No big news, but I thought I'd pass along that driving home this afternoon from work, I caught an interview with Jay Bilas on Gary Parish's radio show here in Memphis. Parish asked Bilas, "As someone who knows the game really well, who are some coaches you think can really coach their asses off?" Bilas said there were the obvious big-name guys--Izzo, K, Self, etc. Then he added that there are some younger guys he thinks are tremendous coaches. Turgeon was the only guy he mentioned by name, and he said he expects Turge will accomplish a lot at Maryland.

How much contact, if any, is Gary permitted to have with Faust, Gibbs, and Breunig? Had he simply retired, I'm guessing he would be permitted to talk to them, right? It's my understanding JT does essentially the same thing for Georgetown. Of course, that doesn't mean it's allowed. But since Gary has an official capacity with the university as "Assistant AD," does that prevent him from contact with recruits? Even if he can't talk to them directly, he could offer a not-so-subtle public endorsement of Turgeon aimed at instilling confidence in the recruits.

I know it's not uncommon for kids to ask out of LOI when there's a coaching change, but this situation seems a bit unique in that the coaching change is coming later than usual. How long do Faust, Breunig, and Gibbs have to decide?

I'm somewhere in between the "it's no big deal; we weren't going to be too good next year anyway" crowd and "this is an embarrassment to MD; we're going to be awful for years" crowd. It's true that expectations were/are tempered for next season--even if Gary had been the coach--but all three guys were expected to make immediate contributions, particularly Faust. Part of the optimism for the '12-'13 season was/is tied to this year's recruits, so if we were to lose them, the impact isn't just for next year. There's also no way to know how losing them for good would impact the thinking of Justin Anderson or potential Terps like Cleare.

Throughout this season it became painfully obvious the Terps had some major deficiencies they weren't going to overcome. The most glaring, I think, were the following (in no particular order):

- lack of a consistent 3-point threat

- poor FT shooting

- weak rebounding

- untimely TO's and bad decisions in crucial situations

- inconsistent defense, particularly on the perimeter

Of those five, I think rebounding is the least likely to improve next year. I like Breunig's potential, but he doesn't strike me as a guy to bang on the boards, and the Terps' biggest question mark in general is at the 4.

Which area do you think is most important for the Terps to improve in order to be back to NCAAT level next year?

I read today that since Miami, VT, and BC entered the ACC, the Terps are 10-19 against the three of them. That's depressing. Being that they were middle-of-the-road/bottom feeders in the Big East and haven't been markedly better in the ACC, I find that rather depressing. It's one thing if the Terps aren't always beating Duke and UNC, but getting owned by the likes of the aforementioned teams is troubling. With the Miami game on the road this year, the Terps could wind up 0-5 against that trio.

In Jeff Barker's quick look ahead to next season--Ben G. linked it in the most recent post--he notes the trio of Greivis, Eric, and Landon scored 43.2 of the Terps' 79.6 PPG. Obviously you don't have to be a genius to see that's over half the team's points. So we should all worry the Terps will struggle to put points on the board, right? Well, not necessarily.

Here's a look at PPG, FG%, and end-of-season result dating back to the '93-'94 season:

1993-1994 - 80.0; 45.7& - Sweet 16
1994-1995 – 86.6; 49.8% - Sweet 16
1995-1996 – 81.3; 44.9% - 1st round
1996-1997 – 75.2; 46.5% - 1st round
1997-1998 – 78.8; 46.1% - Sweet 16
1998-1999 – 84.5; 49.5% - Sweet 16
1999-2000 – 76.7; 46.5% - 2nd round
2000-2001 – 85.2; 48.4% - Final Four
2001-2002 – 85.0; 48.2% - National Champs
2002-2003 – 79.7; 46.4% - Sweet 16
2003-2004 – 77.4; 44.1% - 2nd round
2004-2005 – 81.9; 43.9% - NIT
2005-2006 – 78.3; 44.8% - NIT
2006-2007 – 79.0; 47.8% - 2nd round
2007-2008 – 73.0; 46.2% - NIT
2008-2009 – 71.8; 42.4% - 2nd round
2009-2010 – 79.7; 47.1% - 2nd round

As you'd expect, the FF and Championship teams were offensive juggernauts as was the Steve Francis-led team and the Joe Smith-led squads ('94-'95 was the best season statistically of any during this 17-year stretch).

But what really caught my eye was that with the exception of the '07 and '09 teams--both teams part of the GV, EH, LM era--the Terps haven't averaged under 75.2 PPG in 17 years. Just to dig even a little more, I checked the stats for the probation-era teams.  They all averaged at least 80 PPG!

Why has the scoring fluctuated so little, even during lean years or ones devoid of pure shooters? I suspect it's a combination of the Terps' uptempo style, the ability of the flex to get good looks to score, and the simple fact that whenever any basketball team loses scorers, returning players take more shots.

I think the bigger concerns for offense next year are who, if anyone, will be the guy to create and make his own shot when it's crunch time and will whoever starts at PG run the flex smoothly.

Did anyone catch Gary's radio show tonight? Given the warm things he had to say about the seniors, the team, and the season on Twitter, I thought the show might bring a sort of closure to the season after yesterday.

I meant to listen to it online, but didn't get the chance. Is there a site where you can listen to it after it has aired? I figured the main MD athletics site would have it, but I couldn't find anything there other than simply an ad for the show.