Question for Alford haters

okeefe4prez

okeefe4prez

Well-Known Member
One common complaint about Alford is lack of victories in the NCAA tournament. Why is that such a common complaint? Every team is there to win the tourney and neither Lute nor Mr. Davis ever won the tourney. Do you get a better loser banner if you get to the Final Four? Sure, I guess. A Final Four is okay and carries some prestige, but does it really matter if Iowa gets say a 5 seed, beats the 12, beats the 4 and then gets destroyed by the 1 in the round of 16? Or does it really matter if they lose in the first round rather than the second or third? They still lost the tournament like all the other losing teams. Would keeping Tom Davis have won us the tourney in the Alford years?

Fran maybe gives us the best chance to actually win the tournament we've had in years, but even with Alford at the helm, I don't think the team that lost to Northwestern in the first round would have won the tourney even had they won the first game. Even that star-studded team was just playing for a consolation banner.
 
I don't hate Alford. Thought he was a fine coach.
Wasn't thrilled with the Pierre Pierce ordeal, but nobody is perfect.
 
okeefe4prez said:
Fran maybe gives us the best chance to actually win the tournament we've had in years, but even with Alford at the helm, I don't think the team that lost to Northwestern in the first round would have won the tourney even had they won the first game. Even that star-studded team was just playing for a consolation banner.
Click to expand...

This was one of your better sleights of hand.
 
okeefe4prez said:
One common complaint about Alford is lack of victories in the NCAA tournament. Why is that such a common complaint? Every team is there to win the tourney and neither Lute nor Mr. Davis ever won the tourney. Do you get a better loser banner if you get to the Final Four? Sure, I guess. A Final Four is okay and carries some prestige, but does it really matter if Iowa gets say a 5 seed, beats the 12, beats the 4 and then gets destroyed by the 1 in the round of 16? Or does it really matter if they lose in the first round rather than the second or third? They still lost the tournament like all the other losing teams. Would keeping Tom Davis have won us the tourney in the Alford years? Fran maybe gives us the best chance to actually win the tournament we've had in years, but even with Alford at the helm, I don't think the team that lost to Northwestern in the first round would have won the tourney even had they won the first game. Even that star-studded team was just playing for a consolation banner.
Click to expand...
Is it hard for you to not mention northwestern in your threads?
 
Northwestern State, actually. Thanks for the bad memory. I say this every time, but, Haluska nearly made that half court shot to win the game.
 
when a person like sa comes in and says he is taking the bb program to new heights and then is looking for a new job behind all of our backs and then leaves us with a decade of bad bb I tend to not like the guy. don't hate him but I sure as hell cheer against them!
 
I count 5 questions not one. I was not an Alford "hater". Mr Alford's problems was Mr Alford. One problem he had and still has is communication skills. He seems unable to include himself for criticism when things do not turn out well.

The point I would like to make is that until Noodles Neal was added as an assistant coach Mr Alford was floundering as a bench coach. Even today I notice that NM players listen to Neal rather than Alford. Mr Alford seems unable to express to the players what Neal seems able to. If Neal ever leaves Alford will have a big void to fill.
 
okeefe4prez said:
One common complaint about Alford is lack of victories in the NCAA tournament. Why is that such a common complaint? Every team is there to win the tourney and neither Lute nor Mr. Davis ever won the tourney. Do you get a better loser banner if you get to the Final Four? Sure, I guess. A Final Four is okay and carries some prestige, but does it really matter if Iowa gets say a 5 seed, beats the 12, beats the 4 and then gets destroyed by the 1 in the round of 16? Or does it really matter if they lose in the first round rather than the second or third? They still lost the tournament like all the other losing teams. Would keeping Tom Davis have won us the tourney in the Alford years?

Fran maybe gives us the best chance to actually win the tournament we've had in years, but even with Alford at the helm, I don't think the team that lost to Northwestern in the first round would have won the tourney even had they won the first game. Even that star-studded team was just playing for a consolation banner.
Click to expand...

National title or bust, huh?

In Alford's case, it's not just about lack of NCAA victories. It's also about a lack of NCAA appearances. One of those appearances also with a 3 seed that he couldn't even get out of the first round.
 
At least Alford won something. I realize that two BTT champions is not the same as the regular season title. Davis won nothing. No Big Ten titles, one elite eight & two sweet sixteen appearances in thirteen seasons isn't much to brag about.

Heck, even Lickliter took two teams to the sweet sixteen in six seasons.

Davis did better at Boston College. He had one sweet sixteen & one elite eight appearance in five seasons.
 
In reality, I think 99% of schools out there play to get to the Final Four. That in itself is basically the same as winning the title to most programs. There's really only like 10 schools that actually need more than that for it to be a great season.
 
eyekwah said:
I count 5 questions not one. I was not an Alford "hater". Mr Alford's problems was Mr Alford. One problem he had and still has is communication skills. He seems unable to include himself for criticism when things do not turn out well.

The point I would like to make is that until Noodles Neal was added as an assistant coach Mr Alford was floundering as a bench coach. Even today I notice that NM players listen to Neal rather than Alford. Mr Alford seems unable to express to the players what Neal seems able to. If Neal ever leaves Alford will have a big void to fill.
Click to expand...

Very respectful post.
 
NCAA victories do matter...the reason people bring up Davis all the time is that he never lost in the first round.
Final Fours matter...Izzo has how many when his team was not good during the season...the emphasis is in March victories.
It doesn't matter to the media anymore if you win 20 games a year, it matters how many times you advance to the second and third weekend.
With Alford, there was no chance, for whatever reason and I don't believe it was a lack of talent.

Everything "off-court" was terrible when Alford was at Iowa.
 
okeefe4prez said:
One common complaint about Alford is lack of victories in the NCAA tournament. Why is that such a common complaint? Every team is there to win the tourney and neither Lute nor Mr. Davis ever won the tourney. Do you get a better loser banner if you get to the Final Four? Sure, I guess. A Final Four is okay and carries some prestige, but does it really matter if Iowa gets say a 5 seed, beats the 12, beats the 4 and then gets destroyed by the 1 in the round of 16? Or does it really matter if they lose in the first round rather than the second or third? They still lost the tournament like all the other losing teams. Would keeping Tom Davis have won us the tourney in the Alford years?

Fran maybe gives us the best chance to actually win the tournament we've had in years, but even with Alford at the helm, I don't think the team that lost to Northwestern in the first round would have won the tourney even had they won the first game. Even that star-studded team was just playing for a consolation banner.
Click to expand...

Is this a joke?

This "question" clearly requires no explanation.
 
ok, I do have to give Stevie some credit. He did discover Gaten's NBA talent 3 years before he graduated high school
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top