At this point Kruger gets a D at best.

If that's true, we'd all better buckle in and get comfy. This isn't going to be turned around in 1 or 2 years. It's more likely 3 or 4, at best.

I think that's probably reality. Unless he can get a difference maker or 2. Do we have any Blake Griffins in OKC?
 
If that's true, we'd all better buckle in and get comfy. This isn't going to be turned around in 1 or 2 years. It's more likely 3 or 4, at best.

Agreed. And I'm buckled in, but it's not very comfortable right now.
 
Did you criticize Capel when we scored 46 vs Nebraska and lost by 19 to the perennial conference cellar-dweller in his first season?

The difference is Capel took over a good program, Kruger was handed a big old **** sandwich and he is having to eat it.

haha, good stuff. True, and funny.
 
You bet your ass I did. But Kruger has been handed essentially the same team and is doing essentially the same thing that Capel did. So I go back to my earlier question: is our talent level really so bad that the coach is irrelevant? Would any coach in America finish 13-17 with this team?

Are you hallucinating or suffering from memory loss and blackouts? On a scale of 1 - 10 for D1 teams, Capel inherited about 5 or 6. Kruger inherited a 3 or 4.
 
You're obviously not following. I'm saying last year's team is roughly equivalent to this year's team as far as the talent level is concerned.
 
Seniorsooner is hitting the nail on the head here. I'm not saying Kruger won't right the ship in a couple years. But just comparing this year's performance to last year's, with essentially the same team, the results are very similar. Add to that the major players are a year older and have an extra year of experience.

Didn't everyone think Kruger was a better coach in every way compared to Capel? Then why are we struggling just as much in conference with the same team that's 1 year older? That is the issue that can't be explained unless you say Kruger hasn't lived up to the hype. You can't just say he didn't pick the players, when he chose to come here he chose to coach these players. Certainly blame Capel for the lack of sufficient talent, but we blamed Capel for not being able to coach that talent to Big 12 success so we must also blame Kruger for failing with the same talent.
 
The talent level is not that low. We are playing teams equal in the first half and getting run in the second half. That's coaching.

As the season is going along things are getting worse which probably means the players have lost faith in him too.

There is no excuse for Cam regressing the way he has and we should be getting a lot more from Osby too.

A D so far for Kruger.
 
1235355085091.gif
 
I wouldn't say that "Cade was that good", but guards are WAY more important then forwards in college basketball. And our guards stink. If we had Cade instead of Cam, we'd probably have 3-4 more wins. If we have Cade instead of Cam, AND Newell hadn't left, probably 4-5 more wins.

I asked this over a month ago, and it never got answered.....how many "good" teams are there in the major conferences that don't have a single TRUE shooting guard or wing to bring off the bench? Our back up guards for nearly the entire season have been Blair (a pg) and Neal (really doesn't have a position, but dang sure isn't a guard). We literally have NO true 2/3 on the bench, and our starting 3 has stunk for much of the season. How can you expect more wins?

You're talking about guards coming off the bench right? Or are you including Pledger in this group?
 
I agree this is going to be a bigger job than we, and probably Lon, thought but if I see Lon jump up off the bench and start clapping at every crappy play, I'm going to believe he's Mack Brown dressed up as Lon Kruger!!! I know he has to be supportive of his players but sometimes they need a chewin'!
 
You bet your ass I did. But Kruger has been handed essentially the same team and is doing essentially the same thing that Capel did. So I go back to my earlier question: is our talent level really so bad that the coach is irrelevant? Would any coach in America finish 13-17 with this team?

With Calipari this would be a final four contender, of course none of the current players would still be on the roster and the LNC would be submerged in slime. Outside of Calipari I think Self, Calhoun, Boeheim, & Coach K could squeeze 14 wins out; everyone else 13 or less.

You simply can't put much of the blame on Kruger, he is a good basketball coach not a miracle worker. Capel completely destroyed our program and unfortunately it will not fully return for at least another 3-4 years. Look at it this way; Bob Stoops inherited a 5-6 football team and in 1999 they went 7-5, a modest improvement. During the '99 season his teams competed and lead every game except for the Colorado game (if memory serves me right) but eventually they would relinquish the lead and we lost a lot of winnable games. This is very similar to what we have seen with the basketball team this season. Almost everyone agrees (or agreed until recently) that while the team is far from great they have improved under Kruger this season. Unfortunately like the football team in '99 the team still lacks some attention to detail and has some bad habits from the previous regime so we eventually falter. I will stop with the '99 football comparison now because I am about to call Grooms, Huepel (both Juco's at the most important position for their teams). :)

Idiots trying to pin this season's frustration on Kruger are akin to moronic Purdue fans complaining about Matt Painter during his 9 win first season after he inherited Gene Keady's ****burger.
 
The talent level is not that low. We are playing teams equal in the first half and getting run in the second half. That's coaching.

As the season is going along things are getting worse which probably means the players have lost faith in him too.

There is no excuse for Cam regressing the way he has and we should be getting a lot more from Osby too.

A D so far for Kruger.

Theory: OU plays better teams tough in the first half because they are busting their asses. Second half, with the lack of depth, they're spent. Meanwhile, the better teams run train.

- Did we play down to Tech's level? Absolutely, and it killed us. Even the home game vs. them was frustrating; they were able to muddy up the game in typical Gillispie fashion.
- At Mizzou was doomed from the start. The return game was quite different. Played hard start to finish, couldn't hit FTs. Of course, Mizzou also lost at OSU, so they're not exactly the most focused team.
- K-State...I mean, damn. I don't know what happened in those. Got my hopes up though.

The **** sandwich statement is true, I'm afraid. Outside of the top 3 (Pledger, Osby, and Fitzgerald), it's very, very thin. Everyone has a glaring weakness. The newcomers in the coming years will need to bring swagger and confidence, because this team has neither and it shows. They play hard the first half, keep it close, then come out tired the second half and more or less chalk it up to more of the same as the opponent outclasses them. ****ing Jeff Capel. :(
 
Roster has 5 mid level d1 players on it.. 3 of which can contribute. The roster is depleted and the team has been more competitive under Kruger .. I guess you guys thought we would be dancing this year .
 
Are you hallucinating or suffering from memory loss and blackouts? On a scale of 1 - 10 for D1 teams, Capel inherited about 5 or 6. Kruger inherited a 3 or 4.

Capel inherrited PG Walker(SR)(0.5ppg), C Longar(JR)(2.4ppg), SG Johnson(SO)(2.6ppg), PF Griffin(SO)(3.4ppg), SG Godbold(JR)(5.9ppg), PF Carter(SR)(5.4ppg), and SG Neal(SR)(14.8ppg) while
Kruger inherrited C Fitzgerald(JR)(12.3ppg), SG Pledger(JR)(10.3ppg), SF Clark(SO)(9.9ppg), PG Blair(JR)(8.1ppg), SF Neal(SO)(4.2ppg), SG Newell(SO)(2.1ppg), PF Washington(SR)(1.9ppg) and a RS PF OSBY.

And you're telling me that Kruger inherrited a worse team than Capel...give me a break.
 
Back
Top