the LAST team picked to the NCAAT field -- a choice that was roundly criticized at the time by the national talking heads, and of course the Hogs were blown out by USC in the first round. Today, that team most likely would not have been invited to the NIT -- which now takes conference reg-season champs that don't get auto or at-large bids to NCAAT, then from there just like NCAAT its based off RPI/SOS. It's no longer about who can sell tickets. All of that, and on paper Heath recruited better than CMA so it goes even more to his shortcomings in results.

Plus, Heath had major internal problems with player academics and other off-the-court issues, and his style of play was so boring fans stopped coming in large numbers -- this was before high-def and big-screens were a norm, before basically all games were televised, and before the economic crash of 2008 -- just a few of the factors that along with a watered-down game over time have adversely affected attendance at CBB games from a global vantage point.

Again, not saying that CMA has met some of the resonable expectations, but he's been vastly better than both Heath and Pel on many fronts. He's also been good in the SEC while leavng getting his 3 NCAATs in the last 4 years into Top 17-32 seedings out of 68-team fields.

Postseason invitations are an important part of your argument propaganda and based on that shallow metric Heath going the last 3 straight out of 6 would have made him a better coach for Arkansas than MA.

MA's 2014-2015 would've been a bubble team at best with an even schedule.  Probably would've been NIT bound without the scheduling crutch.  Then he would've gone 5 straight years without a NCAA bid.  That year was probably one of the greatest under achievements in Razorback history given the SEC championship schedule he was gifted and the SEC POY he didn't have to recruit.

Speculating and splitting hairs is simply arguing over which coach was worse.

Can't polish either turd.

[hobhog]

Andy Kennedys OM career was very similar,  arguably better as far as SEC record goes.

[razorback1829]

Facts don’t matter to them Kev. They have an agenda, and even when you put them all in their place with facts, they go make up things and cherry pick because they have an agenda. Good job. You made them all look pretty foolish. Have them changing their post after you respond 😂😂😂

[Kevin McPherson]

Postseason invitations are an important part of your argument propaganda and based on that shallow metric Heath going 3 out of 6 would have made him a better coach for Arkansas than MA.

MA's 2014-2015 would've been a bubble team at best with an even schedule. Probably would've been NIT bound without the scheduling crutch.  Then he would've gone 5 straight years without a NCAA bid.  That year was probably one of the greatest under achievements in Razorback history given the SEC championship schedule he was gifted and the SEC POY he didn't have to recruit.

Speculating and splitting hairs is simply arguing over which coach was worse.

Can't polish either turd.

Proves how bad some of these arguments are. A weaker league sked cuts both ways. Yes, you can win more games, even finish higher in league pecking order, but you can also not take care of biz and not make the NCAAT even with more wins than other teams. The strength of the sked is baked in to the RPI, NCAAT seedings, and even the human polls -- ALL of which said Arkansas was a Top 20-25 team at the end of the season. Had the Hogs played a tougher sked and finished with the same exact record, obviously the RPI/SOS and NCAAT seeding would have been even better, conversely playing a touger sked resulting in 2-3 more losses likely would have resulted in the same or similar RPI/SOS and NCAAT seeding that Arkansas got.

Again, Heath's final Arkansas team probably does not get an NIT invite based on today's standards. Mike's 3 NCAAT teams not only beat the bubble, they were top half and in one case top third of the 68-team NCAAT field. Favorable scheduling -- whether its non-con which is in the program's control, or league play which is NOT in the program's control, or a combo of BOTH -- whatever, favorable scheduling is not going to beat all of the metrics that bake it in to the final analysis.

[BannerMountainMan]

Proves how bad some of these arguments are. A weaker league sked cuts both ways. Yes, you can win more games, even finish higher in league pecking order, but you can also not take care of biz and not make the NCAAT even with more wins than other teams. The strength of the sked is baked in to the RPI, NCAAT seedings, and even the human polls -- ALL of which said Arkansas was a Top 20-25 team at the end of the season. Had the Hogs played a tougher sked and finished with the same exact record, obviously the RPI/SOS and NCAAT seeding would have been even better, conversely playing a touger sked resulting in 2-3 more losses likely would have resulted in the same or similar RPI/SOS and NCAAT seeding that Arkansas got.

Again, Heath's final Arkansas team probably does not get an NIT invite based on today's standards. Mike's 3 NCAAT teams not only beat the bubble, they were top half and in one case top third of the 68-team NCAAT field. Favorable scheduling -- whether its non-con which is in the program's control, or league play which is NOT in the program's control, or a combo of BOTH -- whatever, favorable scheduling is not going to beat all of the metrics that bake it in to the final analysis.

I think this is why Kevin is starting to throw facts out there for CMA because they narrative has been getting so bad that people can make up stats on Hogville and get away with it.

[hamARchy in the USA]

Proves how bad some of these arguments are. A weaker league sked cuts both ways. Yes, you can win more games, even finish higher in league pecking order, but you can also not take care of biz and not make the NCAAT even with more wins than other teams. The strength of the sked is baked in to the RPI, NCAAT seedings, and even the human polls -- ALL of which said Arkansas was a Top 20-25 team at the end of the season. Had the Hogs played a tougher sked and finished with the same exact record, obviously the RPI/SOS and NCAAT seeding would have been even better, conversely playing a touger sked resulting in 2-3 more losses likely would have resulted in the same or similar RPI/SOS and NCAAT seeding that Arkansas got.

Again, Heath's final Arkansas team probably does not get an NIT invite based on today's standards. Mike's 3 NCAAT teams not only beat the bubble, they were top half and in one case top third of the 68-team NCAAT field. Favorable scheduling -- whether its non-con which is in the program's control, or league play which is NOT in the program's control, or a combo of BOTH -- whatever, favorable scheduling is not going to beat all of the metrics that bake it in to the final analysis.

keep on polishin' ...

[Kevin McPherson]

Facts don’t matter to them Kev. They have an agenda, and even when you put them all in their place with facts, they go make up things and cherry pick because they have an agenda. Good job. You made them all look pretty foolish. Have them changing their post after you respond 😂😂😂

Gotta say, it is beyond bizzare that based on the merits of lack of sustained national relevance after 8 years that should be enough to warrant concern, doubt, and raising fair questions about a change -- having ALL of that conceded and squarely on the table, it's still not enough and folks need to drum home this notion that it's been a mediocre ride and results and that the needle isn't far from where it was the previous 9 years under other regimes.

CMA has done well by this program -- not just by being a good man, not just by wanting to be here at a time when the program had worse than the cooties, not just by running a clean program, not just by sustaining a solid academic/APR record, but by actual results that show a program that in many meaningful ways has moved into the top tier of a good basketball league. He's not lived up to all that is expected and can be at Arkansas, but it's simply not accurate to paint him with the mediocre brush. Not close.

[maxhog5]

keep on polishin' ...

[SexyBeast77]

Gotta say, it is beyond bizzare that based on the merits of lack of sustained national relevance after 8 years that should be enough to warrant concern, doubt, and raising fair questions about a change -- having ALL of that conceded and squarely on the table, it's still not enough and folks need to drum home this notion that it's been a mediocre ride and results and that the needle isn't far from where it was the previous 9 years under other regimes.

CMA has done well by this program -- not just by being a good man, not just by wanting to be here at a time when the program had worse than the cooties, not just by running a clean program, not just by sustaining a solid academic/APR record, but by actual results that show a program that in many meaningful ways has moved into the top tier of a good basketball league. He's not lived up to all that is expected and can be at Arkansas, but it's simply not accurate to paint him with the mediocre brush. Not close.

No one is arguing that Mike didn't improve us from Heath and Pelphrey. That's a strawman. We went from averaging 6 conference wins (in a 16 game season btw) to 9 or 10 wins in an 18 game season. Right direction, but Mike can't get us any further. His "System" doesn't work. We are going into battle with a limited General with a limited strategy.
  Rich Schaeffer is proud of that lasts paragraph. You got all the talking points in.

[maxhog5]

To Just make the NCAA tournament means we are one of the best 68 teams? Yay? Maybe slightly better considering the conference tournament upsets.  And we are actually pretty good but still irrelevant?
Re: Arkansas' finshes: How is this top Tier
2011 - 9th
2012 -7th
2013 - 5th
2014 -2nd
2015 - 8th
2016 - 3rd
2017 - 4th
2018 - 7th?

So we avg about 5th out of 14 teams. What tier is that? The mediocre tier?

Mediocre.