Current state of the program

up7587 wrote:When do you look at the score board? You're too busy trying to get a signal on your tablet!

Haha, yea, I finally got rid of it.....turns out my tablet wasn't even internet capable.

DoubleDipper wrote:I gotta say, the board has been fine, IMO, and the guys working the board and the music from the control booth have been doing a fine job too. No complaints.....

I agree that the content on the board has been great!! I have no complaints on that at all... I just don't like not being able to enjoy it when it freezes and reboots!

If "look at the historical record" and complaints about the video board, maketing, and on campus publicity is the best that some of you can come up with - these are the EXACT SAME THINGS I SAW 5 YEARS, AGO, 10 YEARS AGO, 15 YEARS AGO,...ETC.,... wow, just WOW, that, in and of itself speaks VOLUMES.

AGAIN, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result". ..and it doesn't mater one bit who said it.

Pretty sure that 5 years ago the complaints were about NOT HAVING a video board rather than ABOUT the video board. Just so we're clear...

Obviously, an irrelevant distinction. THE VIDEO BOARD has NOTHING to do with winning games, which was my obvious point.

NOTHING?

A functioning video board makes for a better fan experience, theoretically a better fan experience draws more people to games, drawing more people to games makes a better atmosphere, a better atmosphere looks better for recruits, looking better for recruits encourages them to sign, signing better recruits makes the talent better, making the talent better increases your chances with winning. NOTHING is a pretty harsh word.

"I'm disappointed that our team is where it is right now," Reveno said. "I go into every year thinking, 'How are we going to put this team in a position to make a run?' And we're still trying to solve that."

From the BYU game story at the Oregonian.

To emphasize the obvious, the person at the helm recognizes the need to improve the current "team," so that we might make those runs.

If there is a need to give him the benefit of the doubt, it is hereby adjudged and decreed that he has it.

Go Pilots . . .let's get some wins down the stretch.

DaTruRochin wrote:NOTHING?

A functioning video board makes for a better fan experience, theoretically a better fan experience draws more people to games, drawing more people to games makes a better atmosphere, a better atmosphere looks better for recruits, looking better for recruits encourages them to sign, signing better recruits makes the talent better, making the talent better increases your chances with winning. NOTHING is a pretty harsh word.

That's a pretty big stretch.

So is using the word "nothing."

If a program is not competitive at the upper level of its conference, if a program is not interesting, if a student section has < 100 in attendance at a conference game (as I counted at the USF game), talk of a video board creating a better fan experience that draws more people frankly is silly.

Those interested in improving the program should ask themselves a simple question. Imagine you have no affiliation to the program, then ask.....why would or should I want to attend a Pilot basketball game? As recent history indicates (the 10 years I have been a season ticket holder) the only answer is...... To see interesting visiting teams (GU,BYU,UO,OSU,WSU, UW, SMU). Otherwise 1,500 is a big crowd.

A commitment from the admin that they are all in and support program improvement is necessary, as is an expanded recruiting budget as well as an increased coaching staff budget and improved regional marketing designed to improve the brand.

DaTruRochin wrote:So is using the word "nothing."

No, it's not. In terms of winning games, a video board is a lot closer to having no effect than it is to having a significant effect.

I'm not saying it draws people in at all, I'm saying it makes it better when they get there. Having a modern facility is relevant to "the state of the program."

That aside, it does appear that more $$$ for recruiting, marketing, coaching, etc are the obvious answers. The question is, where does that $$$ come from? Our new AD has a fundraising background, it seems using some of that experience is very necessary in the coming future whether that be private donations, new sponsors, or whatever so we can ultimately fund what is necessary to put a good product on the floor. The fact of the matter is, as has been iterated over and over, people won't pay to see the Pilots until the Pilots are worth watching.

Now as for the less obvious answers... Are there issues in the Ath. Dept??A disconnect between the administration and the dept?? (a la the Barnes and Noble merchandizing monopoly with Pilot gear) do today's students just not care about athletics?? I don't know, but hopefully this is something that is being discussed by people who CAN affect change.

goldhelmet wrote:

DaTruRochin wrote:So is using the word "nothing."

No, it's not. In terms of winning games, a video board is a lot closer to having no effect than it is to having a significant effect.

Little effect >>> nothing. Only a sith speaks in absolutes.

I guess I'm not cool enough to know what a "sith" is, so I won't ask.

I cannot believe that we're having this conversation. Yes, I'm stating that a video board is not going to help the Pilots win basketball games.

Sure, maybe not directly. But it DOES have relevance to "the state of the program"... the title of the thread. As in they have made efforts to renovate Chiles Center, which is an inherent part of the "program" as amenities like that DO help recruiting players, which, if I'm not mistaken does win games.

Side note: Sorry for the Star Wars reference. I guess it is too cool.

Rev tweet:

@CoachReveno: Training at 3 pm. Lesson plan to include a a review of @JayBilas article on toughness http://t.co/5LOOREFl Oh, and some work on turnovers.

Follow the link.

DaTruRochin wrote: Having a modern facility is relevant to "the state of the program."

This. It's about keeping up with the Joneses if nothing else. I haven't been to another WCC arena- what are the video boards like there? If I were a recruit, a modern video board is something I would expect as it says "hey, we're serious about our basketball program here."
A few years ago CSU had a video board that was essentially a Lite Brite for text and corny graphics. They got a new spendy one that would handle video. Story is they brought in the big time doners to see it, but left it loaded with the lite brite graphics. Everyone was disappointed until they flipped the switch and showed a video highlight reel.

Another anecdote. In '02 or '03, WSU beat Oregon in their football game. This was the dawn of the Ridiculous Locker Room Era. After the game, a WSU player was quoted saying that Oregon's sweet locker room was nice, but it wouldn't score you a touchdown or win you a game. Fast forward ten years- did that crazy locker room work out for Oregon? Was the WSU player correct?
I'm not sure what resources are available or how they can be allocated. But like it or not, these types of things are things that a high school aged athlete cares about. That, and sweet uniforms. You gots ta have some sweet uniforms baby.

pilotram wrote:

DaTruRochin wrote: Having a modern facility is relevant to "the state of the program."

This. It's about keeping up with the Joneses if nothing else. I haven't been to another WCC arena- what are the video boards like there? If I were a recruit, a modern video board is something I would expect as it says "hey, we're serious about our basketball program here."
A few years ago CSU had a video board that was essentially a Lite Brite for text and corny graphics. They got a new spendy one that would handle video. Story is they brought in the big time doners to see it, but left it loaded with the lite brite graphics. Everyone was disappointed until they flipped the switch and showed a video highlight reel.

I was referring to the video board as a stand alone issue, because that was the way it was presented. I follow recruiting pretty closely, and have more many years. I think you will find that most players decide based on issues like how confortable they feel at the school, with the players, the coaches, chances for early playing time, whether the program is winning, social life, and sometimes distance from home can be an issue. I doubt that UP is planning or could afford the major types of rennovations to the locker rooms that Oregon did. Those are just insane (in a good way).

I love how we continue to get off track with dumbed-down discussions about video boards and what beer brands are sold in the lounge. It's no wonder the university doesn't take the basketball problems seriously.

Anyone that continues to argue that our basketball problems stem from anything but lack of talent doesn't understand basketball. And this sense that we can't recruit high IQ, tough-minded, athletes here at UP because we value academics or our video board has some glitches is an equal part of the "excuses club" that has created this culture of apathy that has existed for too long.

The handful of talented players we do have are forced to create offense for themselves because this coaching staff insists on slowing down the tempo and forcing the ball inside to bigs that aren't tough enough or skilled enough to score it against a defense that has clearly watched enough film on us to know exactly what we're trying to run. Bailey, Pressley, Reinfelds and Thelkie are best in transition. The crowd enjoys it when we push the tempo and make exciting plays. Why don't the coaches get this? I get that developing bigs is Rev's forte but why aren't the other coaches speaking up and saying "Coach- This ain't working"?

We have guys like Korey and Kevin that can play above the rim yet we never throw a back door lob for either of them. And don't tell me that we don't know what a back door lob is cause we get caught by at least one per game. I don't want to hear anymore excuses about slowing it down to limit the turnovers because more balls get tossed out of bounds on that ridiculous inside lob attempt than in transition.

I can't imagine how the guards even get up for games anymore when they know that the first 5 minutes is an exercise in futility. Kind of like last year when Rev had guys stand around while Mitrovitch went 0 for 15 every game. This isn't D1 basketball. I've seen AAU teams execute a better game plan.

Goldhelmet posted the definition of insanity earlier and that seemed to get us off track. Perhaps we're the insane ones for ponying up the cash each year when the university is clealy content with serving up the same thing year after year after year... I for one am tired of the excuses and the... Oh look! Shiny ball! Go Pilots!

The problem is, at least with this recruiting cycle, is pretty much everything that could have gone wrong HAS gone wrong. Players recruited to step in to the Jared role haven't stepped up with any consistency, our big man depth has stagnated or not developed at all and the team was completely unprepared for the loss of a point guard. You can have all the athletic players you want, but if nobody can actually run transition/alley oops and facilitate it makes no sense. Clearly Rev doesn't trust the team to run it effectively so he has taken it out of the game plan for now. Is it more boring? Probably, people love dunks. But it makes sense to focus on the more basic things first, since we clearly aren't doing those effectively either. At this point winning games this year is way less of a focus as it is working on things for next year.

As far as getting all pissy because we dare discuss beer and video boards, haha, call it a coping mechanism, but discussing video boards and beer is vastly more entertaining than discussing Pilot basketball right now. Ultimately there isn't much we can do about the basketball this season, but contacting the AD and letting the proper channels know of said dissatisfaction makes sense at this point. If you think THEY are happy with the results I think you'd be mistaken.

Goldhelmet posted the definition of insanity earlier and that seemed to get us off track

Yeah, that must have been it. I've been one of the few all along who have argued that it is about lack of talent, and now you're saying the same thing. The "doing things the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result" quote is so fitting from a historical perspective, it's not even funny. We are having the exact same discussion now that we had 10, 15, 20 years ago.

We get off track because the excuses that I've mentioned many, many times come up over and over again. "Oh this happened, and that happened, and this player didn't step up or this player didn't turn out like we thought". Every program has to deal with that - it is not unique to the University of Portland. That is part of identifying the right players and developing them. If something goes wrong, as things often will, it starts and ends with the head coach to make adjustments.

How is an explanation, an excuse? I was merely providing reasons for why it is how it is right now, I'm not saying any of it was right.

So since you are one of the few who has said the issue all along is talent, how do you propose we get said talent? And not just "recognizing," how do you convince that higher level talent to come to an unproven program like UP?

We don't have Notre Dame tradition, nor anything close to their budget, where would you start building this program from near scratch?

I agree with DTR on this would like some more explanation/discussion on getting that higher talent to UP. Of course the answer to the problem is to start getting 5 star recruits year in and year out, but UP isn't going to consistently pull that talent right now. We may get one guy here or there because of certain circumstances but we're not going to field a full recruiting class filled with them.

I also think that saying the answer is get better recruits doesn't help anything. Fact is that there are challenges when it comes to recruiting and unless we go out and get Coach K, Brad Stevens, Mark Few, or a big name coach we're not going to land those 5* recruits right now. It wasn't that long ago when we were competing and beating Oregon, Washington, UCLA, Minnesota, etc. And I can tell you that their recruiting classes were all better than ours. It's a combination of seeing what a kid can do, and maximizing his potential to build a team. In a few cases, it's happend. In others it hasn't quite come together.

The focus, for us and the coaches, should be on development of talent that we do have. It's the same goal for all mid-majors really. Taking talent and developing it into a winning program that makes UP an appealing basketball destination which leads to more winning and the cylcle continues. This is the strategy that should be taken. I think this is the strategy that is happening.

As for the game manegment aspects of the current coaching staff, I really can't add much. I played basketball all through High School and still watch a ton of it, but I can tell you that Rev and his staff know FAR MORE about running a team than I do. I can tell you that the three point shot was vital in our recent successful seasons. Right now we have 0 consistent shooters. Combine this with a pretty stagnent offense and it leads to high turnovers and transition opportunities heading the other way. Getting a solid ball handler isn't going to solve the turnover problem overnight.

This brings me up to the next question. There has been a lot of dancing around the point but I'd like to gauge where people are at in terms of this coaching staff. Obviously there are a few who I think are calling for his job, others who are full supporters of him and what he has done. I think I fall somewhere in the middle, which I know is the easy way out but here is my reasoning. I really do believe that consistency is key in building a program. I also say that consistently mediocre is not what I want. This staff has been here 7 years now and all we have to show for it is a couple CBI tournament appearances. I know historically that is a step in the right direction but the past two seasons have been a giant step backwards and more of the same.

When it comes to player development I think the staff had nothing but success stories for 4 or 5 years. The past couple have been a little tough. I think that the next five seasons or so are pretty vital to UP Basketball development. I really do believe that UP should be focused on the 2017-2018 season, when we play in and host the mega tournament. I think it's a great opportunity to turn the perception of UP around on a national stage. If we show up to that and lose two games by 20+ thats what everyone was expecting. If we show up and get a win and compete in the other game, we gain some legitamacy.

ugh, this started out as a short post... Just a final thought, I'm frustrated. I'm very frustrated. I love this school. I love this program. I will never not bleed purple, no matter how much my ego bleeds, which lately is way too much. I will always have hope no matter how many losses. It's easy to be a fan of a good team, but true passion, in my opinion, is sticking with your team through those tough years, and for Portland it's been most of the years. I still believe that one day Portland will be a national contender, and there will be pleanty of fans who jump on the bandwagon, but it's the hardened fan's, those that have gone through these periods that will be the heart, the backbone, the soul of what this program is.

DaTruRochin wrote:How is an explanation, an excuse? I was merely providing reasons for why it is how it is right now, I'm not saying any of it was right.

So since you are one of the few who has said the issue all along is talent, how do you propose we get said talent? And not just "recognizing," how do you convince that higher level talent to come to an unproven program like UP?

We don't have Notre Dame tradition, nor anything close to their budget, where would you start building this program from near scratch?

We convinced Tim Douglas to come here. He had multiple offers. He likes to play uptempo and attack. We slowed him down and asked him to walk the ball up and dump it into the bigs. We lost him. I saw a tweet from Rev that said something to the effect of asking Bailey to score less and get others involved. He also had his choice of college and picked UP. We ask him to defend the other teams best player each and every night. We don't run and plays to get him easy shots. Most of his turnovers come from trying to feed the post. How long will that fly with him?

We can get good players but if we don't develop them and allow them to play to their strength then we'll lose them. I imagine a player like Bailey can't be happy with talk about turning things around for next year. If I'm a talented guard thinking about UP there's no way I come here now after watching how they've used the guards they have.

Goldhelmet- Don't be so sensitive. I wasn't saying that you got us off track. I was pointing out how easily it is for folks here to get distracted which provides cover for the folks that prefer the status quo. You have been dialed in on the talent problems and you're dead on.

I don't believe that budgets are the issue since Rev has the green light to take international trips to recruit. (Did I read something about a $3500 ticket to Germany?) He and his team are at most of the major recruiting showcases not stuck at home scouring the internet for players. There's talent to be had out there. But when you have a coaching staff with the mentality that we have to find hidden gems that need to be developed versus having an effective sales pitch that attracts guys that are tough and ready to go... this is what you end up with. Perhaps we bring in some JC talent to help get us back on track? Perhaps if we let the guys play uptempo and have some fun the local sports news might give us more coverage and that might attract local talent?

One thing is for certain, bad, boring, losing basketball doesn't attract anyone and makes it hard to hang on to the talent and what little fans we have.