Izzo

[SpartyNash]

I?m sorry to say this but I think it?s time to start to wonder if the game has passed Izzo by. Ask yourself if Mike Krzyzewski, Roy Williams, John Calipari, hell John Beilein would ever in their right mind sit a guaranteed lottery pick for the bulk of a neck and neck NCAA Tournament game in favor of a player who averages less than 1 point per game and 7 minutes a night. Let?s not forget he pulled the exact same bullshit with sparsely used walk on Colby Wollenman over Deyonta Davis against Middle Tennessee and probably cost us that game for ?proving a point.? Two potential title caliber teams with opportunities completely pissed away due to inexcusable coaching.

I?m tired of the bullshit excuses. I?m tired of these same retread 1999 pathetic half court sets every fucking year. I?m tired of a thousand turnovers a game every single year. I?m tired of the bull headed defensive approach, never mixing it up ever with full court pressure or a zone when you?re in foul trouble (which is every single game with our big men for the last eternity). I?m tired of getting outplayed by inferior talent. I?m tired of the bullshit pissing matches with great players. I?m tired of top recruits coming here and being shafted in favor of lesser role players.

Get with the times Tom or get the hell out.

 

[MSUMatt28]

A lot to dissect there. I agree with a fair amount of it.

I'm not sure I agree on the offensive sets. Go back and look at the 2016 team. They were beautiful to watch offensively. The ball moved to the open guy, even without a true creator at PG (unless you count DV), and they could shoot the heck out of it. This year's team still before today was shooting over 50% from the field and 40% from 3 and averaged over 80 ppg. Certainly they need work in attacking zones, that much is clear.

Everything else I agree. It seems like Izzo is too focused on a few things certain players CAN'T do, that a few other players do ok, as if those are the only factors in the game. Get the best players on the court and figure out how to best used their strengths while mitigating their weaknesses. There's a narrative out there now forming that he doesn't know how to coach high caliber talent and/or restricts it, and I'm not sure I can dispute it at this point, and that's not going to help on the recruiting trail.

I also don't think his teams have adjusted very well to the way games are called nowadays as we seem to be at a free throw deficit most games. And if whatever other things he's not liking from his bigs doesn't get them on the bench, them getting 2 fouls in the first half will do it instead.

But as for the recent March failures, that all could just be the law of averages, quite frankly. The team has outplayed it's seed plenty of times in the past. In recent years that's starting to get flipped around. There is alot of luck, or lack thereof, that goes into NCAA tournament success. Duke has plenty of earlier than expected exits in their history, but then plenty of long runs just because they're there getting a 1, 2, or 3 every single year and putting themselves in good position. So it's still going to work out a lot of the time. Same goes for Kansas as bad as they are at choking in the NCAAs. They're still going to at least be in position to make a run every year, and then every now and then, they do. Those programs aren't having years where they're in there as 6 or 7 seeds. They don't have "Championship or bust" seasons because every season is one.

 

[lucke]

100% agree. Izzo can't move past the 90's style of play that won him a championship. Almost 20 years later, and we still play the same boring style with no adapting to the modern game. Time for Izzo to go.

 

[SpartyNash]

100% agree. Izzo can't move past the 90's style of play that won him a championship. Almost 20 years later, and we still play the same boring style with no adapting to the modern game. Time for Izzo to go.

I appreciate how much this program has achieved the past 20 years thanks to Izzo, but I won?t be devastated when he ultimately decides to retire. Obviously the grass isn?t always greener as many programs have found out the hard way, but I would be thrilled with a breath of fresh air and new mentality when that eventually happens.

 

[SpartyNash]

A lot to dissect there. I agree with a fair amount of it.

I'm not sure I agree on the offensive sets. Go back and look at the 2016 team. They were beautiful to watch offensively. The ball moved to the open guy, even without a true creator at PG (unless you count DV), and they could shoot the heck out of it. This year's team still before today was shooting over 50% from the field and 40% from 3 and averaged over 80 ppg. Certainly they need work in attacking zones, that much is clear.

Everything else I agree. It seems like Izzo is too focused on a few things certain players CAN'T do, that a few other players do ok, as if those are the only factors in the game. Get the best players on the court and figure out how to best used their strengths while mitigating their weaknesses. There's a narrative out there now forming that he doesn't know how to coach high caliber talent and/or restricts it, and I'm not sure I can dispute it at this point, and that's not going to help on the recruiting trail.

I also don't think his teams have adjusted very well to the way games are called nowadays as we seem to be at a free throw deficit most games. And if whatever other things he's not liking from his bigs doesn't get them on the bench, them getting 2 fouls in the first half will do it instead.

But as for the recent March failures, that all could just be the law of averages, quite frankly. The team has outplayed it's seed plenty of times in the past. In recent years that's starting to get flipped around. There is alot of luck, or lack thereof, that goes into NCAA tournament success. Duke has plenty of earlier than expected exits in their history, but then plenty of long runs just because they're there getting a 1, 2, or 3 every single year and putting themselves in good position. So it's still going to work out a lot of the time. Same goes for Kansas as bad as they are at choking in the NCAAs. They're still going to at least be in position to make a run every year, and then every now and then, they do. Those programs aren't having years where they're in there as 6 or 7 seeds. They don't have "Championship or bust" seasons because every season is one.

I?ve thought about that last paragraph of yours quite a bit after the game. I agree with it. Just like a veteran baseball player that is a career .270 hitter and hits .400 for a month, naturally you?d expect that to even itself out and come down to reality. With great runs from nowhere like 2003, 2005, 2015, there?s years like 2016 and 2018 where the averages come back to bite you, it just sucks when it happens multiple times in a small time span. It makes the sting worse and may be more knee jerk.

 

[Spartanmack]

if you believe the law of averages argument then basically what you're saying is izzo isn't and never was elite. he's overachieved a few times so he's bound to underachieve to bring his career average back inline where it should be.

I think that's nuts and a poor excuse for not delivering when he should. I'm not saying he's elite or he's not - I'm open to either possibility or another - that he was and now he's not. the fact is he got beat by another coach who the game has passed by. Boeheim didn't even deserve to be in the tournament. to e fact that we lost a game where we should have absolutely dominated the second half says a lot about coaching, not math. I would buy the law of averages argument when it comes to explaining the poor shooting performance yesterday but not izzos career. if he coached a better game in 2016 and yesterday, no one would be saying "the law of averages says we are due to underperform at some point." izzos career averages should be impacted by lesser talented teams - I would buy the argument that he can't have a stacked roster every year - not by randomly underperforming with elite talent everywhere. we should have attacked Syracuse right out of the in the 2nd half, gotten 2 or 3 fouled out or benches by the 10 minute mark, worn them down and won walking away. Instead we payed into their hands, didn't make any adjustments to account for cold shooting and lost a game we should have won by double digits.

I always crap on Calipari for being a bad coach who just takes a handful of lottery picks and throws them.on the floor. well, I'd probably prefer that to a guy who takes an almost as talented roster and benches them so I can watch Ben Cater, Matt McQuaid and Josh Langford run out the shot clock every possession.

 

[MSUMatt28]

if you believe the law of averages argument then basically what you're saying is izzo isn't and never was elite. he's overachieved a few times so he's bound to underachieve to bring his career average back inline where it should be.

I think that's nuts and a poor excuse for not delivering when he should. I'm not saying he's elite or he's not - I'm open to either possibility or another - that he was and now he's not. the fact is he got beat by another coach who the game has passed by. Boeheim didn't even deserve to be in the tournament. to e fact that we lost a game where we should have absolutely dominated the second half says a lot about coaching, not math. I would buy the law of averages argument when it comes to explaining the poor shooting performance yesterday but not izzos career. if he coached a better game in 2016 and yesterday, no one would be saying "the law of averages says we are due to underperform at some point." izzos career averages should be impacted by lesser talented teams - I would buy the argument that he can't have a stacked roster every year - not by randomly underperforming with elite talent everywhere. we should have attacked Syracuse right out of the in the 2nd half, gotten 2 or 3 fouled out or benches by the 10 minute mark, worn them down and won walking away. Instead we payed into their hands, didn't make any adjustments to account for cold shooting and lost a game we should have won by double digits.

I always crap on Calipari for being a bad coach who just takes a handful of lottery picks and throws them.on the floor. well, I'd probably prefer that to a guy who takes an almost as talented roster and benches them so I can watch Ben Cater, Matt McQuaid and Josh Langford run out the shot clock every possession.

I'm not saying that 7 Final Fours isn't/wasn't elite. But there is more of an element of luck in NCAA tournament success than people are willing to admit. The 2010 team was a deeply flawed team that had Kansas and OSU (who has beaten us at Breslin) lose right before we would have played them. And some of Izzo's Final Four teams in the past have confounded us in the same way as this year's team. The 2005 had all the same complaints about lack of mental toughness and underachievement...until they went out and beat Duke and Kentucky in one weekend. The 2009 team lost home games to Penn State and Northwestern. Then put together a great effort vs Louisville, then got a Final Four game in Detroit vs a more accomplished UConn team. And Izzo spent some of those seasons confounding us with puzzling moves, taking teams and continuing to tinker with them until he finds the right mix, throwing guys like Bograkos, Kebler, Austin Thornton (who actually had a very nice senior season) at us. In the end it generally worked out and everyone forgot all about it. Now a couple of times it hasn't worked out. And that's kind of the point. Sometimes it isn't going to work out. Coach K didn't become less of a coach because he lost to Lehigh and Mercer (with Jabari Parker).

All of which is to say that Izzo isn't that much different of a coach now than in the past just because they've lost early in the tournament a couple of times as high seeds. I think we were all questioning whether he was slipping back after the debacle of 2011, and then he came back the next year with possibly his best coaching job. Whether he is slipping this time around? I don't know. History suggests he will come back strong next year. I don't think he did a great job this year, but I'm certainly not going to go and say that the game has passed him by. But I do think he needs to make adjustments. Not so much X's and O's and offensive scheme and all that, but just in how he manages young, talented players. If he doesn't do that, then he won't get any more of them and then it won't matter how good of a coach he may be.

As for what happened with this year's team. It does seem strange to see that an Izzo team actually peaked in December, that seems to be what happened here. Back then they took Duke to the wire and probably win if not for some unconscious shooting by Grayson Allen. They pound a good UNC team, do the same to a full strength Notre Dame. Mercilessly pound some hapless opponents (not that impressive but we've seen them struggle comparatively in the past against some of those types of teams). Then OSU blasted them and they never seemed to recover even with all the Big Ten wins that came after. The only good team they beat after that was Purdue at home in a game they trailed most of the way. Certainly had the talent, but not any experienced leadership to go with that talent. There are a couple of exceptions (uber-talented young Duke and UK teams) but most elite teams over the years have those strong-willed and capable Juniors and Senior leaders mixed in with the one and done talent. We didn't have that this year. And yes Izzo tried to push a lot of buttons, but didn't hit the right ones often enough. And yes I do also think all the other "stuff" did take a toll on the players.

 

[Spartanmack]

I understand what you're saying, I just don't think what happened in '16 and this year have anything to do with good or bad luck averaging out (other than perhaps the poor shooting performance yesterday - that was out of the ordinary for this team). Yesterday's loss was completely avoidable - I think that loss was as bad a coaching loss as the Bret Bielema Rose Bowl against TCU. They should have pounded the ball inside either by better ball movement or driving - even if it's not more successful than jacking up 3s at the end of the shot clock, at least they would force Syracuse bigs to defend and either foul out, get benched or get worn down. As it was, they basically gave them a 23 second time out with just about every possession, dribbling and passing the ball around the arc.

As for Izzo confounding us with strange moves that worked out, I don't think he ever did anything as unorthodox as playing Carter and/or Goins/Wollenman while sitting Jackson and Davis and had success. I agree with you that luck has a lot to do with the tournament but that applies in situations like Houston/uofm where that kid missed 2 FTs and 3 of his last 4 to give mich a shot at the end. That doesn't apply to massive coaching blunders. Of course, we could have gotten lucky at the end and didn't but we shouldn't have been in a position to need luck - and that's 100% Izzo's fault.

Correction: it's at least 80-90% Izzo's fault. The team missed a ton of open shots and they fumbled a ton of loose balls - that's not his fault, but Izzo made ZERO adjustments and worse, made ZERO effort to attack their weakness and get to the foul line or make Syracuse go to their horrible bench.

 

[gotime909]

I’m of the belief that introducing 2 new players suddenly to major roles will fuck up any rhythm and chemistry this team had built. Never mind that it came at the expense of sitting your 2 best post players. A day later and I’m still putting this loss 100% in Izzo.

 

[Spartanmack]

I?m of the belief that introducing 2 new players suddenly to major roles will fuck up any rhythm and chemistry this team had built. Never mind that it came at the expense of sitting your 2 best post players. A day later and I?m still putting this loss 100% in Izzo.

I've downgraded his responsibility to 90% - the team missed a ton of open shots and looked like keystone cops in loose ball situations. Shoot even 10 points below season averages and we win no problem. But that clearly wasn't happening and not only did Izzo do NOTHING about it, he actually made it harder. It's like he didn't know what to do - like Tikhonov not pulling Tretiak down a goal in the 1980 Olympics - just kept with the same strategy that clearly wasn't working.

 

[SpartyNash]

I've downgraded his responsibility to 90% - the team missed a ton of open shots and looked like keystone cops in loose ball situations. Shoot even 10 points below season averages and we win no problem. But that clearly wasn't happening and not only did Izzo do NOTHING about it, he actually made it harder. It's like he didn't know what to do - like Tikhonov not pulling Tretiak down a goal in the 1980 Olympics - just kept with the same strategy that clearly wasn't working.

Was just going to respond that I would put 90% as well. As disgraceful as the lineups were and as pathetic as the offensive sets were, ultimately the players had plenty of decent looks (albeit from deep which why are you shooting from there when you can?t make shit, but I digress). Several missed free throws and wide open threes, one or two drop and we still win in spite of Izzo and the horrendous shooting.

 

[Spartanmack]

Was just going to respond that I would put 90% as well. As disgraceful as the lineups were and as pathetic as the offensive sets were, ultimately the players had plenty of decent looks (albeit from deep which why are you shooting from there when you can’t make shit, but I digress). Several missed free throws and wide open threes, one or two drop and we still win in spite of Izzo and the horrendous shooting.

this is the point - not only can you not shoot but you have 3 guys with 3 fouls to start the 2nd half and Syracuse has NO bench. Go inside! That's on Izzo.

Also, we missed the front end of all three 1-and-1s and Bridges missed both on a 2-shot trip in the first half - that alone could have been another 5 to 8 points on the halftime lead.

And let's not forget they did all this in what was basically a home game.

 

[Michchamp]

some of the Izzo bashing reminds me of the UM fans that bashed Carr for 10+ years, then had to eat their words when they got what they wanted, and he immediately TRASHED the program.

Izzo DID just win an outright Big Ten title. they coasted on talent, and that's on him, but it's not enough to justify starting anew right now... especially given the current shitshow going on in East Lansing.

I'm not that familiar with the rest of MSU's coaching staff. Is there anyone ready to succeed him now? If not, I think forcing him out would be a disaster. In addition to guys leaving for the NBA, you'd probably lose more to transfers.

 

[MSUMatt28]

some of the Izzo bashing reminds me of the UM fans that bashed Carr for 10+ years, then had to eat their words when they got what they wanted, and he immediately TRASHED the program.

Izzo DID just win an outright Big Ten title. they coasted on talent, and that's on him, but it's not enough to justify starting anew right now... especially given the current shitshow going on in East Lansing.

I'm not that familiar with the rest of MSU's coaching staff. Is there anyone ready to succeed him now? If not, I think forcing him out would be a disaster. In addition to guys leaving for the NBA, you'd probably lose more to transfers.

That is a good question about the heir apparent. I have no idea what the plan is, but whenever that time comes, if it comes from the current staff, I don't see that as a good way to go.

The Lloyd Carr comparison is a good one and one absolutely needs to be careful what they wish for there. Blowing it up doesn't guarantee that someone else can go put it back together again, when perhaps all it takes is to fix a few cracks. Can/will Izzo fix them is the question.

 

[Spartanmack]

despite all the conjecture, I don't think anyone really wants Izzo fired. I could be wrong but I personally don't want him fired - 7 final fours and a championship means he probably gets to stay as long as he wants. But if this turns out to be a long term pattern, the tide will shift - though even then I think he'd be able to leave on his own terms rather than be fired.

I do seriously think he needs to clean house though - Dwayne Stephens as associate head coach is shocking based on what I remember of him as a player. He was there the last 3 of my 4 years and the guy was a complete dope. Athletic but that's about it. Maybe he's a great recruiter, who knows but I can't imagine he's big time head coach material. I don't know much about Dane Fife other than he played for Bobby Knight the first half of his college career so he's probably one of those kids who got by on basketball IQ and a nice jumper but I'd be fine if he got replaced too. The problem with a guy like Fife is even if he is head coach material, would he jump ship for his alma mater? Izzo needs to bring in someone who can help with game situations - someone who can draw up plays that don't result in turnovers or shot clock violations coming out of time-outs.

Anyway, Izzo's not going anywhere - he just won the B1G and lost a tourney game he can easily excuse away. I'm pretty sure everyone knows he's pretty well entrenched. When it eventually happens, I hope they would look outside for his replacement. It's my understanding Gregg Marshall has turned down jobs better than the one he has but I'd like to see them go after a guy like that if Izzo were to step down in the next couple years.

 

[Sbee]

I?m sorry to say this but I think it?s time to start to wonder if the game has passed Izzo by. Ask yourself if Mike Krzyzewski, Roy Williams, John Calipari, hell John Beilein would ever in their right mind sit a guaranteed lottery pick for the bulk of a neck and neck NCAA Tournament game in favor of a player who averages less than 1 point per game and 7 minutes a night. Let?s not forget he pulled the exact same bullshit with sparsely used walk on Colby Wollenman over Deyonta Davis against Middle Tennessee and probably cost us that game for ?proving a point.? Two potential title caliber teams with opportunities completely pissed away due to inexcusable coaching.

I?m tired of the bullshit excuses. I?m tired of these same retread 1999 pathetic half court sets every fucking year. I?m tired of a thousand turnovers a game every single year. I?m tired of the bull headed defensive approach, never mixing it up ever with full court pressure or a zone when you?re in foul trouble (which is every single game with our big men for the last eternity). I?m tired of getting outplayed by inferior talent. I?m tired of the bullshit pissing matches with great players. I?m tired of top recruits coming here and being shafted in favor of lesser role players.

Get with the times Tom or get the hell out.

I think there's a lot of frustration talking here. Most of your complaints are about the offense, too many sets, too rigid, too many turnovers, but we were 6th in offensive efficiency in the country with 1.147 points per possession. we averaged 81 PPG this year, even though that accounts for tempo, that's a healthy amount of scoring. 9th in shooting percentage, 12th in effective shooting percentage, 3rd in offensive rebounding percentages.

We can all criticize coach for a bunch of decisions, about the playing group, etc, but really, this was a damn good offensive team that had a horrific shooting game. The syracuse zone does a very good job of taking the post away, you need your wings to make jumpers. McQuaid was 1 of 7 (banking in his only shot), langford 1 of 12, Bridges 4 of 18. You simply can't beat teams when that happens. I didn't like some of the lineups too but it seemed like we got more than enough good looks to win the game, just didn't make the shots we usually do. If this was best of 7, I'd like our chances, but you can't have one horrific day and survive in this tournament.

 

[Spartanmack]

I think there's a lot of frustration talking here. Most of your complaints are about the offense, too many sets, too rigid, too many turnovers, but we were 6th in offensive efficiency in the country with 1.147 points per possession. we averaged 81 PPG this year, even though that accounts for tempo, that's a healthy amount of scoring. 9th in shooting percentage, 12th in effective shooting percentage, 3rd in offensive rebounding percentages.

We can all criticize coach for a bunch of decisions, about the playing group, etc, but really, this was a damn good offensive team that had a horrific shooting game. The syracuse zone does a very good job of taking the post away, you need your wings to make jumpers. McQuaid was 1 of 7 (banking in his only shot), langford 1 of 12, Bridges 4 of 18. You simply can't beat teams when that happens. I didn't like some of the lineups too but it seemed like we got more than enough good looks to win the game, just didn't make the shots we usually do. If this was best of 7, I'd like our chances, but you can't have one horrific day and survive in this tournament.

but we had a horrific day and almost won the game - in fact, if Battle doesn't hit that runner just inside a minute, chances are really good we win the game. Syracuse does collapse the post but we managed to get SU's entire front court to rack up 3 fouls in the 1st half but didn't manage to get any of them to foul out.

As far as this team's offense, the stats are what they are but it's also true that this team really struggled offensively against every decent team they played since December.

 

[SpartyNash]

Regarding Izzo: no, I do not want the guy fired nor would it ever happen for reasons on the court. I realize he has put this program on the map and will probably be the greatest coach we?ll have my entire life. But given the bullheaded approach to the game that seemingly has never and probably will never change, I?m not going to be upset in the least if we see a new style and approach to the game one day.

 

[Sbee]

but we had a horrific day and almost won the game - in fact, if Battle doesn't hit that runner just inside a minute, chances are really good we win the game. Syracuse does collapse the post but we managed to get SU's entire front court to rack up 3 fouls in the 1st half but didn't manage to get any of them to foul out.

As far as this team's offense, the stats are what they are but it's also true that this team really struggled offensively against every decent team they played since December.

I don't think you can struggle that much and end up with those high rankings, numbers do go down a little bit in conference play but that happens everywhere. As for racking up fouls, I agree, but we only rack up fouls with Ward in there. He was 4 of 5 from the floor, he made one defensive error with about 11 minutes left and sat the rest of the way, I don't understand that one. Izzo opts to go with better defensive players than offensive players down the stretch, Tillman missed looks inside and missed a key FT, he defended well and rebounded well, but Ward would have given us a little more offense and a chance to score through contact. Ward not playing much is a head scratcher. Also, I'd take Goins against the zone over Carter, he has a better chance to hit a 15ft jumper and also makes good passes in the center of the zone. Izzo went with him late against Oakland and we started to break their zone, I think he had 7 assists in that game, not sure why he only played 3 minutes.

 

[tinselwolverine]

some of the Izzo bashing reminds me of the UM fans that bashed Carr for 10+ years, then had to eat their words when they got what they wanted, and he immediately TRASHED the program.

Izzo DID just win an outright Big Ten title. they coasted on talent, and that's on him, but it's not enough to justify starting anew right now... especially given the current shitshow going on in East Lansing.

I'm not that familiar with the rest of MSU's coaching staff. Is there anyone ready to succeed him now? If not, I think forcing him out would be a disaster. In addition to guys leaving for the NBA, you'd probably lose more to transfers.

I really didn't want to horn on their discussion, but yeah, I was thinking this.

Except I don't remember Carr trashing the program. Maybe you meant his replacement, that piece of shit.

Lloyd Carr was always class.