All the Verbal Fellatio for Forbes...

R

rodthompson

Well-Known Member
I don't get it at all. There are all these people who acting like he's "the man" for the job. Did anyone really know who he was prior to two weeks ago? My guess is not many. There is a reason that the guy is 45 years old, been coaching for over 20 years, and never even been mentioned for another head coaching position. That makes me very weary. How can he possibly be the "slam dunk" candidate that so many people want. This hire could really sink the program in to depths not even imaginable.

It's not the time to take a gamble. We need a guy who has at least some track record of proving he can produce a consistent winner.
 
rodthompson said:
I don't get it at all. There are all these people who acting like he's "the man" for the job. Did anyone really know who he was prior to two weeks ago? My guess is not many. There is a reason that the guy is 45 years old, been coaching for over 20 years, and never even been mentioned for another head coaching position. That makes me very weary. How can he possibly be the "slam dunk" candidate that so many people want. This hire could really sink the program in to depths not even imaginable.

It's not the time to take a gamble. We need a guy who has at least some track record of proving he can produce a consistent winner.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I did. When Lick broke the all-time losses in a season record at Iowa I email Gary Barta and told him to get rid of Lickliter and hire Steve Forbes. True effin' story bro.

I had actually been scouting new coaches well before that, and Forbes was my favorite. I was also very interested in MSU assistant Mark Montogomery, but by the sounds of Izzo's statements related to the Lickliter firing that Izzo would encourage Montgomery to stay away from Iowa.

p.s. Why do think it was a gamble? Was it a gamble for Butler to replace Lickliter with Stevens? Look at them now, off to the Elite Eight. I think Steve Forbes is far from a gamble.
 
He's proven over time that he can be a winner. Look at what has happened at the programs that he's been to. Texas A&M had nothing until he and Gillespie came in and brought top notch players. Tennessee's success went up dramatically after he joined the staff and helped bring in top notch players. The guy brought a top 10 ranked class to La Tech in 2003.
 
So you are giving Forbes all the credit for other coaches' success?

That is not a accurate effin' assessment to me, bro?
 
I can see that point. Personally, I think going after another mid major coach is just as big of a gamble. Actually a bigger gamble if they are just going to implement the same system without realizing what it takes to win at Iowa.

Forbes' biggest asset would be his recruiting. Some of us are more interested in getting talent here than x's and o's. Don't get me wrong, you need to be able to coach as well. But recruiting is the name of the game.

It's not like Forbes was everyones #1 choice from the jump. I think most people are looking at the realistic candidates left in the pool. And Forbes is a guy that stands out to us more than the same old mid major type that we've already seen.

Trust me, there would be few tears for Forbes if we were able to land a Drew or Dixon. That just doesn't seem likely anymore.
 
Steve Forbes was being mentioned as a possible future Iowa coach as far back as January. As far as being a gamble he stacks up very well compared to most of the jokes on Barta's list. Marshall, Gregory, ect. These guys sure haven't set the world on fire either.
 
rodthompson said:
So you are giving Forbes all the credit for other coaches' success?

That is not a accurate effin' assessment to me, bro?
Click to expand...

No, I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that he's be a big part of a couple of very successful programs that last 10 years or so. Not sure on the timeline, just a guess. He has proven everywhere he has been that he can bring in top players and help turn around programs.

The biggest thing that Iowa needs right now is more talent. Would you say that is an accurate assessment?

He has proven to be able to bring in top talent at every stop. Would you say that is an accurate assessment?
 
rodthompson said:
So you are giving Forbes all the credit for other coaches' success?

That is not a accurate effin' assessment to me, bro?
Click to expand...
Someone has to recruit to the players. A player doesn't always come to a school for the HC. The assistants spend a lot of time with the recruits and Forbes is a great recruiter.
 
burky247 said:
I can see that point. Personally, I think going after another mid major coach is just as big of a gamble. Actually a bigger gamble if they are just going to implement the same system without realizing what it takes to win at Iowa.

Forbes' biggest asset would be his recruiting. Some of us are more interested in getting talent here than x's and o's. Don't get me wrong, you need to be able to coach as well. But recruiting is the name of the game.

It's not like Forbes was everyones #1 choice from the jump. I think most people are looking at the realistic candidates left in the pool. And Forbes is a guy that stands out to us more than the same old mid major type that we've already seen.

Trust me, there would be few tears for Forbes if we were able to land a Drew or Dixon. That just doesn't seem likely anymore.
Click to expand...



If you are not able to be an x's and o' s guy all the talent in the world won't matter.
 
HawkPrdatr40 said:
If you are not able to be an x's and o' s guy all the talent in the world won't matter.
Click to expand...

That's why you get assistants who specialize in that aspect. This is the growing trend in college basketball.

Having said that, I don't think it's fair to assume that Forbes knows nothing about the strategy of the sport. He's learned from some of the best and I think he would do a great job at teaching the game.
 
You don't think those two have been successful?

HawkeyeMike23 said:
Paul Hewitt and Rick Barnes agree.
Click to expand...

Good grief, each guy has been in the Final Four (Hewitt to the title game). Barnes has had Texas in the NCAA tourney each of his 12 years, with 3 conference titles and a Final Four, along with two other Sweet 16 and two Elite Eight appearances. He might not be a great X and O guy, but to say he hasn't been successful (or Hewitt) is silly.
 
There is something to be said about someone being the "face man" for the program. I don't give a rat's *** what you say. Being able to go on television and look that part is a big deal. Forbes is not that guy. It shouldn't matter, but it does. Unless he's got a great sense of humor like Majerus or something like that.
 
Again rod, who is your guy? Are you really disqualifiying someone because of a physical appearance? What are your impressions of Chris Doyle?

What a joke.
 
Id rather have a guy with no hair and recruits his *** off then someone who spends more time with their hair(Alford/Lick) and doesnt recruit at all.
 
Good thinking. If you don't know anything about Forbes then why are you so hell bent on knocking him ? I see you never did answer the question about who you want for the job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top