After the brutal losses, all I heard from Rose was the same coach speak over and over; things like "we were a step slow tonight". There were glaring gaps in how our team played. I would watch individual players try to play hard on defense, but it was so undisciplined. They would try so hard to the point of over-committing almost everytime (taking a step too far, Emery reaching in, people leaving their feet); instead of setting up properly in front of the man they were defending. We were lost on offense, and Rose never tried to scheme to our strengths. Maybe you shouldn't run such a "free flowing" offense when you have so much inexperience and lack of depth. Start with a good scheme and maybe this team could learn to be free flowing over time.Mars wrote:My problem was pairing Rose's best-ever recruiting with his worst season in about 10 years. On top of that was continuing to lose players, guys like Emery showing little improvement over 2 years (let alone in-season), the lack of defense (at the perimeter especially), poor shot selection completely unopposed by coaching, and the lack of good passing in set offensive schemes. Then add in losses like the home loss to UVU, and how that game was lost, the inability to win at lowly Santa Clara, the parade of losses to sub-200 rpi teams, and losing 3 in a row to St. Mary's with the final loss by 31 points, and the home-court NIT blowout L was an ugly cherry on an unappetizing sundae.
I think firing Rose is unreasonable, but if Rose doesn't make any adjustments we are in for continued disappointment in the coming years. Personally, I would hope that Tom Holmoe would have a long discussion with Rose about the state of the program and what kind of vision Rose has for the program going forward. Is Rose dreaming big anymore, or is he just satisfied with the status quo?