I don't understand the "we can't expect more" mentality

[theboat]

title of this thread also applies to the football program

At least football has some success to hold onto.

 

[theboat]

I was curious so I did a little research on coaches with long tenure, as usually they have earned it in some way.
Painter: 6 tournaments in first 7 years, 2 sweet 16's in the first 5 years.
Beilein: 5 tournaments in 7 years, including final four and elite eight.
Huggins: 5 for first 5, sweet 16 and final four
Sean Miller: 6 tournaments in first 8 years including 3 elite eights, and 2 sweet 16's.
Dana Altman: team went CBI to NIT, and NCAA ever since including a sweet 16, elite 8, and a final four.

the only comparable resumes I can find on coaches that have been around as long as Fran are Mark Fox at Georgia, Brad Brownell at Clemson, and Hamilton at FSU. Now, I know that Alford would say that Iowa has something in common with those schools, but we all know that we don't.

The reality is that after 8 seasons, we know exactly what we are going to get out of Fran, and it is at best average. If you are OK with that, then that is up to you, but you need to admit that to yourself. Some people are OK not bettering themselves because they don't want to risk anything.
But if you think he is going to somehow magically figure it out now then you are just flat out lying to yourself.

 

[PCHawk]

I haven’t seen anybody say it is easy or a sure thing that a coaching hire works. That would be silly. But you point out that a coach can make all the difference between a good program and a bad one. The best programs in college have to get the right coaches still.
That is the exact argument as to why you make a change every few years if it isn’t the one. If you dated everyone for 8 years hoping they would change to be the one before you finally concede that they aren’t marriage material. You’ll probably end up as a creepy middle aged single person.

True. But some great coaches take more than a few years to show they are great coaches. After 3 years, there was still a decent chance Fran was a great coach. Maybe I could get on board with firing a bad coach after 3 years (like Lick) and an average coach like Fran after 5 or so years.

The only thing is when you tank a couple hires in a row and destroy your program, you should probably hang onto an average coach for more than 5 years to get your program back on solid ground. If they Fire Fran at the end of this year, I'm ok with it. If they Fire the next coach after 3 years for being average, I'm ok with it becasue the program has been average for 7 years or so now. But I think it would have been a terrible move to fire Fran after 3 years.

 

[theboat]

True. But some great coaches take more than a few years to show they are great coaches. After 3 years, there was still a decent chance Fran was a great coach. Maybe I could get on board with firing a bad coach after 3 years (like Lick) and an average coach like Fran after 5 or so years.

The only thing is when you tank a couple hires in a row and destroy your program, you should probably hang onto an average coach for more than 5 years to get your program back on solid ground. If they Fire Fran at the end of this year, I'm ok with it. If they Fire the next coach after 3 years for being average, I'm ok with it becasue the program has been average for 7 years or so now. But I think it would have been a terrible move to fire Fran after 3 years.

That ship has sailed so no point in discussing. But after 3 years the trajectory was pointing up. You ride that out and see where it goes. Lick was gone after 3 years because his needle was pointing down. Now the trajectory is pointing down again. If you wait too long with a downward trend, we get back to where we were when he started.

 

[PCHawk]

I was curious so I did a little research on coaches with long tenure, as usually they have earned it in some way.
Painter: 6 tournaments in first 7 years, 2 sweet 16's in the first 5 years.
Beilein: 5 tournaments in 7 years, including final four and elite eight.
Huggins: 5 for first 5, sweet 16 and final four
Sean Miller: 6 tournaments in first 8 years including 3 elite eights, and 2 sweet 16's.
Dana Altman: team went CBI to NIT, and NCAA ever since including a sweet 16, elite 8, and a final four.

the only comparable resumes I can find on coaches that have been around as long as Fran are Mark Fox at Georgia, Brad Brownell at Clemson, and Hamilton at FSU. Now, I know that Alford would say that Iowa has something in common with those schools, but we all know that we don't.

The reality is that after 8 seasons, we know exactly what we are going to get out of Fran, and it is at best average. If you are OK with that, then that is up to you, but you need to admit that to yourself. Some people are OK not bettering themselves because they don't want to risk anything.
But if you think he is going to somehow magically figure it out now then you are just flat out lying to yourself.

I've said in other threads that I'm a firm believer in coaches get the team in position to win the game, then players have to win it. My thoughts the last 4 years (before this one) is Fran did have it figured out. He had his team in position to be a top 10-15 team over a 3 year span, but the players just couldn't close out games.

I know you don't agree with me that coaches don't win close games. But I firmly think that. And becasue I think that, my opinion of Fran is considerably different than someone who thinks coaches lose close games. My reason for liking Fran is based on what he had this program in position to achieve over that 3 year span before something he couldn't control happened (in my opinion. It's not about being afraid of change, or accepting mediocrity for me. It's about seeing that one variable differently than some. And without that one variable (close games) everyone would love Fran.

 

[PCHawk]

That ship has sailed so no point in discussing. But after 3 years the trajectory was pointing up. You ride that out and see where it goes. Lick was gone after 3 years because his needle was pointing down. Now the trajectory is pointing down again. If you wait too long with a downward trend, we get back to where we were when he started.

I agree. I don't think Fran will bring us down farther than this year. In my opinion, we will be going up again starting next year and even more the next. But like I said earlier, I'm ok if he doesn't get that chance.

 

[HawkGold]

That ship has sailed so no point in discussing. But after 3 years the trajectory was pointing up. You ride that out and see where it goes. Lick was gone after 3 years because his needle was pointing down. Now the trajectory is pointing down again. If you wait too long with a downward trend, we get back to where we were when he started.

The trajectory was up on wins if that is the bottom line. The D, half court O, player fundamentals have always been an issue. He did manage to recruit some good enough players.

That said, I don't think this year will be a total loss.

However, I do think that teams that over play Iowa on the perimeter are subject to getting beat by Cook on the inside which was a part of what happened to a depleted Wisky.

MSU will overplay on the outside, but they have the players to do it. Still might be a surprisingly good game.

 

[GotTimDodge]

I don't understand the general mentally capping a team's success and I don't understand stuff like ranking Iowa 9th among Big Ten basketball jobs and basically saying that's all you get. You get a coach that is willing to take the 9th best job in the Big Ten.

Any program's history of success has to start somewhere. Florida won back to back NCs in 06-07. Did no one tell them that's not allowed because they weren't a historical basketball power? If you control for the Billy Donovan era, Iowa has more NCAA tournament success than Florida. But that didn't prevent them from hiring a championship level coach.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Iowa should just hire a different coach and win an NC. But conversely I think the idea that there is a cap on how good of a coach you can get is fundamentally flawed. If that were the case how did these teams that won multiple championships get their FIRST championship coach?

This makes too much sense. I don't think people like that in here.

 

[theboat]

I agree. I don't think Fran will bring us down farther than this year. In my opinion, we will be going up again starting next year and even more the next. But like I said earlier, I'm ok if he doesn't get that chance.

Anything is possible, but I can’t think of one time a coach that got to the next level this far into their tenure when they hadn’t before.

 

[lightning1]

I've said in other threads that I'm a firm believer in coaches get the team in position to win the game, then players have to win it. My thoughts the last 4 years (before this one) is Fran did have it figured out. He had his team in position to be a top 10-15 team over a 3 year span, but the players just couldn't close out games.

I know you don't agree with me that coaches don't win close games. But I firmly think that. And becasue I think that, my opinion of Fran is considerably different than someone who thinks coaches lose close games. My reason for liking Fran is based on what he had this program in position to achieve over that 3 year span before something he couldn't control happened (in my opinion. It's not about being afraid of change, or accepting mediocrity for me. It's about seeing that one variable differently than some. And without that one variable (close games) everyone would love Fran.

The players couldn't close out games because they couldn't get stops when they needed them. They couldn't get stops because Fran McCaffery doesn't coach defense.

 

[PCHawk]

Anything is possible, but I can’t think of one time a coach that got to the next level this far into their tenure when they hadn’t before.

But again, because of my opinion that players win close games, I feel like he already did his part to have us there. That group of players couldn't quite seal the deal that Fran had them in position to seal.

I know you don't agree with that logic. But when it's a one possession game late, I just don't see what a coach can do to jave anything other than a minimal impact. If you want to know what my opinion of Fran is, try thinking about what you would think of Fran if we were .500 in close games for that 3 year stretch. Keep in mind we would probably have two top 10 finishes and one or two titles.

 

[PCHawk]

The players couldn't close out games because they couldn't get stops when they needed them. They couldn't get stops because Fran McCaffery doesn't coach defense.

Well they played good enough defense to make it a 50/50 game with a minute left. And it wasn't just defense that screwed them. It was never making a shot, not getting a rebound, and stupid turnovers that was just as much to blame.

 

[theboat]

But again, because of my opinion that players win close games, I feel like he already did his part to have us there. That group of players couldn't quite seal the deal that Fran had them in position to seal.

I know you don't agree with that logic. But when it's a one possession game late, I just don't see what a coach can do to jave anything other than a minimal impact. If you want to know what my opinion of Fran is, try thinking about what you would think of Fran if we were .500 in close games for that 3 year stretch. Keep in mind we would probably have two top 10 finishes and one or two titles.

As a college coach, you pick the players and you coach them. If they aren’t good enough, it’s on the coach. If they don’t respond in games consistently , that it also on the coach,

 

[theboat]

Well they played good enough defense to make it a 50/50 game with a minute left. And it wasn't just defense that screwed them. It was never making a shot, not getting a rebound, and stupid turnovers that was just as much to blame.

3 of this 4 things go back to coaching.

 

[lightning1]

I agree. I don't think Fran will bring us down farther than this year. In my opinion, we will be going up again starting next year and even more the next. But like I said earlier, I'm ok if he doesn't get that chance.

Bring us down lower than tied for 13th place in a 14 team conference? That's going out on a huge limb there.

 

[PCHawk]

As a college coach, you pick the players and you coach them. If they aren’t good enough, it’s on the coach. If they don’t respond in games consistently , that it also on the coach,

Sometimes players get the yips and there is nothing a coach can do about it. There are some extreme cases of it. I'm pros and college. Gesell didn't come off as "unclutch" at all his freshman year. He developed it and it got worse. Last year the most unclutch player on the team was Jok. Now you might say Fran's coaching style makes players unclutch, and it is possible. But I say Jok was part of the teams that couldn't close out games and that's what caused him to choke late.

I am fine debating whether it's a player or a coach who loses close games. But that's not why I brought it up. My point was to tell you why I think like I do. It isn't about being ok with average, or being afraid of change. It's about me having a higher opinion of Fran than ones who think he cost us all those close games.

 

[lightning1]

Well they played good enough defense to make it a 50/50 game with a minute left. And it wasn't just defense that screwed them. It was never making a shot, not getting a rebound, and stupid turnovers that was just as much to blame.

I saw the games too. We couldn't get stops. And that hasn't changed. The opposing teams stepped up and played better defense at the end of those close games. They got stops. They caused turnovers and forced us to take poor shots. They boxed out to make sure we couldn't get those rebounds.
That's why defense is so import if you want to make deep runs in the NCAA tournament. If you want conference titles. Fran does not value players that play defense or coaching team defense. That much is obvious to anyone that cares to look.

 

[phdsvp]

Close the thread. $10.2 million says we can't expect more.

 

[PCHawk]

I saw the games too. We couldn't get stops. And that hasn't changed. The opposing teams stepped up and played better defense at the end of those close games. They got stops. They caused turnovers and forced us to take poor shots. They boxed out to make sure we couldn't get those rebounds.
That's why defense is so import if you want to make deep runs in the NCAA tournament. If you want conference titles. Fran does not value players that play defense or coaching team defense. That much is obvious to anyone that cares to look.

Come on. That might be true to an extent, and that makes it a valid point. But it only happened with those teams. We were fine closing out games before those players, and we were fine last year. We had so many unforced turnovers to lose games I can't even remember them all. Woody was a good rebounder. He quit rebounding with one minute left. So many replays of Woody standing there watching a shot go up late and giving up the offensive rebound.

There is a lot of truth to your post tho and it softens my stance on the subject some.

 

[trj]

Josh hits the nail on the head here. It is a common sense problem. What does Alford, Lick, and Fran all have in common? Well, besides not having stellar teams.....they were are all mid-major coaches coming into Iowa. Iowa needs a major level coach who has had successful experience coaching in major level conferences. Mr. Davis was the last one to coach here. Does not get talked about much, but Mr. Davis actually finished 1st in the Big East Conference at Boston College and went to the Sweet 16 and Elite 8 there prior to coaching at Stanford and Iowa.

Iowa needs a coach with a resume something like that coming in. Even if it is a retrend coach looking to get back into the game. Iowa can get a retrend coach.

It is a no win situation. You go that route and people are complaining that Iowa only hire retreads. The rally cry would be why can’t we take a chance on a hot mid major guy.