Because he’s been having some trouble with it
Ah, the Thursday of the First Round of the NCAA Tournament. It’s the most wonderful weekend of the year for college basketball fans. And that means it’s been a dreadful weekend for Notre Dame men’s basketball fans — all twelve of them — for seven (!) of the last eight (!!) years.
It’s frankly unacceptable for the only school whose football and men’s basketball programs both rank in the top-ten winningest programs of all time in each sport. Men’s hoops used to matter at Notre Dame, and now they don’t.
Photo by Joseph Weiser/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
Shrewsberry didn’t inherit a good situation, to be sure. And year 1 was rough but still showed plenty of promise? But year 2? Zero upward trajectory, zero cause for belief.
It’s been reported and discussed how Shrewsberry made a bad decision to focus his team’s off-season development almost exclusively on offense before last season, which led to a regression defensively. But the funny thing is that it might have been the plan all along, because — as I recall — it was made known before Shrewsberry’s first year that the team was focusing almost exclusively on defense. That made sense for a program that was wet toilet paper on defense at the end of Mike Brey’s time, but the impressions made on college kids don’t carry over across years if not reinforced at least slightly. And what did they even work on offensive when this year’s plan of attack against decent defenses was the same as year 1: “Markus Burton save us.”
In short, it all bodes negatively. So, to help Shrewsberry out, I figured it doesn’t hurt (because, relatively speaking, nothing can hurt a borderline cadaver of a program at this point) to solicit the fans for how they think the program should be run to change things up.
And that’s where you, Dear Reader, come in. So, check out the synopses below and vote, or make your own suggestions in the comments.
*AUTHOR’S DISCLAIMER: Shrewsberry has a bajillion times more basketball knowledge in his pinky toe than I have in my entire body. I know this, so don’t think I’m attacking the man as unqualified. I’m just taking him to task because he’s very well compensated in his job but he’s clearly not getting results worth the paycheck.
Option 1: Defense Driven
You know, the way it looked in year 1. Yeah, more on offense would be nice, but beggars can’t be choosers.
Option 2: Focus Exclusively on Offense
You know, like Mike Brey was doing it by the end. Yeah, that product was stale and had a really bad track record at the end, but at least it got them to one NCAA Tournament in a six-year span.
Option 3: Transfer Portal or Bust
There’s no time anymore for developing multiple high school recruits in college basketball. Weight training and studying the game take too long, and results are demanded immediately (or at least by year 3). You need guys who have been there, done that, taken the lumps and already developed into polished players. You can scream “academics,” but there aren’t that few academically qualified transfers who can play decent basketball and put up with South Bend weather for one year.
Option 4: Offensive/Defensive Line Driven Program
Sort of related to the previous option, but a step further. Take a page out of Marcus Freeman’s book — literally. I don’t mean to just build the program around strength training to bully every team. I mean Shrewsberry should literally recruit exclusively high school football linemen — or, even better, take them from the dregs of the football program — and throw them on a basketball court. It would at least be entertaining if not effective.
Option 5: Draft the Women’s Program’s Players
Niele Ivey’s squads clearly play better together as a team than Shrewsberry’s.
So, what are you voting for?