Gatens is not God

Billso said:
The players aren't the bad guys, and Gatens is not God - the OP is ridiculous.

As I posted elsewhere, a wise manager will "ignore an incident, attack a pattern". If Gatens unhappiness is part of a larger pattern - and Barta knows MUCH more detail on prior defections than we ever will - then it could be the proverbial last straw.

And of course, said pattern isn't just about player defections.
Click to expand...

And I think we can all agree that if Matt was indeed, "God"...Iowa would've had a MUCH better season...

:D
 
Matt is a legacy first and foremost. He is a team guy, I really believe that. He is sick of losing and playing Jr. High basketball. I applaud him for standing up for IOWA BASKETBALL, it is and should be more then what it currently is. Matt has been playing totally uninspired ball all year, like he was in jail and forced to play. I for one say thanks Matt if you did stand up for what once was Iowa Basketball.
 
"...now being told what to do by 18-22 year old kids?"

Interesting statement. Would people rather the players (men by the way) and parents not express their concerns to the AD? They may have already expressed their concerns to Lackluster or were worried about repurcussions if they did? If a player tells a head coach they have concerns, what happens? The coach no longer has trust in that player, is that not correct. Lackluster expects loyalty, we all know that. If he doesn't get it, I imagine you are done. So a player has a few options:
1. He can transfer and say he is thinking about transferring because he no longer enjoys playing for the coach.
2. If he doesn't want to transfer because he loves the school, he has to stay quiet and try to play for the coach.
3. He can talk with the AD when invited.
Once one and two come out, that player is screwed as far as the coach coach/player relationship is concerned is it not? If it is a popular player, what then?

All players can just stay quiet and have another year like this year and lackluster and the AD can think that everything is hunky dory and when players aren't playing as hard as they can, the losing begins again, WHOSE fault is it? Who gets blamed? Suddenly dissension shows up on the team, when it has been there all the time for a long time. Then the AD fires Lackluster at the end of the year because of a dismal year.

Or the AD can be proactive, talk with players--listen to their concerns, take into account the possibility of their transferring (hardly threats...they either will or won't). Barta knows that if upperclassmen or freshmen transfer that lackluster will be starting all over AGAIN for the 4th year. Fans will go nuts; Lackluster will whine and make all kinds of excuses about why that is good that those players transferred and Iowa will have another 10-23 year. Barta knows this...so he has to head it off...period.

The program is not being run by 18-22 year old men, but by an idiot of a coach who has NO communication skills, recruiting skills, and no idea what to do to get Iowa back into the upper division of the Big 10 except a bunch of excuses.

Also, Lackluster supporters refuse to believe that the program can be in this bad of shape. They wanted to believe that all the players were on board and supportive and it turns out that key players are NOT supportive of him.

The best thing that the four Lackluster supporters left can do is go to his house and help him pack, pat him on the back, and tell him what a raw deal he got, while the rest of the Hawk Nation moves on...
 
NewMexHawk said:
"...now being told what to do by 18-22 year old kids?"

Interesting statement. Would people rather the players (men by the way) and parents not express their concerns to the AD? They may have already expressed their concerns to Lackluster or were worried about repurcussions if they did? If a player tells a head coach they have concerns, what happens? The coach no longer has trust in that player, is that not correct. Lackluster expects loyalty, we all know that. If he doesn't get it, I imagine you are done. So a player has a few options:
1. He can transfer and say he is thinking about transferring because he no longer enjoys playing for the coach.
2. If he doesn't want to transfer because he loves the school, he has to stay quiet and try to play for the coach.
3. He can talk with the AD when invited.
Once one and two come out, that player is screwed as far as the coach coach/player relationship is concerned is it not? If it is a popular player, what then?

All players can just stay quiet and have another year like this year and lackluster and the AD can think that everything is hunky dory and when players aren't playing as hard as they can, the losing begins again, WHOSE fault is it? Who gets blamed? Suddenly dissension shows up on the team, when it has been there all the time for a long time. Then the AD fires Lackluster at the end of the year because of a dismal year.

Or the AD can be proactive, talk with players--listen to their concerns, take into account the possibility of their transferring (hardly threats...they either will or won't). Barta knows that if upperclassmen or freshmen transfer that lackluster will be starting all over AGAIN for the 4th year. Fans will go nuts; Lackluster will whine and make all kinds of excuses about why that is good that those players transferred and Iowa will have another 10-23 year. Barta knows this...so he has to head it off...period.

The program is not being run by 18-22 year old men, but by an idiot of a coach who has NO communication skills, recruiting skills, and no idea what to do to get Iowa back into the upper division of the Big 10 except a bunch of excuses.

Also, Lackluster supporters refuse to believe that the program can be in this bad of shape. They wanted to believe that all the players were on board and supportive and it turns out that key players are NOT supportive of him.

The best thing that the four Lackluster supporters left can do is go to his house and help him pack, pat him on the back, and tell him what a raw deal he got, while the rest of the Hawk Nation moves on...
Click to expand...
I think there is a difference between a player going to the AD and stating he is not happy and may transfer if the coach stays and a player being asked by the AD how he feels about the program and that player being honest when answering. The first seems to be a from a player who thinks he can influence the AD in his decision for the future of the program while that player is there. The second is just being an honest person when asked a question and that person is also frustrated with the situation. Who would not be frustrated in the current situation?

I am not saying that is either is right or wrong - just different.

I don't know what happened in Matt's case (and I won't speculate). I am not sure anyone knows but Matt and his family. I tend to think the best of people and hope that everything will work out for all parties for the best in the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top