I believe the issue is the exact opposite.
1. Recruiting - Tad has failed to land 4* star recruits, particularly big's and does not seem to even try to get 5* to CU. He has a roster full of SG's/SF's around 6'4". He has replaced graduating and departing big men with more 6'4" players. So, there is no offense rebounding and there is no excuse not to have solid shooting when you recruited a team full of shooting guards.
2. Offensive strategy. Tad runs a high post offense, with motion on the perimeter. There is one pick set for the shooter and the C will pop up and set screens and pass cross court before setting another screen up top before going back down to the block. It is a very slow, methodological offense. The offense, I believe, is suppose to tire the defense down over a course of a game by running around, while affording opportunities for long range jumpers or penetration off screens. That style does not allow for a lot of assists, does not allow athletic players to get up and down the court (best utilizing their skills) and due to so much ball movement, leads to a lot of turnovers. Tad's teams have never had a lot of assists since he arrived on campus, minus two seasons when the mayor put his stamp on the offense. His offense does not allow for blowouts and most games are close. The problem there is allowing inferior teams to hang around causes problems.
I have said for years that Tad needs to bring in a recruiting assistant that can actually bring in some 4* + talent and that Tad needs to open things up a little. When he has taken his hands off the offense in small stretches and the team is able to run, his teams extend leads, score often and outrun teams. I would love to see him open it up for more than a possession or two.
1) I'm fine with fair critiques of Tad's staff's recruiting over the years, especially considering our latest haul. But your statements are a bit misguided imo. I agree that I wish he went after more 5 stars every now and then, but there may be more moral reasons for him not doing that, although he did go after Dorsey. He has gone after and landed 4 stars. His staff may have struggled to sign high-level bigs as of late, but even Duke went through a stretch where targeted bigs seemed to ignore them. It happens, although it is disappointing.
2) I admit to having only watched really 1.5 games this year, so I can't comment too much on offensive strategy this year. However, I think it's fair that Tad will try to adjust offense to his team, like every coach will. Scott got the ball quite a bit when he was here, and even Wes too, if he had position. It wasn't always a high post offense, although, yes, there are some high post screens. I do wish we would have perimeter shooters cut more, but it makes sense to have shooters spot up behind the arc. I think our spacing in general seems good this year, but again, limited sample size.
Tad did bring in some good assistants for recruiting. If you're looking for a high-octane, running offense, you may be waiting for awhile. Tad is not Westhead. I also wouldn't say that Tad taking his hands off the offense opens things up. It's not like they're running a set play every time down, and then all of the sudden, Tad decides not to call in a play and the team relaxes and opens up. High paced/wide-open offenses still have concepts that are used by the players - it's not just jungle ball where the players are in complete control.
It's been discussed before on Allbuffs that Boyle's high level strategy as a coach is to recruit the best talent, allow that talent mostly free-range on offense to display their skills and instead focus on maximizing defensive effort. I read that as "Boyle doesn't spend time coaching set plays on offense". this is backed up by my un-expert observations following CU over the last four years. Compared to Wisconsin and Virginia Tech, I don't see Colorado running as many "coach designed plays" on offense, but I am not an expert and I could be incorrect in my observations (i.e. I don't claim the expertise to 100% identify when players are running a 'set play' vs just using their abilities to get open and get a shot, but I think I'm probably right most of the time).
The implication of this is that we don't create opportunities to get shooters open and get the ball to those guys. We're only scoring 73.7 PPG, putting us tied for 209th in the NCAA (side note: checkout whose #1!).
I know there are some on this board that delve into "advanced stats" with far greater understanding of them than I have, but for dumb fans like me, looking at assisted baskets is the easiest way to tell if a team is moving the ball to the open guy. Four total team assists last night was egregious, but I just checked ESPN and we're 310th in the NCAA in assists per game on the season (out of 351 schools). Last season we were tied at 135th in this stat and 144th the year before that. It would appear that for at least three years now, something isn't working.
So, someone with more experience analyzing the game than me, is "lack of scripted plays on offense" a root cause of our issues? Or, acknowledging that I am an idot, am I completely missing the obvious problems?
I'm by no means an expert either, but I don't think any team runs coach-designed plays all the time, or even the vast majority of the time. There are concepts to an offense and what players should do in certain situations, and occasionally, sure a play or set will be called out. I wouldn't go so far to say Tad doesn't spend time coaching offense... ...just because the offense isn't as efficient as we want, doesn't mean it's not coached. Our players still do move on offense to positions based on where the ball is moving - there's definitely some coaching there. So I would agree, most of the time, the players are working withing what they practiced and free-lancing within what they've been coached. I think that's fine... ...without having been inside one major collegiate practice, I imagine that's the norm. Basketball isn't football, except for specific drawn-up plays, where players execute specific motions every play. (I know you know this - not trying to a smart ass....)
Personally, I think our problems on offense usually come down to not shooting well. Boring and a no-**** type of answer...again, I wish we would crash inside a little more, but whatever....I think next year, as our players mature a bit, the offense will seem better.
