Sherri talking with James Hale 3/28

[TheMont]

I just caught Sherri talking with James on Sports Talk. I missed the first 5 minutes or so, but here's her main talking points that I heard:

-She sounds incredibly sick. She said that always happens at the end of the year because you get 'run down'

-Every successful team has a star. The OU women need someone to assert themselves and be a star. Great supporting casts are important, but they need a star.

-We only had a player score 20+ points 7 times total all season -- "that's CRAZY!" -- it's incredibly hard to win games that way

-She spoke at length about Buddy and his success -- she's never seen an individual work harder on their craft than Buddy Hield. You need purposeful time spent in the gym. Kelsey Plum does the exact same thing. "Someone needs to be willing to put in that time and effort to distinguish themselves"

-You can counteract size and athleticism of Baylor, Kentucky, Texas, etc. but not with poor shooting -- Against Kentucky, they shot 27% from 2 and not hitting 3 balls -- makes it impossible to compete against more athletic teams

-Discussed new players, even just adding one player always changes complexion -- She says they're adding 4 (she included EJ who was struggling with her learning curve all last season)

-NANCY: great length, basket protector -- Sherri compared her to Khadeem - learning curve, needs to be stronger, tougher -- she's had "physical issues" in senior season. Lots of IFs -- but there's a huge upside that you can't teach

-DUNGEE - different from Nancy in that Chelsea's body is ready for Division 1 basketball - learning curve is only on mental side

-Morgan Rich - she can really SCORE - long, hard to guard, quick release -- needs to improve her defense, but she's already seen a lot of improvement as she's been working with S&C coach

-James asked her about UCONN's dominance and if that's good for college basketball -- "I can't imagine an instance where excellence is bad" - the parity from #2 on down is stronger than it's ever been - its not Geno's fault - it's everyone else's problem to be better

 

[SoonerNorm]

Sherri is saying the same things we've been saying so we all are pretty much in agreement as to what the problems are: 1) need some stars i.e. recruiting 2) players have to spend hours and hours in the gym and improve their skills.

If the coaches dedicate themselves to recruit at a higher level and if the players spend the time in the gym, we will see better days ahead.

 

[badger]

James asked her about UCONN's dominance and if that's good for college basketball -- "I can't imagine an instance where excellence is bad" - the parity from #2 on down is stronger than it's ever been - its not Geno's fault - it's everyone else's problem to be better

Aside from increased attendance at conference road games, it can't be good for the AAC. Tulsa actually won the C-USA tourney title and made the NCAA tournament before it ended up in the same conference as UConn. Will the AAC ever be more than a one-bid conference with the Huskies, or will they continue to be #1 to the 2000th power with everyone else stuck playing for second?

Granted, upsetting UConn is your golden ticket to being noticed and every AAC team has that shot more often than the rest of the country... or, on the flip side, each AAC team has to ink/permanent marker in two conference losses on every season's schedule and sell recruits on not playing in the postseason... oh wait, Temple's in the WNIT, so there's that

 

[betterstill]

The Big 12 is not far from the same problem with Baylor. Not as bad as UCONN, but bad enough. Looks like Texas may challenge them but there is a great gulf between Baylor and the rest of us. I do not see that changing. Would any of our players have started for Baylor this year? Would any have made the 2nd team at Connecticut?

I think women's basketball is too top heavy. I fee like there is not enough star talent out there to give teams the chance of getting to a point of beating the biggies. Then you add the fact that not as many women want to get playing time so they can have an opportunity to play after college. Thus they are content to sit on the bench and play in a Final Four team. It is more fun and they get their education paid for.

The third reason is that girls are not as inclined to stay home or near home to be close to mama as boys are. So UCONN can rake them in form wherever. OU doesn't have a chance with Oklahoma 5 star players.

 

[scrybe]

The Big 12 is not far from the same problem with Baylor. Not as bad as UCONN, but bad enough. Looks like Texas may challenge them but there is a great gulf between Baylor and the rest of us. I do not see that changing. Would any of our players have started for Baylor this year? Would any have made the 2nd team at Connecticut?

I think women's basketball is too top heavy. I fee like there is not enough star talent out there to give teams the chance of getting to a point of beating the biggies. Then you add the fact that not as many women want to get playing time so they can have an opportunity to play after college. Thus they are content to sit on the bench and play in a Final Four team. It is more fun and they get their education paid for.

The third reason is that girls are not as inclined to stay home or near home to be close to mama as boys are. So UCONN can rake them in form wherever. OU doesn't have a chance with Oklahoma 5 star players.

I'm a dad and granddad, and in my experience the complete opposite is true.

 

[tycat947]

I'm a dad and granddad, and in my experience the complete opposite is true.

I believe that as well. But it really comes down to individual. 2 of 3 Samuelson girls stayed close to home at Stanford and another goes clear across the country to UConn.

UConn, has played tough schedule in the past but they are really going to start playing extra tough out of conference schedule (in addition to adding OU, I'm pretty sure they've added series with Texas and Hypocrite U, as well) because their conference is soooo bad. The AAC MAY be the thing that weakens their program a bit. I don't see the top players wanting to go to Tulsa, Tulane, SMU, Houston, Temple, etc so that they can play against UConn. Geno can get most everyone who he wants and in the past they had Notre Dame, St Johns, Georgetown, etc to play against (and those teams were decent at the time) there may be some players that when they decide on whether UConn or P5 conference school, P5 school may have an advantage for said player because of exposure. It will take a few years but if UConn remains in AAC, I think it will weaken their women's AND men's basketball teams.

 

[soonerstar]

Wish all the good teams would quit playing Geno. Maybe that would hurt his recruiting. But ESPN would get involved more and pressure schools to play him on Big Monday, etc.

 

[sybarite]

I want to play Geno. I think we should stop playing Baylor.

 

[MsProudSooner]

Regarding Sherri's comments about Buddy, this link is to an article by Holly Rowe about Buddy's hard work:

http://oklahoma.247sports.com/Bolt/Oklahoma-star-Buddy-Hields-success-the-result-of-hard-work-44517762

 

[betterstill]

You may get your wish. We may someday wind up in the ACC.

 

[Sooner Cal]

Wow, you can beat bigger, more athletic teams if you score more than they do. Can't f you don't make your shots. Now that is deep.

I've been saying all year that the team is not very athletic for a top program. The solution is to recruit better athletes.

I also think we play Sherri's system whether it's right for us or not.

 

[Oliver Hardy]

The Big 12 is not far from the same problem with Baylor. Not as bad as UCONN, but bad enough. Looks like Texas may challenge them but there is a great gulf between Baylor and the rest of us. I do not see that changing. Would any of our players have started for Baylor this year? Would any have made the 2nd team at Connecticut?

I think women's basketball is too top heavy. I fee like there is not enough star talent out there to give teams the chance of getting to a point of beating the biggies. Then you add the fact that not as many women want to get playing time so they can have an opportunity to play after college. Thus they are content to sit on the bench and play in a Final Four team. It is more fun and they get their education paid for.

The third reason is that girls are not as inclined to stay home or near home to be close to mama as boys are. So UCONN can rake them in form wherever. OU doesn't have a chance with Oklahoma 5 star players.

I hope to heck she didn't actually say anything
like that, even if you were paraphrasing. If she did, she needs to retire or be fired immediately because she no longer has the fight in her to recruit and compete.

UConn, Baylor, Stanford, Norte Dame each can carry about 15 kids max. That's 60 players. A coach's job is to entice quality players to come to their program. 5 and four stars. There are plenty out there. They just want to play for programs and coaches who win, where they get a chance to play if they are good enough, where a coach doesn't play favorites and where losing, inconsistency or whatever it might be produced a mediocre product and becomes acceptable.

We can't compete completely with UConn and the other three - yet. We almost did for a couple of years. We can do it if we don't make
excuses like what I just read, you don't settle and you will do everything possible to get players here without cheating. Sometimes you have to build character as you coach you just can't recruit character and pray they can play.

 

[Oliver Hardy]

Just
Realized I was not responding
To Sherri comments but those of an earlier poster. Thank God Coach didn't say what I thought she said
Or I would have been screaming and calling for her immediate firing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[atlantasooner]

I'm sorry why is the counter to teams with length and athleticism NOT recruiting MORE
length and athleticism.

If those teams keep kicking your ass, then maybe your strategy is NOT working.

 

[betterstill]

I meant AAC not ACC. UCONN is in the AAC.

 

[betterstill]

I'm sorry why is the counter to teams with length and athleticism NOT recruiting MORE
length and athleticism.

If those teams keep kicking your ass, then maybe your strategy is NOT working.

I completely agree with this.

 

[Sweetest OU Girl]

Here is what she actually said.

You can counteract size and athleticism of Baylor, Kentucky, Texas, etc. but not with poor shooting -- Against Kentucky, they shot 27% from 2 and not hitting 3 balls -- makes it impossible to compete against more athletic teams

She is exactly right of course, but it leads to the real question. Why did we shoot so poorly - really poorly - almost all year? We had a game late this year where we shot just 17%. I have not looked at the final stats but at one point we were dead last in 3 point shooting in the conference. That is inexcusable. So again why did we shoot so poorly all year? It is a hard question to answer precisely, but my personal experience is it generally comes down to time in the gym. You must shoot for hours each week to make your shot automatic. That takes lots of personal commitment and a competitive spirit. It is not flashy and doesn't get you lots of attention. Al least not until game time and you shoot extremely well game after game - much like Buddy has done. Not, of course, that you can expect to have that kind of year all the time.

And I'm not talking about just casual shooting. You must challenge yourself. Make 40 consecutive free throws. Make 20 consecutive 3's. Etc. You do not leave the gym - no matter how tired you are - until you meet your goal. And it teaches the key skill of performing under pressure. By the time you have been there an hour and a half and are shooting that 40th FT or 20th three ptr, you are feeling as much pressure as you will ever feel in an actual game. Obviously that is not because the coach is watching you, or "making" you do it. It is because you want to be the very best you can be. I doubt we have players who are that committed and driven - although I cannot say that for a fact. But the results suggest it.

I wonder what is happening in the summer. It is possible the lack of summer camps hurts our team. Normally when you have camps your players are part of that and end up in the gym for hours and hours day after day. Part is mentoring, but lots of it is skill development and enhancement. There is no better way to learn than to teach. It is since we dropped the camps that our shooting has slowly slipped away.

 

[Hoopdreams79]

Someone fill me in on the no camps at OU I know they had them 5 years ago can't recall when they went away or why camps are are great building block not just for coaches and players but players and players time to gather and see kids that would fill great roles together who want to play together

 

[Sweetest OU Girl]

Here is what she actually said.

You can counteract size and athleticism of Baylor, Kentucky, Texas, etc. but not with poor shooting -- Against Kentucky, they shot 27% from 2 and not hitting 3 balls -- makes it impossible to compete against more athletic teams

She is exactly right of course, but it leads to the real question. Why did we shoot so poorly - really poorly - almost all year? We had a game late this year where we shot just 17%. I have not looked at the final stats but at one point we were dead last in 3 point shooting in the conference. That is inexcusable. So again why did we shoot so poorly all year? It is a hard question to answer precisely, but my personal experience is it generally comes down to time in the gym. You must shoot for hours each week to make your shot automatic. That takes lots of personal commitment and a competitive spirit. It is not flashy and doesn't get you lots of attention. Al least not until game time and you shoot extremely well game after game - much like Buddy has done. Not, of course, that you can expect to have that kind of year all the time.

And I'm not talking about just casual shooting. You must challenge yourself. Make 40 consecutive free throws. Make 20 consecutive 3's. Etc. You do not leave the gym - no matter how tired you are - until you meet your goal. And it teaches the key skill of performing under pressure. By the time you have been there an hour and a half and are shooting that 40th FT or 20th three ptr, you are feeling as much pressure as you will ever feel in an actual game. Obviously that is not because the coach is watching you, or "making" you do it. It is because you want to be the very best you can be. I doubt we have players who are that committed and driven - although I cannot say that for a fact. But the results suggest it.

I wonder what is happening in the summer. It is possible the lack of summer camps hurts our team. Normally when you have camps your players are part of that and end up in the gym for hours and hours day after day. Part is mentoring, but lots of it is skill development and enhancement. There is no better way to learn than to teach. It is since we dropped the camps that our shooting has slowly slipped away.

Here is evidence of what I stated in the next to last paragraph above. The article on ESPN is here:

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-b...coaches-oregon-state-beavers-first-final-four


And here is the comment that got my attention:

DALLAS -- She stood on the line with seven seconds left in the game, and a chance to give Oregon State a three-point lead against Baylor. Beavers junior guard Sydney Wiese wasn't thinking about the fact that she'd missed one of two free throws 26 seconds earlier. Nor was she saying to herself, "This is for the Final Four. You absolutely MUST make these."
Instead, the word that went through Wiese's mind was this: driveway.

"I've been saying that to myself throughout the season," Wiese said after the Beavers' 60-57 victory Monday sent the program to its first Women's Final Four. "That reminds me of my roots back home; I'd shoot on the driveway with my brother and my dad, and practice free throws until I made however many in a row.

"I'd get an extension cord, bring the radio out and blast 'Now That's What I Call Music' CDs all day. It's still one of my favorite things to do when I go back home: Just to be out there and shoot, and envision moments like that."

 

[badger]

Would you send your daughter to Baylor after all of the bad press on their handling of that Boise football transfer and other cases where they basically protected their star program's male athletes at the expense of non-revenue program women's athletes? Hell to the no.

It's going to impact their WBB recruiting, mark my words. And they deserve it.