Coaching but also an offensive line... no QB can succeed here in a piss poor scheme and a terrible line.
Kcmatt7
11050 posts
HighEliteMajor said:
Crimsonorblue22 said:
Had she remained at KU, Hudy's job would have looked slightly different this fall.
KU in May announced a "groundbreaking" collaboration with University of Kansas Health System and LMH Health called Kansas Team Health, aiming to minimize potential conflicts of interest between medical personnel and the university's coaches and administrators. Under the policy, Hudy and about 40 other sports medicine staffers — other strength and conditioning coaches, physicians, athletic trainers, nutritionists and wellness coordinators — were to be converted to employees of University of Kansas Health Systems, reporting to medical professionals rather than athletic department personnel.
That was from Topeka cap.
Sounds like the AD is being proactive so as to make med staff independent. Would seem to be a good move to help limit liability. Just a thought.
Agreed. I have no issues with them instituting it.
Sucks Hudy wanted to leave because if it, but ultimately this is a good move LT.
Sad day. Would love to know why.
Marco said:
Kcmatt7 said:
Marco said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
If KU pushes they can get him. Robinson and McBride are tight. But he’s also down the board a ways.
I say we try to sign as high-profile a point as we can. Bill runs pretty much a three-guard set, I get that, so question. Do you think McBride and Harris are more than serviceable? I.e. can they as sophomores get us to where we want to go, which is always a conference and national 'chip? Where do you think they will play? 1, 2 or three? Who do you think we have more than just a chance to sign? If you say Nix - despite some of my posts - I would certainly not be disappointed. I want Thompson bigtime but he is a two, I'm talking PGs.
Caleb Love
I hear you, Thompson is starting to look a bit problematic, isn't he?
I don't have a good read on the situation. Seems like he's Nike bound, but things can change fast... A bag of cash can travel mighty fast down I-35.
Marco said:
FarmerJayhawk said:
If KU pushes they can get him. Robinson and McBride are tight. But he’s also down the board a ways.
I say we try to sign as high-profile a point as we can. Bill runs pretty much a three-guard set, I get that, so question. Do you think McBride and Harris are more than serviceable? I.e. can they as sophomores get us to where we want to go, which is always a conference and national 'chip? Where do you think they will play? 1, 2 or three? Who do you think we have more than just a chance to sign? If you say Nix - despite some of my posts - I would certainly not be disappointed. I want Thompson bigtime but he is a two, I'm talking PGs.
Caleb Love
FarmerJayhawk said:
Can’t emphasize this enough. We HAVE to make progress on the field (4+ wins) to keep this group together. There will be a lot of schools keeping tabs on our guys trying to poach if things go south.
They absolutely have to win the first two games.
And then they need to win 1 of the next 3. BC, WVU, TCU. If they get swept here, I think it'll be almost impossible to win 4 games. And, truth be told it would just be extremely deflating for everyone.
And then the other win needs to come from Tech, KSU or Baylor.
Imagine Bill and Les doing a in home visit together.
Marco said:
@Kcmatt7 I do.... Not that I necessarily want them to be - would take Nix in a heartbeat! - but we would already have McBride, Harris and Garrett. That is a pretty deep and talented group.
Garrett isn't a PG. I don't understand why people keep lumping him in with the PGs. He hasn't been one since he got here. He isn't one right now. And he won't be one next season.
BeddieKU23 said:
Andre is a 4 year guy. Is he better then Harris who we just took? I say we look for an elite option like we are. I see the value in offering. May just be that.
Could be that Bill is hedging that at least one of the two will turn out.
I don't expect an elite PG to get scared away by any of the PGs projected to be on the roster in 2020-2021.
kjayhawks said:
@BShark very true but I still think Dee Ford was better. The defense was terrible last year in everything but creating turnovers. I'm worried that they will be a touch better statically wise but wont duplicate turnover numbers. Oddly enough I feel the same about KUs defense.
Ford has been out for a couple of weeks now. Having knee issues.
I think it was best to move on from a run porous DE with a bad injury history to a guy two years younger who is stronger in the run and still an elite pass rusher.
justanotherfan said:
Last year's team was flawed. Unless Grimes had come in and been a Ben McLemore or better type player, its unlikely KU's roster would have gotten us through the Big 12 last season. Even if Grimes had been that good, there's still a chance that with two strong teams in the conference, KU may not have been able to knock off both. Last year was the perfect storm - flawed KU team, two other programs with one of their best teams in the last two decades (probably the best Texas Tech team ever). I think Tech wins the conference last year even if Grimes had come in and met expectations, unless he played like a top 3 pick (something that even the most optimistic people would not have been thinking last year).
Last year's team was so short-handed. No Doke. No Silvio.
I think the season could have turned out differently had we been at full strength.
approxinfinity said:
@Marco one beautiful educated Australian bartender woman didn't want to talk to you, and so Americans shouldn't have more affordable higher education.... :fish:yyyyyyy....
ROFL
Marco said:
@Kcmatt7 Please explain to me why I have to explain everything to you? Our system is not broken. We are becoming a nation of whiners. "I want free education and healthcare!" Fine, and they can go ask someone else to pay for it because I am not going to.
Upward mobility, ofcourse, is fine. I've been to Australia a few times, met a beautiful (....indeed) bartender in Perth, she was thirty years old and held a masters in anthropology - they have free university there. She didn't offer much in the way of conversation.
First, you won't explain it because your argument makes no sense.
And, again, nobody here has said anything about free education. Not a single post above or in this thread.
In fact, if you had any sort of reading comprehension abilities, we have been talking about the Dept. of Education taking more control over universities and forcing them to reign in the cost of tuition. And how universities, because they get federal loan dollars, raise tuition every year instead of looking inward at their own bloated costs. We have been talking about controlling tuition costs.
I repeat, nobody here has said anything about a free education.
I do not think it should be free. Let me repeat that, just in case you didn't read it correctly. I DO NOT THINK IT SHOULD BE FREE. I just don't think it should cost an arm and a leg. I think the cost of tuition has been detrimental to the economy. As college degrees have become more of a standard for most good jobs, we have encouraged a huge chunk of our population to go the college route. That route means that the average person comes out with $30k+ in debt, even at public institutions. This 30k debt weighs on a person for 10+ years and reduces their buying power significantly. $300-400 a month goes a long ways, especially for someone fresh out of school only making $45k-50k a year. Those same people are expected to save for retirement, save for a house, be able to afford a car whenever the beater they drove through college gives out, and are pretty likely to have a kid within those same 10 years they are paying for a loan. Therefore, that $300-400 a month limits their buying power significantly.
High college tuition also ends up costing YOU more money. When someone defaults on their student loans, guess who is paying for that? The taxpayer. As tuition prices have increased, so have loan defaults. 11% of student loans are defaulted on. People who work for non-profits and pay just the minimum on their loans are able to get their student debt wiped away after 10 years. Millions of dollars of tuition paid for by the taxpayer.
I could go on and on. But, as you can see, the high cost of college tuition hurts the economy and burdens the tax payer. It is not good for the nation. And nobody is even asking you to pay more for it.
All we are preaching is fiscal responsibility from public institutions of higher education.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Marco said:
@Kcmatt7 I think it is priced about right. If too cheap we would have the most degreed waiters, waitresses and bartenders in the world, but it would do next to nothing for the economy or nation - could, in fact, even hurt both. But, yes, it is expensive....
So, in the 70s, 80s and early 90s, when someone could pay for tuition, rent, food and gas with a part time job, this country must have really sucked huh?
Please explain to me how a more affordable education would hurt the economy.
Please explain to me how the middle class having more dollars in their pocket would hurt the nation.
Please explain to me how having a more educated society is a bad thing.
Marco said:
@Kcmatt7 College should be earned, not given away. That way you more appreciate what you had to go through to get it.
I didn’t say it should be given away.
I just said it shouldn’t be as expensive as it is.
HighEliteMajor said:
@Kcmatt7 Great point about our in state universities. Base scholarships at KSU also are better. What I love about this discussion point (not holding my breath) is that many more kids would go to JUCOs or Community colleges. That's where the real value is, particularly for the first year (when you get TAs for the most part anyway at KU/KSU type schools). I've long said that every kid can afford to go to college. Work and go to school at a JUCO or CC for your first two years (or maybe first 50 or so credits if you need university credits as you get deeper in the process). That would really cut student loans, plus working while going to a JUCO/CC is much easier. Also, I'd love to see universities charge less for intro classes per credit hour. If you have a full professor, higher level classes, that goes at a higher rate (but should be less than it is now). Again, paring back the mission and thing universities have their hands in would create a more efficient and less expense product. The cost of living in a dorm, for example, is outrageous for mass housing in a public university setting.
I went to KCKCC my first year. And I worked 30 hours a week almost the entire time I lived at KU. And I lived at home my Junior year and commuted an hour every day.
And I still came out with $30k in debt.
It's just insanely expensive to go to college, imo.
FarmerJayhawk said:
@Kcmatt7 KU is less than 10% more than KSU and about 25% more than WSU. Much of that is higher faculty salaries for KU than KSU, and much higher than WSU because they just play in different sandboxes. Research institutions charge more all around the country because their mission is different.
To drive the efficiency point home, I was part of the effort in 2017 that mandated every single public university in Kansas hire independent firms to conduct efficiency studies that will be made public and presented to the Board of Regents and the legislature. Looking forward to seeing what the private sector folks come up with. I really hope they turn out better than the giant study the state commissioned, because it was a steaming trash fire.
12 credit hours:
- KU: $5,057.00
- KSU: $4,222.50
- WSU: $3,623.28 - (This could be missing a fee, but max it's $4k a semester).
That's right in line with what I said. And it doesn't include fees for certain departments which could easily be more at KU than the other two.
I am an accountant and I have worked in Higher Education Institution myself. I've seen and processed the invoices/payroll. I know the waste is rampant. Bloated salaries for positions that shouldn't exist are everywhere. Professors getting paid $150K plus per year are teaching basic courses. Travel expenses for faculty are outrageous and basically just funding family vacations. "Retention bonuses" are paid to some staff and faculty every single year for no apparent reason other than they can be (Fun fact: They don't actually prevent anyone from leaving). Schools pay thousands for memberships for faculty members that mean nothing and don't benefit the school whatsoever. Hundreds of Thousands are paid for subscriptions to databases that nobody ever uses. The list could go on if I kept thinking about it.
I'm glad to hear that they're conducting the study, however I don't expect many results if each institution got to pick who the independent firm was. It is similar to public companies firing their auditor because they didn't like their opinion. But even if they don't have results, I can tell you with 100% certainty that KU should not have over $1B in operating expenses.
We spend $400M a year on "instruction" when we only bring in $315M in Tuition and Fees. This margin dumbfounds me. It makes no logical sense. We have TA's doing a ton of work and getting paid almost nothing. We have Grad Assistants teaching classes for very cheap. We have adjunct professors getting paid squat and doing online classes. We have giant lecture halls where the Student to Teacher ratio is as high 350 to 1. They don't even provide books! Yet somehow we are still spending $400M. It just makes absolutely no sense.
HighEliteMajor said:
What we should do is govern the public institutions. Pare them back. Place significant limits. Understand that public institutions are like the government. They bloat. They aren't operated like private business (generally). Colleges are on the positive end of that, though, meaning, they adhere much better to the bottom-line than other government run ventures. But they are ever-expanding.
Amen.
The Dept. of Education has all the leverage in the world, yet they don't use it.
I have a lot of experience working with and in the Administration side of Higher Education. It's an ugly, egotistical, bloated place. It breeds waste, and as you pointed out, most of it is because they know they can raise tuition the next year and federal loans will foot the bill.
Any school that wants to take federal loan money should have to adhere to very strict rules regarding tuition price and tuition increases.
There is no real reason that KU should be 25% higher in tuition than KSU. 33% higher than WSU. All three are major public schools in the state of Kansas. Yet the cost to attend is wildly different.
I would fully support any candidate on either side of the aisle willing to more heavily govern any institutions that receive money from federal loans. It's an issue that needs to get fixed, and soon.
It doesn’t feel real
We say this, full well knowing Garrett is going to start lol
nuleafjhawk said:
@Kcmatt7 I wholeheartedly agree with going for it on 4th down. I probably wouldn't have a punter on the team if i was the coach.
Not so agreeable on the onsides kick thang though.
I do need to see the NFL results from this year after teams have adjusted to the new onsides rules. That definitely could change my thinking.
I just don't see how you can keep an athlete like that on the bench...
I am waiting to see an analytics nerd as a head coach soon. Basically, the numbers say it's totally worth it to go for it on most 4th downs and to go for 2 most of the time. Depending on your defense, it's also worth it to onside kick it almost every time.
There will come a day. And if they are successful, it'll spread like wildfire and likely change the game for forever. If they flop, it'll be another 20 years before someone tries it again.
@BeddieKU23 seems pretty clear something strange is going on behind the scenes there.
Cunningham cutting his list to 5 tonight.
@BeddieKU23 Svi had similar numbers in his overseas trips if I recall correctly. Part of it is just being the best player on your team and forcing shots because your teammates suck
HighEliteMajor said:
Talk about Enaruna, Braun, Wilson, McBride -- it seems apparent that we might just strike gold this season with one of these guys. Meaning, the odds of one of them being a major player quicker than expected is pretty good. Not sure who I'd bet on at this point. I think McBride has the easiest path to playing time, though.
But the nice thing is that it is really likely that we will not need any one of them to be "gold" this season to win a national championship. This is going to be a good season ... need a cool "MF" patch to remember our lost friend.
I'm most hopeful about Enaruna. He's just so athletic. But if I were putting money on it, I'd say Wilson and McBride end up getting more run than him and Braun.
BeddieKU23 said:
Daishen Nix said he will take an official visit to KU and UK in the coming weeks.
He has a guardian, beware, former assistant to Jerry Tarkanian.
Being touted as the best passer in High School, being compared to Jason Kidd at same stage.
No shoe affiliation. Going to be a weird one
Sounds like he'll be an early commit wherever he goes.
They have Mark Leiter Jr. in the Jay's organization too.
Others:
- Fernando Tatis Jr.
- Lance McCuller's Jr.
- Cody Bellinger
I still could see Jayden back in Lawrence by the time it's all said and done.
justanotherfan said:
If these projections are what we actually get we could be in some trouble.
If we are looking to Garrett as our #2 option, our offense will likely be fairly inefficient. Our defense could be very stout, but relying on a guy that's not a natural or efficient scorer, our defense had better be elite, because we will need to win some 65-60 type games.
With Doke, you also have to account for some foul trouble, and being out of the games late. While he may be in better shape, he probably won't play much in the last 4 minutes of any game, and will probably miss time in other games due to foul trouble. 26-27 minutes per game for Doke seems a bit heavy to me. I would bet he's under 25. That shouldn't hurt this team though, because we have a lot of front court depth.
17-18 seasons he was able to get to almost 24 MPG.
I think it's pretty likely we see him play a few minutes more than that per game if he's in shape to do it.
BShark said:
@Kcmatt7 I worry about bad ball as well. As @Texas-Hawk-10 has fairly mentioned before this team looks more experienced than they are especially when it comes to actually playing for Self and playing together. Silvio is a JR that's played 20 games total, Doke is a SR that's logged under 1200 total minutes, Moss is a first year guy when it comes to Self etc...
Really good point here.
I'm sure my worries will be quelled once the season starts and we beat the ever living shit out of Duke.
FarmerJayhawk said:
CJ Moore had a great KU hoops mailbag for The Athletic this morning. He thinks Garrett starts over Moss, at least initially. He also thinks the identity of the team will be stifling defense, similar to the 11-12 bunch. Not sure if it's breaking news, but Self is planning to play big 80% of the time, then use someone like Wilson as a small ball 4. Could also play Garrett at that spot since he's 6'7 with the hair and is such a good defender. He also reported Ochai's shot is much improved. They made a couple mechanical tweaks over the summer and his shot is more consistent now.
Also, check out how slim Udoka looks now. Dude is really gearing up to play extended minutes. He's thin enough now to wear Mitch's shorts. https://www.instagram.com/p/B0Y3IxAF373/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link ↗
I thought Doke looked super athletic in the scrimmages. I guess this would explain why.
HighEliteMajor said:
@Kcmatt7 Hmmm. Here's a question that can help with your opinion, this year in particular -- Who is our coach? Given the structure of this team, I have great confidence that it's going to be highly positive. Knowing our coach, and what he's proven in the past, the pieces that Self has (and their skill sets) makes this a really good match. That why I'm optimistic. I view this as a near perfect fit. Not perfect -- perfect would be a major league ball handler at the two spot. But pretty stout.
My main concern is speed of play and ball handling. Because if there is no back up PG ready to play (shaky with the ball/TO machine, etc), we change dramatically when Dotson is off the floor. Slower play with Garrett in that role and a much different dynamic on the offensive end. This could create a lot of vulnerability.
Oh I love the gritty somewhat ego-less team. It is right in Bill's wheelhouse. And the regular season is all but guaranteed to be a success under him.
My concerns lie with how well this team is built for the tournament.
In my mind, there are a few ways the season could go.
-
Our bricklaying starting lineup couldn't come at a better time. With the 3pt line getting pushed further back, Doke, Dave and De Sousa will be an unstoppable trio in a season where the 3 pointer hasn't been adjusted to and the big man is reborn. This could make us NC good.
-
Our bricklaying starting lineup gets exposed in the 3 point era. And we get exposed once again. Not a NC team.
-
Our stud defense starting lineup is a fantastic contrast to our offensive-minded subs. We are able to stymie opponents early, go on runs when they're vulnerable, and close down games effectively. This is a NC option.
-
Our team fails to mesh together nicely, and our offense is unable to find much of a rhythm. We revert to badball, and just hope Dotson and Doke can do enough to carry us. This is very unlikely to result in a NC.
ajvan said:
@Kcmatt7 If you can answer all those questions after an exhibition game, ESPN should be paying you $$$ for color commentary! 😉
Lol I mean you'll be able to see enough to know whether your assumptions were way off or not. And some of the minutes distributions will answer a few questions alone.
I've never been so opinionless on a KU basketball team. I just have too many questions.
Will Ochai get back to how he started?
Can Garrett improve enough offensively that we can space the floor?
How good is Moss going to be?
How good is Silvio going to be?
How good is Dave going to be?
Can Wilson handle playing the 4 in college? Or will Mitch still have to be the 4th big?
Is Harris a more capable backup PG than McBride?
Is McBride such a good shooter he needs minutes at the 2?
Does Enaruna get any run? Or is he still trying to figure it all out?
Do we start our best defensive lineup? Or do we throw Moss in there to give us a shooter?
What pace do we want to play at? Or will the tempo change based on who is on the floor?
Will we play much small ball at all?
I'll have to wait until exhibition games I think before I can make any sort of declarative statement.
Must have thought they could just show up
I do see that Wichita sold more in ticket revenue than the rest of the regional locations combined...
Tickets to the entire Wichita regional are like $75 right?
Tristan is going to be a young freshman, considering the current landscape of college basketball.
The rest we will just have to wait to see.
Texas Hawk 10 said:
@Kcmatt7 Wilson and Enaruna play different positions. Wilson is a stretch 4 and Enaruna is a 3. Wilson or McBride/Harris (whichever gets the back up PG job) will be the freshman with the most minutes this year.
You might be right. But Enaruna is 6’9 and looks like a modern athletic 4 to me.
It's far from a guarantee that Wilson even gets more than 5 mpg this year. I personally see Enaruna beating him out for PT. But i know others don't feel that same way.
Crimsonorblue22 said:
Anybody going?
I wish I could but bad time for me
Seems like things are setting up for the Spurs future.
rockchalkwyo said:
Forgot to mention this earlier. A few days ago JW posted a picture on his Snapchat and on it it said “almost pro”. I hope he doesn’t think he’s a OAD or that Bill promised him minutes that would make us uncomfortable. I could be over thinking like usual. What do you guys think?
Overthinking
Rumors coming out of my Aquinas people are that Jayden bombed his ACT. And then tried to have someone else take it for him and got caught...
alwaysajayhawk said:
@BShark That is so far from the truth. I heard from a very reliable source that Berry is just the opposite. Strong work ethic in the gym lifting and getting shots up , have you seen his body lately the muscle mass that he has put on since his freshman year, He is also a very good student and an exceptional person.
Well there is something about him the staff isn’t in love with.
FarmerJayhawk said:
KUSTEVE said:
This Berry you speak of...why are so many on here gaga about him?
We love our local players until they get to KU and then we rip them to shreds.
I've never understood this...
Yea I'm torn. We've seen Frank, Ulis, Harper and Edwards all do well despite their size.
His brother plays D1 ball too, at a small school, but he's done okay considering he's probably about the same height.
I admit, it's pretty hard to get a read on how a short guy's game will translate to this level.