Something needs to change with Missouri basketball

[Red7]

Here's the breakdown for Troll of Year:

Red
Rod
Abner
Rojo
WS11Champ
Jack Bolly
Majicman

Congratulations boys.

This can only mean that some or all of those on the list have handed this moron his (donkey) in multiple threads not only now but when he was under whatever username (lacoochie, Supreme,etc.) he was banned on in the past.

Keep up the good work.

He/she has trouble dealing with facts and reality. Notice he never presents his/her own. Just attacks those that do. He/she is like moths to a flame. Post it and he/she will come. Like f-ing Beetlejuice.

[MIDMOBIRDTWO]

Here's the breakdown for Troll of Year:

Red
Rod
Abner
Rojo
WS11Champ
Jack Bolly
Majicman

Congratulations boys.

This can only mean that some or all of those on the list have handed this moron his (donkey) in multiple threads not only now but when he was under whatever username (lacoochie, Supreme,etc.) he was banned on in the past.

Keep up the good work.

He/she has trouble dealing with facts and reality. Notice he never presents his/her own. Just attacks those that do. He/she is like moths to a flame. Post it and he/she will come. Like f-ing Beetlejuice.

Kookie is a real stool sample. Just put it on ignore.

[Shady]

They just need to pay more for better players.

So will that guarantee the needed consistency to win big? Ex. Advance to at least the Sweet Sixteen.

Yes, that's the way it's works. When you have more talent than other teams you consistently win more. Do you not understand sports (or life).

I won a lot of basketball games as a head coach. Talent is very important. Especially, superior talent. But there are many other aspects involved in putting together a tremendous team that is consistent. You don't seem to have the capacity to understand that.

You're joking. Anyone that know sports knows that more talent wins more often. That's the starting point. You can do other things to improve on your win percentage but having better talent is step 1. Get over yourself.

"Put 4-5 five star players on the floor and if they aren’t coached well you won’t win or at least win the big ones. Coaching makes a huge difference". Let this sink in.

Jesus dude, you think you're talking over my head but you aren't. Even Calipari wins with 4-5 star kids so while it takes a decent coach to win with good talent it's MUCH easier to win with more talent.

I agree with the importance of talent.
But you are missing the point. Ex. Check out Iowa. And Drake last season. A great coach, strategically, matters a lot.

[Shady]

I wrote this before when Martin was at this stage of his career at Mizzou. Gates does some things well as head coach, but we all agree the offensive structure or lack of is a major issue. Hire an assistant coach who is well versed in the European systems of five out and ball screen continuity offenses and give this coach the freedom to install and coach it and make in game adjustments against man and zone. Many of the D1 programs are doing it now. Gates needs to look inward and realize this, as he already has numerous assistants who probably play the yes man role. Sadly, I don't see this happening, and it will be Ground Hog Day next year again at this time regardless of who he recruited.

And it wouldn't hurt to bring in some of those skilled, very tall European players either. Some having had some professional experience already.

[11WSChamps]

Yes I believe changes are coming.

Ticket prices will be going up.

[Lightning Rod]

They just need to pay more for better players.

They do need to pay more. They need to rally the funding.

But they also need a coach who can relate and land recruits and NIL guys and tell them Columbia is the place to be to grow and prosper and have them believe it.

THAT'S Dennis Gates.

Give him the time to do it.

I'm fine with keeping Gates, although I don't think he's a great coach I do think he's good enough to get a reasonably talented team to the FF.

Poor talent evaluater, inability to coach guys up, poor X and O guy, inconsistent recruiter, yeah, he's our guy.

I disagree with most of what you say here and the recruiting is more about money than anything else.

Can you tell me what you disagree with?

[Lightning Rod]

Here's the breakdown for Troll of Year:

Red
Rod
Abner
Rojo
WS11Champ
Jack Bolly
Majicman

Congratulations boys.

This can only mean that some or all of those on the list have handed this moron his (donkey) in multiple threads not only now but when he was under whatever username (lacoochie, Supreme,etc.) he was banned on in the past.

Keep up the good work.

Here's the real list for Troll of the Year:

winonsports (loseronsports)

Vote accordingly.

[onemizzou]

They just need to pay more for better players.

So will that guarantee the needed consistency to win big? Ex. Advance to at least the Sweet Sixteen.

Yes, that's the way it's works. When you have more talent than other teams you consistently win more. Do you not understand sports (or life).

I won a lot of basketball games as a head coach. Talent is very important. Especially, superior talent. But there are many other aspects involved in putting together a tremendous team that is consistent. You don't seem to have the capacity to understand that.

You're joking. Anyone that know sports knows that more talent wins more often. That's the starting point. You can do other things to improve on your win percentage but having better talent is step 1. Get over yourself.

"Put 4-5 five star players on the floor and if they aren’t coached well you won’t win or at least win the big ones. Coaching makes a huge difference". Let this sink in.

Jesus dude, you think you're talking over my head but you aren't. Even Calipari wins with 4-5 star kids so while it takes a decent coach to win with good talent it's MUCH easier to win with more talent.

I agree with the importance of talent.
But you are missing the point. Ex. Check out Iowa. And Drake last season. A great coach, strategically, matters a lot.

I hate to burst your bubble but those kids were close to being as talented as what Mizzou had. Now I admit that Gates didn't do the best job coaching in that game but still it wasn't like Mizzou was massively more talented than Drake and what they lacked in talent they made up for in tenacious play (of course some of that attitude comes from the coach).

[onemizzou]

They just need to pay more for better players.

They do need to pay more. They need to rally the funding.

But they also need a coach who can relate and land recruits and NIL guys and tell them Columbia is the place to be to grow and prosper and have them believe it.

THAT'S Dennis Gates.

Give him the time to do it.

I'm fine with keeping Gates, although I don't think he's a great coach I do think he's good enough to get a reasonably talented team to the FF.

Poor talent evaluater, inability to coach guys up, poor X and O guy, inconsistent recruiter, yeah, he's our guy.

I disagree with most of what you say here and the recruiting is more about money than anything else.

Can you tell me what you disagree with?

He evaluates talent just fine it's just that he can't seem to land the talent that he wants (i.e. money issues).

Doesn't coach guys up? His staff has turned guys into incredible three point shooters that weren't before. The problem is that he hasn't had guys here for long enough to actually coach them up he's constantly having to get scraps out of the portal (because there isn't the money to get the top guys) that are in some cases one year guys. I think Mitchell improved in his two year here. You can complain about Ant but some kids just go through stuff and it's not just about coaching. Ant got sat down but came back and played well the last couple weeks of the season.

Poor X and O guy? I'm not saying he's great at this at all but he's not poor.

The recruiting is more about money than about him. I think he goes after really good players but loses them to more flashy programs/coaches and again there is the money problem.

I've said before that Gates is a good but not great coach. I think given a higher level of talent he certainly can get a team to a FF. I don't think he holds the team back at all but does he push it to a higher level than the talent suggests? I think you could make arguments both ways. This team for example, I thought they were dead after the double miracle win against OU. I didn't think they'd win 4 more games at that point. But I think he pushed and motivated them to the point were they safely made the tourney. I also think he made some missteps both before and after that game (Ole Miss, LSU to name a couple).

So, to summarize, he's a good coach and I think he deserves more support from the boosters to get a team talented enough to get to a FF and then if he doesn't, it's time to cut him loose. Until he coaches below the talent level of the team I think you have to stay with him.

[knttiger]

I've got to work on my game- can't believe he left me off the list. Anyway gentlemen, the site is much better when you don't quote him and simply put him on the ignore list.

[Shady]

They just need to pay more for better players.

So will that guarantee the needed consistency to win big? Ex. Advance to at least the Sweet Sixteen.

Yes, that's the way it's works. When you have more talent than other teams you consistently win more. Do you not understand sports (or life).

I won a lot of basketball games as a head coach. Talent is very important. Especially, superior talent. But there are many other aspects involved in putting together a tremendous team that is consistent. You don't seem to have the capacity to understand that.

You're joking. Anyone that know sports knows that more talent wins more often. That's the starting point. You can do other things to improve on your win percentage but having better talent is step 1. Get over yourself.

"Put 4-5 five star players on the floor and if they aren’t coached well you won’t win or at least win the big ones. Coaching makes a huge difference". Let this sink in.

Jesus dude, you think you're talking over my head but you aren't. Even Calipari wins with 4-5 star kids so while it takes a decent coach to win with good talent it's MUCH easier to win with more talent.

I agree with the importance of talent.
But you are missing the point. Ex. Check out Iowa. And Drake last season. A great coach, strategically, matters a lot.

I hate to burst your bubble but those kids were close to being as talented as what Mizzou had. Now I admit that Gates didn't do the best job coaching in that game but still it wasn't like Mizzou was massively more talented than Drake and what they lacked in talent they made up for in tenacious play (of course some of that attitude comes from the coach).

You are starting to get the picture. "it wasn't like Mizzou was massively more talented than Drake and what they lacked in talent they made up for in tenacious play (of course some of that attitude comes from the coach)".

[winonsports]

Yes I believe changes are coming.

Ticket prices will be going up.

Says the guy who has never bought tickets.

Give yourself a point on the scoreboard under the South side of the bridge.

[11WSChamps]

Yes I believe changes are coming.

Ticket prices will be going up.

Says the guy who has never bought tickets.

Give yourself a point on the scoreboard under the South side of the bridge.

Says the guy who's an inveterate liar and a gutless one at that.

Let's compare she shed boy..how many games have you paid for or do you office gopher get free nose bleed seats?

[Lightning Rod]

They just need to pay more for better players.

They do need to pay more. They need to rally the funding.

But they also need a coach who can relate and land recruits and NIL guys and tell them Columbia is the place to be to grow and prosper and have them believe it.

THAT'S Dennis Gates.

Give him the time to do it.

I'm fine with keeping Gates, although I don't think he's a great coach I do think he's good enough to get a reasonably talented team to the FF.

Poor talent evaluater, inability to coach guys up, poor X and O guy, inconsistent recruiter, yeah, he's our guy.

I disagree with most of what you say here and the recruiting is more about money than anything else.

Can you tell me what you disagree with?

He evaluates talent just fine it's just that he can't seem to land the talent that he wants (i.e. money issues).

Doesn't coach guys up? His staff has turned guys into incredible three point shooters that weren't before. The problem is that he hasn't had guys here for long enough to actually coach them up he's constantly having to get scraps out of the portal (because there isn't the money to get the top guys) that are in some cases one year guys. I think Mitchell improved in his two year here. You can complain about Ant but some kids just go through stuff and it's not just about coaching. Ant got sat down but came back and played well the last couple weeks of the season.

Poor X and O guy? I'm not saying he's great at this at all but he's not poor.

The recruiting is more about money than about him. I think he goes after really good players but loses them to more flashy programs/coaches and again there is the money problem.

I've said before that Gates is a good but not great coach. I think given a higher level of talent he certainly can get a team to a FF. I don't think he holds the team back at all but does he push it to a higher level than the talent suggests? I think you could make arguments both ways. This team for example, I thought they were dead after the double miracle win against OU. I didn't think they'd win 4 more games at that point. But I think he pushed and motivated them to the point were they safely made the tourney. I also think he made some missteps both before and after that game (Ole Miss, LSU to name a couple).

So, to summarize, he's a good coach and I think he deserves more support from the boosters to get a team talented enough to get to a FF and then if he doesn't, it's time to cut him loose. Until he coaches below the talent level of the team I think you have to stay with him.

Seems you feel he needs more NIL and that will solve all his problems. Funny how teams getting less NIL perform at a higher level than our Tigers. His problem is over valuing players on the roster. I understand giving Mitchell and Ant a good NIL this season, but after that you have to make sure you don't overpay for potential. I'm sure they gave Pierce a nice NIL, maybe even Phillips to get him here, and both were JAG. Did he give Mack a good NIL, how about Porter? Spend your NIL wisely and it will take you further, and I'm not sure they did that. If NIL is the determining factor for a successful season then don't worry about being a good recruiter, just get an X and O guy, not a slick talker.

Who are the incredible three point shooters you speak of? Crews? Pierce? Ant? Who has he coached up to be ibcredible? I think you are seeing something that isn't there.

I respect your opinion, just disagree. Thanks for responding, I appreciate it.

[winonsports]

They have been so inconsistent in different important aspects. Box out, helpside defense, defending threes, dribble lane penetration. The offense is stagnant vs certain defensive schemes. Poor off ball movement and ball movement. Free throws, etc. What's strange is some of these things are very good at times, some times they are abysmal. Talent, alone, doesn't insure big time success.

What you're describing could be said about 100 teams in college basketball, many of which in the P5 conferences made the tournament.

A real coach wouldn't be so myopic.

[acco40]

That cannot be your post-game speech after losing again in March.

99% or more teams will lose, once again in March. That’s what happens when you have an elimination tournament in March preceded by a March Conference tournament.