Cut Fran and staff some slack

We are all positive and hopeful. But it is not so bad that this team cannot improve on last year. I hope you feel the coaching staff is stronger. The team lost a number of non conf games that I think they could win this upcoming year. We blew a Michigan game and lost a couple other B10's close. Fuller is the only loss, and he picked up more in the conf season.

To me, it not out of the question the team approaches .500 overall and adds 3 more B10 wins. Even if not in wins, the games will be closer.

One step at a time. Its about improvement and momentum.
 
BlackGold57 said:
We are all positive and hopeful. But it is not so bad that this team cannot improve on last year. I hope you feel the coaching staff is stronger. The team lost a number of non conf games that I think they could win this upcoming year. We blew a Michigan game and lost a couple other B10's close. Fuller is the only loss, and he picked up more in the conf season.

To me, it not out of the question the team approaches .500 overall and adds 3 more B10 wins. Even if not in wins, the games will be closer.

One step at a time. Its about improvement and momentum.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how it is possible to think that this team is going to improve in the W-L department. The best (arguably) player has left. Fuller was definitely the most consistent and looked the most comfortable against the level of competition last year. The freshman aren't just going to come in and tear it up like people think. Lick was a bad coach, but the players aren't very good either. If Iowa equals their win total from last year I think that would be sufficient this year...
 
Someone said earlier in this thread about just wanting Iowa to be competitive with B10 teams this year and I'd have to agree with this. At least for me, if Iowa is playing B10 teams tough with an uptempo style I'm interested in watching the whole game. Last year I'd turn on a game and just hope we kept it close. I think Fran will do a good job. The guy won't settle for losing, we just need to give him time and support.
 
The other thing to consider beyond W's on the court is if the fans come back and can buy into what Fran is creating. Reviving the energy around the program and Carver is just as if not more important to the short term health than making the NCAA or NIT. Granted, much of that goes hand in hand in producing wins... but one can already argue that Fran is already creating a culture of success through his actions since his hire.

Losing out on Utoff- c'mon... he's not the difference maker yet. Does it sting? Sure does! It just shows that Fran has a long ways to go to improve this team. For now, it seems that we need to find kids that want to be here and can buy into what we're trying to do. Maybe it's a home grown stud, or an overlooked and driven diamond in the rough.
 
PlanoHawk said:
The other thing to consider beyond W's on the court is if the fans come back and can buy into what Fran is creating. Reviving the energy around the program and Carver is just as if not more important to the short term health than making the NCAA or NIT. Granted, much of that goes hand in hand in producing wins... but one can already argue that Fran is already creating a culture of success through his actions since his hire.

Losing out on Utoff- c'mon... he's not the difference maker yet. Does it sting? Sure does! It just shows that Fran has a long ways to go to improve this team. For now, it seems that we need to find kids that want to be here and can buy into what we're trying to do. Maybe it's a home grown stud, or an overlooked and driven diamond in the rough.
Click to expand...

Please do argue this...I've seen alot of this type of statement with nothing to back it up...not sure was it Fuller leaving? Cougill flunking out? Bringing in a bunch of walk-ons? Getting out recruited by Bohannon on Uthoff (allegedly)? Or is simply saying, "were going to play an uptempo style" in his introductory presser sufficient to building the culture of success you've noted?
 
creating success... is that what you're hoping for me to argue? probably a bit of a reach at this point- fair enough, but i'm not saying he's successful yet- just that he's working extremely hard to build success into the program- and people generally seem to be excited. boring and shallow? you're probably right- oh well... it's a message board.

fuller i'll give you, but cougill is what he is- questionable at best about fitting into fran's "scheme". the walk-on's want to earn their change to play what's wrong with that- and if Utoff doesn't want to play for iowa, then i'm not going to cry in a corner.
 
A couple of players can make a big difference. Fran has to sell the program and his style of play to a couple of guys a year, which is not all that easy. If he can do that and then coach them as we all hope he can, there is light ahead. I UNI and Butler proved that you do not need all 5* recruits to field a good team. I just hope we can be patient enough to wait for a 5 year plan and not a 2 year plan.
 
muskienks said:
A couple of players can make a big difference. Fran has to sell the program and his style of play to a couple of guys a year, which is not all that easy. If he can do that and then coach them as we all hope he can, there is light ahead. I UNI and Butler proved that you do not need all 5* recruits to field a good team. I just hope we can be patient enough to wait for a 5 year plan and not a 2 year plan.
Click to expand...


.... waiting for CAARHAWK to jump on this, 5 year plan
 
DFaceHawkeye said:
.... waiting for CAARHAWK to jump on this, 5 year plan
Click to expand...

I'll take it. There is no such thing as a 5 year plan in CBB anymore. If you aren't winning in year 1 or 2 of a new regime you might as well start over. My theory is if you become irrelevant for 3 years in a row, you aren't coming back. No one is going to want to come and play, the fans aren't going to come and watch. I don't believe that after the Lick era ppl will just gladly give the new coach another 5 years to (possibly) run the program down to the point of no return. At the bear minimum you need to beat some ranked teams or make some noise in the conference tourney.
 
No one knows for sure if McCaffery is the answer. We do know that Lickliter wasn't. McCaffery has come in and done and said the right things to inspire a mostly apathetic fan base. He lost the oxycontin-kid (I forgot his name) and Brust, who were probably thankful that Lickliter was fired so they could get a second chance. It was clear Brust wanted to play a style of basketball that is more like what Lickliter was playing, but at a way more successful level. It's also clear that Utoff is similarly inclined to play that style - no sense in going to a school that doesn't fit how you want to play basketball. It's completely subjective at this point, but I sense a more positive vibe coming from the basketball program. Also, because they'll be playing a different style of basketball from the last 2 years, it's difficult to compare the team to last year. I think guys like Gatens and May will flourish in this style as opposed to the slow down style under Lickliter. May showed glimpses of it last year, but you could tell it wasn't allowed under Lickliter. Let a few games get played, then compare. McCaffery will need to convince hs seniors and juniors to get in on the ground floor of something good. It's happened before, even at Iowa - Lute taking over for Dick Schultz - it can happen again. It's easy to be cynical at this point, I'd urge holding off on the cynicism until we see what we got this year.
 
Funny how realistic viewpoints end up being framed as cynicism. I have said the same thing over and over, successful coaches rebuild teams in the first couple of years. That is what the actual evidence shows.

Anybody that is arguing for the slow and steady method, show me someone who has done that in the last decade. Or at least come up with a plan that has been shown to be effective rather than optimism that is not at all based in fact.
 
JonDMiller said:
He had better have a few more chapters in his playbook, because that won;t be happening in the Big Ten. The collection of coaches right now is as good as it has ever been.
Click to expand...

Don't take my word for it, take Painter's when asked about being successful with Sienna's style of play he responded that you can play that way when you have better players than the rest of your league.

When you have lesser players you have to slow things down to keep it close. FM even said this to extent when he said if you play 52-50 games you better score 52 a lot. Translation, people will be ready to watch games where you lose more readily if the score is higher.
 
clicheusername3 said:
I'll take it. There is no such thing as a 5 year plan in CBB anymore. If you aren't winning in year 1 or 2 of a new regime you might as well start over. My theory is if you become irrelevant for 3 years in a row, you aren't coming back. No one is going to want to come and play, the fans aren't going to come and watch. I don't believe that after the Lick era ppl will just gladly give the new coach another 5 years to (possibly) run the program down to the point of no return. At the bear minimum you need to beat some ranked teams or make some noise in the conference tourney.
Click to expand...

If we run with your logic and say that if you're irrelevant for 3 years, you aren't coming back, then why not go ahead and give McCaffery 5 years? We've already been irrelevant for 3 straight years under Lickliter. So "we aren't coming back" anyway. It can't get any worse (if we were to use your logic).
 
CAARHawk said:
Funny how realistic viewpoints end up being framed as cynicism. I have said the same thing over and over, successful coaches rebuild teams in the first couple of years. That is what the actual evidence shows.

Anybody that is arguing for the slow and steady method, show me someone who has done that in the last decade. Or at least come up with a plan that has been shown to be effective rather than optimism that is not at all based in fact.
Click to expand...

I dont think anyone is arguing against HOPING what you are writing, happens.

The difference is you call it realistic....some others, me included, say you are being highly optimistic. Just as long as you don';t come back screaming 'OFF WITH HIS HEAD' when they don't reach the dance in the first two years. If you do, that will be on your expectations, which again, I believe as being unrealistic, and unfair for the head coach.
 
Fair enough. I would hope everyone feels the same way. Actually, I have readjusted my thinking so that I think a good NIT run in year two might be best. Might be best way to get the fans back and excited in Carver. Also, success breeds success.

If he doesn't have the team in tournament play by year two. He better have the pieces put together for year three. Because when you go into year three you even lose Horn and Montgomery as the two outliers that didn't build their programs in two years. Is FM so special that he can be the first contemporary coach to accomplish this task, particularly when his own record shows success by year three?
 
Last edited:
tm3308 said:
If we run with your logic and say that if you're irrelevant for 3 years, you aren't coming back, then why not go ahead and give McCaffery 5 years? We've already been irrelevant for 3 straight years under Lickliter. So "we aren't coming back" anyway. It can't get any worse (if we were to use your logic).
Click to expand...

Actually you just read the words you felt like reading, because I said that the timing starts over when a new regime comes in.
 
Lets face it, Fran needs a bit of luck also. Basabe might be the sleeper that we need...or Marble...to kick start this program. As has been said, Housbrouk was a sleeper that got it going at Siena. I look at Anthony Davis(2011,6'10 forward out of a small school in Chicago)...this kid was literally not in the top 500 of his class only 6 months ago. Gibbons now has him in his top 5. We need Fran to get in early on a kid like this,and have him blossom...a lightning strike. Longshot? Yea, but it could also come in the form of a Iowa kid who decides to stay close to family,like a Paige or Jok.

Fran has a chance because Iowa/Omaha has some top prep talent in 2012 and 2013.
It will all come down to getting over the hump with some early talent,which is why I agree that getting at least one top recruit like Coleman in the fold by Nov 15 is huge psychologically for this fan base...throw Iowa fans a bone, a sign that talent is in the pipeline,and they will support a struggling team better this year. Then build on that.
I agree that NIT by 2012 is important. Then tourny appearances of some flavor in 2013 and beyond...keep the upward momentum going,however incremental thru the first 3-4 years and everything will fall in place.
 
A guy like Coleman, a JUCO or Foreign big man who is more seasoned than a project high school forward, (which right now is Iowa's best shot) and an athletic 2/3 type player.

Really shouldn't be too much to ask for. Important thing is to spend the time and effort in the right places. The ready for prime time forward is the key. Need to pull out all stops there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top