[81alum]

To 81alum's post on changing offensive schemes, I don't follow other programs closely enough, but is this a common theme with other coaches, to change the strategy - Princeton, triangle, flow, etc. multiple times within a few years? Obviously, coaching staffs should tweak things based on the strengths and weaknesses of their current roster, but it seems like changing the general strategy so greatly is causing more consternation than it should?

I've heard commentators praise Tara for being so flexible and willing to change--to change with the times and to change based on her players.

When I first started watching seriously in the Appel / Nneka / Chiney days Tara used the Triangle offense.  It was an old offense that had gone out of style, which meant not too many of our opponents had recently faced it.  It was an offense very well suited to getting the ball to your post down low on the block, and we used it effectively to have Appel and then Nneka and then Chiney dominate inside.

After Chiney graduated, we did not have anyone who was going to be a dominant post like the prior three.  Tara installed a motion offense designed to feature our two young guards, Amber Orrange and Lili Thompson.  Our post players (Kaylee Johnson, for example) did lots of screening to help get Lili and Amber open.  Bonnie Samuelson became a "stretch four" and canned trey after trey from the four position, which also helped to open up lanes for the guards.

I don't remember the exact year we switched away from the motion offense to the Princeton (which is actually a kind of motion offense,) but it was after Lili left.  The Princeton requires that all 5 players be able to shuffle through various interchangeable positions--it is better suited to a team with 5 good players than a team with 2 stars, for example, and it can't really be implemented with a slow/immobile post.  Tara went to learn the Princeton from friendly rival coaches up at Davis, I remember.  The Princeton was the perfect offense for us...until it wasn't.  During the years it was implemented our biggest problem was teams that switched to zone.  As a motion offense, it relies on running the other team ragged and getting defenders hung up chasing their marks all over the place.  Many teams responded by going zone and just letting us run.  The key to making the Princeton work--and we had our worst season in 20 years I think during its first year--is getting all players to get that offense into muscle memory, so they never have to think about their cuts  but just do them.  But we also had to develop a "zone offense" mid year when so many opponents began to frustrate the Princeton with the zone. And of course Oregon played zone all the time, and made life difficult for us.

Now we have left most of the Princeton behind and implemented something called the "flow" offense, which can be run with either 4 out and 1 in or 3 out and 2 in.  The players know what starting formation to get into when they get to the half court, and then the offense is supposed to flow from one play to another without stoppage until someone gets open.  Unfortunately, I see a lot of stoppage with someone on the perimeter with the ball not knowing what comes next.  Maybe the Flow needs muscle memory too, and they might not have it yet.  As I piece it together from chalk talks, the Flow was implemented so we could use our freshmen this year--necessary in the wake of the loss of the 3 senior guards.  It was simple enough that they could pick it up and be integrated into the offense much sooner than if they had to learn the Princeton.

[81alum]

To 81alum's post on changing offensive schemes, I don't follow other programs closely enough, but is this a common theme with other coaches, to change the strategy - Princeton, triangle, flow, etc. multiple times within a few years? Obviously, coaching staffs should tweak things based on the strengths and weaknesses of their current roster, but it seems like changing the general strategy so greatly is causing more consternation than it should?

I've heard commentators praise Tara for being so flexible and willing to change--to change with the times and to change based on her players.

When I first started watching seriously in the Appel / Nneka / Chiney days Tara used the Triangle offense.  It was an old offense that had gone out of style, which meant not too many of our opponents had recently faced it.  It was an offense very well suited to getting the ball to your post down low on the block, and we used it effectively to have Appel and then Nneka and then Chiney dominate inside.

After Chiney graduated, we did not have anyone who was going to be a dominant post like the prior three.  Tara installed a motion offense designed to feature our two young guards, Amber Orrange and Lili Thompson.  Our post players (Kaylee Johnson, for example) did lots of screening to help get Lili and Amber open.  Bonnie Samuelson became a "stretch four" and canned trey after trey from the four position, which also helped to open up lanes for the guards.

I don't remember the exact year we switched away from the motion offense to the Princeton (which is actually a kind of motion offense,) but it was after Lili left.  The Princeton requires that all 5 players be able to shuffle through various interchangeable positions--it is better suited to a team with 5 good players than a team with 2 stars, for example, and it can't really be implemented with a slow/immobile post.  Tara went to learn the Princeton from friendly rival coaches up at Davis, I remember.  The Princeton was the perfect offense for us...until it wasn't.  During the years it was implemented our biggest problem was teams that switched to zone.  As a motion offense, it relies on running the other team ragged and getting defenders hung up chasing their marks all over the place.  Many teams responded by going zone and just letting us run.  The key to making the Princeton work--and we had our worst season in 20 years I think during its first year--is getting all players to get that offense into muscle memory, so they never have to think about their cuts  but just do them.  But we also had to develop a "zone offense" mid year when so many opponents began to frustrate the Princeton with the zone. And of course Oregon played zone all the time, and made life difficult for us.

Now we have left most of the Princeton behind and implemented something called the "flow" offense, which can be run with either 4 out and 1 in or 3 out and 2 in.  The players know what starting formation to get into when they get to the half court, and then the offense is supposed to flow from one play to another without stoppage until someone gets open.  Unfortunately, I see a lot of stoppage with someone on the perimeter with the ball not knowing what comes next.  Maybe the Flow needs muscle memory too, and they might not have it yet.  As I piece it together from chalk talks, the Flow was implemented so we could use our freshmen this year--necessary in the wake of the loss of the 3 senior guards.  It was simple enough that they could pick it up and be integrated into the offense much sooner than if they had to learn the Princeton.