College coaches cannot require more than 20 hours per week of basketball time when school is in session. That includes practice as well as mandatory meetings, video review, and workouts. Each game counts as three of the 20 hours. Most players will voluntarily train or practice specific skills in addition to the mandatory activities, but that's only a few more hours.

NBA players are full time employees. Because they work full-time schedules, the amount of work and detail that goes into game preparation, training methods, adjusting to self-scouting, and various other aspects of running a basketball team is sunstantially greater and therefore is more sophisticated.

Niele Ivey might not be able to implement half of what the Grizzlies do. Maybe it will be more like 10 percent of their program. Nevertheless, she saw the pros doing things that college coaches simply don't have time to implement. Ivey definiitely will return with a few new coaching tactics she can implement.

Sorry but I don't put much into her being an assistant for a short time in the NBA. It looks great on the resume and I'm sure she learned some things but it's a different game with different rules. I don't think there are many strategies or offense/defense that translate. Sorry, just don't. Felt that way when she took the job and still do. It was great pub and a resume stuffer. She can sell it to recruits.

a marketing tool. Happens all of the time in the CFB world. Some exposure to the NBA could be very attractive to ladies who aspire to play in the WNBA, which probably includes most of them. It could be intriguing to some, and certainly cannot hurt.

Half think she learned nothing in Memphis and have think she learned too much.

I guess I'll be the one to take Niele at her word.

She knows Muffet's coaching methods and those have been very effective in wcbb. However, it would be almost impossible not to pick up some useful knowledge from a year in the sport's top league.

between Niele learning nothing or learning too much, but I wholly endorse that we should “take Niele at her word.” I agree.

Surely, the NBA is a different game than women’s college basketball. Yet, Niele is so adamant when she says, “It was the best year I ever had—the level of learning and expertise I was exposed to on a daily basis.”

I don’t think she’s lying, nor do I think she is stupid (not bright enough to know most of what she learned is not translatable[too many negatives?]). And I don’t think she’s saying it just for great publicity to sell it to the recruits. That also seems a bit disingenuous given how important she says Muffet’s lesson of integrity is to her.

After all, she was the one who went through the experience. We have to give some credence to that. Maybe there was more to the experience than we realize.

women's game forward. The NBA experience may well have given her some ideas that are applicable to how the women's game might evolve. In addition, I have noticed that recruits seem to follow the NBA with interest.

Seriously, what did you expect her to say about the experience? Not saying she got nothing out of it but i believe it's minimal at best. Go back and watch her interviews and listen to her struggle to answer questions about what she learned.

There was statements made by players that they won games when she scouted opponent. Even that would be different from the rules on defense in particular. She did a great job here with that for Coach to begin with.

Was it exciting and ground breaking? Yes. Still, much to do about nothing. My opinion and will never change. Game is totally different, top to bottom.

...of what Niele picked up from Taylor Jenkins that sounded like she wanted to translate into ND (some plays, sets, etc.). That's great and I completely take her at face value.

As for her gushing about it being a great year, well, it was her first year from out under the wing in a decade. Glad it worked out so well for that one year. But some aspects of it are so very different that it might not even translate.

NBA aside, what I'm interested in is how she grows into the Head Coaching roles. I'm sure her mentor will advise her on everything from outside commitments to dealing with the administration. However for on-court matters, me thinks having someone that has been there, done that will come in handy. Plus it offers another perspective.....Stay tuned.

There is much more athleticism now and individual skills are more and more imitating those seen in the men’s game. It’s at least a plus for her to have been exposed to the level of skills at the highest competitive levels and perhaps to have gained some insights into how they’re developed.

..and I think our takes even overlap: the indivdiual athletic ability is growing in the women's game as well and a lot of the sets that she picked up are probably predicated on taking advantage of that. Heck, in the NBA, it's almost a given that someone should beat a defender.

Not like that quite yet in the WNBA or college game, but I look forward to seeing what comes out of it.

Since she was obviously a female perspective in an almost all male NBA world, she might see that diversity as a good thing. I know Muffet was an advocate for a female staff, but more because women weren't getting jobs in the male side of basketball (and Muffet did have men on her staff in the past)

Again, I would be happy with the status quo, but that also assumes the staff wants to remain and work under a new coach. Decisions have to be made by all parties.

has always been having Ruth Riley return to ND in a coaching role. Who better than her to coach post players? I know, pipe dream