Fran Develops Offensive Players / Recruiting Question - Bully Ball

[WinOneThisCentury II]

There is no doubt. Iowa's offensive numbers speak for themselves over Fran's tenure. We always have skilled offensive players...shooters, and guys who can score at multiple levels (Keegan, Luka, Joe W). The problem is, when you get to the tournament, do we have enough athletes who can defend and play against the type of teams you will see as you move to round two, etc.

Kenny Smith just called it Bully Ball. He was discussing Texas Tech, but you could substitute other teams too. They aren't good offensive teams...but they play hard-nosed physical defense, crash the boards and are physical as hell down low, and they get to every loose ball or rebound because they are all great athletes. They wear teams down.

The question becomes...is Iowa recruiting the right players. Keegan Murray was the only physical player we have over 6'5"...who could hold his own with those teams. They have five guys who play that physical style playing at the same time. Unless they decide to change the way the tournament is officiated...we aren't recruiting the right style of player.

 

[jamesvanderwulf]

You're not wrong. Basketbrawl just requires constant effort, grabbing, impeding, bumping and slapping on defense. Offense comes from the turnovers, put backs, free throws and the occasional 3 after everyone chasing the ball gets out of position. Brad Davidson drew 9 offensive fouls today? Did I hear that right? That's the fluid kind of ball I really enjoy...

 

[Hawkstrat]

Iowa starts three white guys.

 

[jamesvanderwulf]

Iowa starts three white guys.

So does Gonzaga...

 

[HawkRugged17]

The second round games this weekend were grinders ... Some offense, but scores like 54-49, 59-53, and 53-48 are sprinkled in there. Need some emphasis on stopping the other team as well as efficient offense.

 

[Pepperman]

The second round games this weekend were grinders ... Some offense, but scores like 54-49, 59-53, and 53-48 are sprinkled in there. Need some emphasis on stopping the other team as well as efficient offense.

with as many B12 teams still alive, get used to it. Over unders in B12 were in the 125-135 range all year because all of them play great D.

 

[hexumhawk]

Iowa plays a finesse game in a sport that no longer allows you to play that way. Let that sink in for a bit.

 

[tweeterhawk]

Iowa plays a finesse game in a sport that no longer allows you to play that way. Let that sink in for a bit.

In his first year taking over a disaster of a program TJO put together a very physical team up in Lames. They manhandled (mugged?) another physical Wisconsin team yesterday to advance to the Sweet 16.

Unless Fran changes his recruiting, he will lose every year to the Clones. I don’t think Fran is capable of change.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Sure, Fran values offense over defense when recruiting players - he also gets the players he can get.

Last year, Oregon beat the Hawks in a game that did not remotely resemble Bullyball. Oregon scored 95 and made it look easy as the blew past the Hawks. This year they lost to a Richmond team because the Hawks couldn't put the ball in the basket. Yes, Iowa was somewhat weak inside, but if they simply made their average from 3 it's an easy win.

Baylor beat Gonzaga last year in the finals 86-70. Neither team played Bullyball.

When you lose an important game, you blame the coach, the players, the style, the officials, recruiting, etc. When you don't have regular season championships or deep runs in the Dance, you blame all those things x 10. You point to another team or two that did have success and credit their style, or their coach, etc.

Different styles can be successful. You just have to execute it well. Iowa didn't and lost.

 

[hexumhawk]

In his first year taking over a disaster of a program TJO put together a very physical team up in Lames. They manhandled (mugged?) another physical Wisconsin team yesterday to advance to the Sweet 16.

Unless Fran changes his recruiting, he will lose every year to the Clones. I don’t think Fran is capable of change.

Agreed. We will when games when we shoot well, but really no shot when we don't. We need more dogs the way the game is called now.

Not saying I agree with the way BB is- I don't as I feel like there needs to be more freedom of movement and skill. The reality is that isn't how it is played now.

 

[intrepodor]

In his first year taking over a disaster of a program TJO put together a very physical team up in Lames. They manhandled (mugged?) another physical Wisconsin team yesterday to advance to the Sweet 16.

Unless Fran changes his recruiting, he will lose every year to the Clones. I don’t think Fran is capable of change.

Ralph Miller always said he'll recruit a player who can score because you can teach them to play defense.

 

[HawkRugged17]

Ralph Miller always said he'll recruit a player who can score because you can teach them to play defense.

Some coaches are able to teach a player to play defense. I contend, there needs to be some level of instinct to play defense in the player to allow him to be taught.

 

[RocknRollface]

One thing is for sure after the last two years.

The narrative that the bigbten is too physical and gets punished in the tournament is backwards.

The big ten is not as physical as the rest of college basketball it would appear.

Playing physical bumping defense is what gets rewarded.

 

[Fsanford]

Sure, Fran values offense over defense when recruiting players - he also gets the players he can get.

Last year, Oregon beat the Hawks in a game that did not remotely resemble Bullyball. Oregon scored 95 and made it look easy as the blew past the Hawks. This year they lost to a Richmond team because the Hawks couldn't put the ball in the basket. Yes, Iowa was somewhat weak inside, but if they simply made their average from 3 it's an easy win.

Baylor beat Gonzaga last year in the finals 86-70. Neither team played Bullyball.

When you lose an important game, you blame the coach, the players, the style, the officials, recruiting, etc. When you don't have regular season championships or deep runs in the Dance, you blame all those things x 10. You point to another team or two that did have success and credit their style, or their coach, etc.

Different styles can work be successful. You just have to execute it well. Iowa didn't and lost.

Baylor is a very physical defensive team. They play in the BIg 12, and to compete in that league you have to play a very physical game

 

[WinOneThisCentury II]

Sure, Fran values offense over defense when recruiting players - he also gets the players he can get.

Last year, Oregon beat the Hawks in a game that did not remotely resemble Bullyball. Oregon scored 95 and made it look easy as the blew past the Hawks. This year they lost to a Richmond team because the Hawks couldn't put the ball in the basket. Yes, Iowa was somewhat weak inside, but if they simply made their average from 3 it's an easy win.

Baylor beat Gonzaga last year in the finals 86-70. Neither team played Bullyball.

When you lose an important game, you blame the coach, the players, the style, the officials, recruiting, etc. When you don't have regular season championships or deep runs in the Dance, you blame all those things x 10. You point to another team or two that did have success and credit their style, or their coach, etc.

Different styles can work be successful. You just have to execute it well. Iowa didn't and lost.

Just to be clear...what Iowa is doing isn't working in the NCAA tournament...for the past 15 years...a pretty damn good sample set. ISU just went from 2 wins to the sweet sixteen. What style do they play?

You can point to the fact that we didn't shoot well against Richmond. Good teams can play several styles of basketball...especially when the shots aren't falling. They pound the ball inside and get to the line. At tournament time...you have to be physical. Richmond was the more physical team when we played them...they were tougher too.

Listen...Iowa won the B10 tournament with a great run. What have we learned? The B10 is down and it was down last year. They got two teams in the Sweet Sixteen out of 9 teams. Most Big 12 teams play the bruising physical uber aggressive style. Is it any wonder they do well in tournament time? They play teams playing that style all year...and when they play teams that don't face that intensity for 40 minutes...they have a huge advantage. Couple that with the refs letting the physical play go...and it's a recipe for success.

I'm not saying Fran needs to change everything. I'm saying we may need to recruit a different style player though in certain roles.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Baylor is a very physical defensive team. They play in the BIg 12, and to compete in that league you have to play a very physical game

So, the Hawks need a team that can score 86 on the #1 team in the nation and still play physical, like Baylor.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Just to be clear...what Iowa is doing isn't working in the NCAA tournament...for the past 15 years...a pretty damn good sample set. ISU just went from 2 wins to the sweet sixteen. What style do they play?

You can point to the fact that we didn't shoot well against Richmond. Good teams can play several styles of basketball...especially when the shots aren't falling. They pound the ball inside and get to the line. At tournament time...you have to be physical. Richmond was the more physical team when we played them...they were tougher too.

Listen...Iowa won the B10 tournament with a great run. What have we learned? The B10 is down and it was down last year. They got two teams in the Sweet Sixteen out of 9 teams. Most Big 12 teams play the bruising physical uber aggressive style. Is it any wonder they do well in tournament time? They play teams playing that style all year...and when they play teams that don't face that intensity for 40 minutes...they have a huge advantage. Couple that with the refs letting the physical play go...and it's a recipe for success.

I'm not saying Fran needs to change everything. I'm saying we may need to recruit a different style player though in certain roles.

Richmond was not more physical than Iowa. Iowa outrebounded Richmond on the offensive and defensive boards. The Hawks also outshot Richmond by 9 shots, 37 of which were inside the 3 point line - many inside 6 ft, - and only shot 49% inside the arc.

You can't shoot 36% and beat decent teams. The Hawks were 2-6 this year when shooting less than 40.5%. They were 24-4 shooting better than that.

Would it help for Iowa to be more physical? Of course. What do you give up to be more physical? Maybe 4 points a game? The Hawks lost 7 games this year by a total of 28 points.

When you lose to Richmond, it simply looks bad. But, in this particular game, there was no problem with Iowa's "style". They had a bad game.

 

[NCHawkeye24]

The lack of consistency in officiating is the big problem. And it is not just over the course of a season, but even during the game. It is really impossible to adjust to. Look at Iowa and Richmond. Fran tells Keegan and Perk, Iowa's two most important players, to be more aggressive, and they both pick up charging fouls. That stuff gets in your head, especially in the first half when you know that, "ok, I just got one, if I get another I sit for the rest of the half", or in the second half if you get three you sit. Keegan has had foul problems all this year, so you know he was thinking about it.

So the team wants to be aggressive, but, they know if they are they are going to get called. Then, conversely, they can get hacked, like Kris did, and not get the call. The first thing about being aggressive is that you don't think about being aggressive. You play with intensity and then that leads to aggressiveness. But I think everyone is pretty clueless on the rhyme and reason to why the games are officiated and that just makes the players tentative.

One more thing, I don't think this is just an Iowa thing. I think this is a big reason why the B1G does so poorly in the tournament. Its not the only reason, but one of the big ones.

 

[WinOneThisCentury II]

Richmond was not more physical than Iowa. Iowa outrebounded Richmond on the offensive and defensive boards. The Hawks also outshot Richmond by 9 shots, 37 of which were inside the 3 point line - many inside 6 ft, - and only shot 49% inside the arc.

You can't shoot 36% and beat decent teams. The Hawks were 2-6 this year when shooting less than 40.5%. They were 24-4 shooting better than that.

Would it help for Iowa to be more physical? Of course. What do you give up to be more physical? Maybe 4 points a game? The Hawks lost 7 games this year by a total of 28 points.

When you lose to Richmond, it simply looks bad. But, in this particular game, there was no problem with Iowa's "style". They had a bad game.

You are wrong on the physical part. We played a significant part of the game with Jbo, Patrick, and Rebraca...none of these guys are physical players. Rebraca holds his own...and hit the boards...but Cayo and Burton were consistently more physical and got to the basket.

In the tournament, teams have poor shooting games...but they find a way to win. Perkins played 19 minutes, Ulis played 1 minute or something like that...two physical guards. Toussaint played 13 minutes...those three guys can defend...and I believe should have played more minutes.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

You are wrong on the physical part. We played a significant part of the game with Jbo, Patrick, and Rebraca...none of these guys are physical players. Rebraca holds his own...and hit the boards...but Cayo and Burton were consistently more physical and got to the basket.

In the tournament, teams have poor shooting games...but they find a way to win. Perkins played 19 minutes, Ulis played 1 minute or something like that...two physical guards. Toussaint played 13 minutes...those three guys can defend...and I believe should have played more minutes.

Well, I disagree.

Yes, they had a couple of players that were more physical than JBo and PMac - every B1G team the Hawks played had guys more physical than those two, and probably more of the non-con games.

I simply don't believe Iowa lost this game because Richmond overpowered them.

Ulis hasn't played well for a month. Joe T had a very poor game. I don't think playing those guys more would have helped.

I get it, when you lose a game the coach should have done something different. Or, they could play exactly the same game and make 9 3's out of 29 (31%) instead of 6 (21%) - this by a team that shot 41% from 3 since Feb 1st.

 

[jamesvanderwulf]

In the tournament, teams have poor shooting games...but they find a way to win.

Wisconsin says hold my six pack...

 

[isuisshit]

need to recruit some guys who would fit right in on NBA rosters in the 1980s and 90

 

[NCHawkeye24]

You are wrong on the physical part. We played a significant part of the game with Jbo, Patrick, and Rebraca...none of these guys are physical players. Rebraca holds his own...and hit the boards...but Cayo and Burton were consistently more physical and got to the basket.

In the tournament, teams have poor shooting games...but they find a way to win. Perkins played 19 minutes, Ulis played 1 minute or something like that...two physical guards. Toussaint played 13 minutes...those three guys can defend...and I believe should have played more minutes.

I guess it depends on what someone's version of physical is. Perkins only played 19 minutes because he fouled out and Toussaint was just such a liability because he makes such poor decisions on the offensive end at times, and he did in this game as well. JBo was a liability defensively, and not hitting shots, but I think the choice here is do you take a JBo thinking he may hit the next one, or take Toussaint and think he will settle down? Because this it did not appear that Toussaint was really shutting down Gilyard or anything, that choice had to be JBo.

To me the swing plays were the Burton/KM deal where KM got the charge, which was the wrong call because he was in the circle, and the Perkins/Burton call where Burton drew the charge but again I think was the wrong call because he was still moving and jumped in front of Perk. Those plays really set the tone because it appears that the referees rewarded effort rather than the logic of what a foul is and isn't. I don't see that as Burton being physical, if anything I see him as a flopper. Just like at the end with Kris' non-call, that wasn't being physical, that was just a foul. They had no problem calling less than that in the first half on Perk, but didn't there.

I don't like Fran's hard rule on the 2 foul thing in the first half, because I think when something like this happens it really gets in these guys heads. They know if they get 2 they sit, especially after they just got 1 when they were trying to be aggressive. KM knew he needed to be on the floor, so he can't afford to get into foul trouble. Its a tough situation for sure and there is no right answer, but with this team, knowing that the entire team fed off of KM's energy Fran could not afford to let him get tentative. And when he did in this game, it trickled down to everyone else. Unfortunately we won't see KM anymore, but if he stayed I think he would learn a lot from that game and take his leadership to another level. Don't get me wrong, I am not criticizing him or blaming him for the loss, but I think the next evolution to his game is mental and how he can get the eye of the tiger and lift all of his teammates with him.

 

[WildIowaCat]

You cannot go too far to one extreme or the other. Bully ball, basketbrawl, or anything of its ilk is just as ineffective to win it all as teams with no defense. The part where it’s worse is that it’s ugly, boring and subjective to refs. We all love that right? The correct answer is a balanced approach with a focus on fundamentals and game planning.

ISU is having success, but matchups matter and they have yet to get challenged with one. This is the nature of the tourney along with poor performances there are also bad matchups and personnel advantages.