HawkeyezBull
Well-Known Member
Hey, if we can throw in "MEAT" to sweeten the deal, I'm all for it. If there's one thing Iowa has a lot of.....it's MEAT!!
Good idea I change my mind,... meat not meet
We have an overinflated opinion of our program
- Thread starter Rawkhawk73
- Start date
Good idea I change my mind,... meat not meet
Why is Jim Delaney considered the most powerful man in college sports?
Because he is the commissioner of the most powerful conference in college sports.
Iowa happens to be a charter member of that conference.
Iowa has just plowed 43 million dollars into upgrades and new facilities for men bb..
Do outsiders know that? I doubt it.
It is Barta's job to sell this program to a top flight coach.
We have a fanbase that is famous around the country for its loyalty to our football program...and the wrestling program...what? Those fans do not like bb? No, they like winning bb.
We are not IU, but we are not chopped liver either. Why is every other conference waiting with bated breath to find out which way the Big Ten is going with expansion? Because the Big Ten rules the college landscape. And any AD worth his salt is going to be able to paint the future picture...Big Ten -Superconference,Super BTN penetration on the east and west coast....BTN is global...Africa is the next great recruiting bonanza...with the BTN beaming into every country in the globe.
Sorry, but I am not buying that the Iowa job is not on the cusp of exploding..with the right guy at the helm...if I can see, it,so can Barta and a new coach.
Because he is the commissioner of the most powerful conference in college sports.
Iowa happens to be a charter member of that conference.
Iowa has just plowed 43 million dollars into upgrades and new facilities for men bb..
Do outsiders know that? I doubt it.
It is Barta's job to sell this program to a top flight coach.
We have a fanbase that is famous around the country for its loyalty to our football program...and the wrestling program...what? Those fans do not like bb? No, they like winning bb.
We are not IU, but we are not chopped liver either. Why is every other conference waiting with bated breath to find out which way the Big Ten is going with expansion? Because the Big Ten rules the college landscape. And any AD worth his salt is going to be able to paint the future picture...Big Ten -Superconference,Super BTN penetration on the east and west coast....BTN is global...Africa is the next great recruiting bonanza...with the BTN beaming into every country in the globe.
Sorry, but I am not buying that the Iowa job is not on the cusp of exploding..with the right guy at the helm...if I can see, it,so can Barta and a new coach.
burky247
Well-Known Member
STILLBUSTER
Well-Known Member
RawkHawk73: "Overinflated Opinion" part 2 (long, what else is new)
First, excellent, honest and accurate post by Rawkhawk73. Watching version after version of "new coach" / "prospective coaches" threads pop up since before 2:30 yesterday and the tone of every one of them has me realizing more and more the truth of what RH73 stated. Where he discussed the mismatched internal / external perceptions on the "status" of Iowa in the college bball world, I'll focus on the mismatched "perception / expectation" vs reality here at home.
To summarize:
#1. Next guy must "make a splash". Everyone has their own lists. While most include many of the same names, everyone seems to have their favorite. Not only that, one person's favorite seems to have an exclusiveness relative to the other prospective candidates. Has me concluding, short of Bruce Pearl, (extremely unlikely) any one else means a large % of the fan base will not be "splashed".
Let's not forget that, at the time, TL was not chopped liver. He came with NCOY credentials and a history of winning at a "blue collar" type of program that so many Hawk fans take pride in. He said all the right things, like, "competitve", "building it the right way", "discipline", "play with pride / play like champions". 3 years later and many of the same fans that were thrilled to have TL and the "style" he brought to the table are so snake bit they might be inclined to second-guess anyone but "their" top guy.
#2. Must be "up-tempo". I get that everyone likes an exciting brand of bball but I think some wallow under the delusion that more points = up tempo. Even more are deluded that the next "up-tempo" guy is going to stroll into Carver, wave his magic wand and Iowa is going to average 75 ppg.
Here's some facts to chew on:
Point per game: 60.2, 60.5, 66.3, 68.4.
Scoring attempts per game: 45.9, 50.9, 53.3, 54.3
The above stats are from Alford's last 2 years, with records of 25-9 and 17-14, and Lickliter's last 2 years, with records of 15-17 and 10-22. Can you tell which stats go with which season? (The first 2 in each line are TL's 08-09, 09-10 seasons and the last 2 in each are SA's 05-06, 06-07 seasons).
First of all, I think everyone would agree that SA's "motion" offense fits the definition of "up-tempo". Yet, it sure didn't produce a lot better scoring opportunities / attempts than TL's style, which has so often been (erroneously) claimed as "boring" and "unwatchable". In fact, the winningest season in the last 20+ years came in at just 6.1 points more and, most importantly, only 2.4 scoring opportunities more, per game, than this last season, which is the losingest season ever.
But how can this be, Still? TL is out! Next guy will play "modern" bball. Iowa is saved from irrelevance and will instantly be competitive, again!
As in all sports, it comes down to execution. You need only look at a few key stat lines to see how this current group failed so miserably, especially the "veterans". The team had 5 more scoring attempts per game this year vs last year (1629 fga vs 1469 fga over 32 games each season) yet shot 41.4% vs 44.2%. Gatens attempted 80 more shots, 48 more 3's, yet shot a miserable 37% / 32.8% compared to 42.2% / 40.3%. Cole had 50 turnovers (1.7 / game) vs 29 (0.9 / game) last year. (I know I've had a tendency to pick on MG over the course of this year but, imo, he had one of the epic "sophomore slumps" I've ever seen. As more comes out about his role in TL's dismissal -- his frustrations -- I find myself even more disappointed in his mental toughness and focus. Dude had 30% more shot attempts and simply didn't get it done. Frustrated or not, that's on him, not "the system" which gave him that many more opportunities to produce.)
This isn't a crusade to defend TL or argue against his firing (although I firmly believe he should have been given another year, as long has he kept the team intact). It is undeniably a reality check on what so many are already expecting to see by default that TL is no longer the Iowa coach.
You still have the same players / talents / skills that struggled to execute in a deliberate system. I find it hard to believe that they will magically overcome their size and athletic mismatches, not to mention their simple, unforced blunders, when the tempo is accelerated. Jon even stated this in nearly every candidate on his list: plays up-tempo when gets the right players. This is exactly what TL's intent was, accept it or not.
First, excellent, honest and accurate post by Rawkhawk73. Watching version after version of "new coach" / "prospective coaches" threads pop up since before 2:30 yesterday and the tone of every one of them has me realizing more and more the truth of what RH73 stated. Where he discussed the mismatched internal / external perceptions on the "status" of Iowa in the college bball world, I'll focus on the mismatched "perception / expectation" vs reality here at home.
To summarize:
#1. Next guy must "make a splash". Everyone has their own lists. While most include many of the same names, everyone seems to have their favorite. Not only that, one person's favorite seems to have an exclusiveness relative to the other prospective candidates. Has me concluding, short of Bruce Pearl, (extremely unlikely) any one else means a large % of the fan base will not be "splashed".
Let's not forget that, at the time, TL was not chopped liver. He came with NCOY credentials and a history of winning at a "blue collar" type of program that so many Hawk fans take pride in. He said all the right things, like, "competitve", "building it the right way", "discipline", "play with pride / play like champions". 3 years later and many of the same fans that were thrilled to have TL and the "style" he brought to the table are so snake bit they might be inclined to second-guess anyone but "their" top guy.
#2. Must be "up-tempo". I get that everyone likes an exciting brand of bball but I think some wallow under the delusion that more points = up tempo. Even more are deluded that the next "up-tempo" guy is going to stroll into Carver, wave his magic wand and Iowa is going to average 75 ppg.
Here's some facts to chew on:
Point per game: 60.2, 60.5, 66.3, 68.4.
Scoring attempts per game: 45.9, 50.9, 53.3, 54.3
The above stats are from Alford's last 2 years, with records of 25-9 and 17-14, and Lickliter's last 2 years, with records of 15-17 and 10-22. Can you tell which stats go with which season? (The first 2 in each line are TL's 08-09, 09-10 seasons and the last 2 in each are SA's 05-06, 06-07 seasons).
First of all, I think everyone would agree that SA's "motion" offense fits the definition of "up-tempo". Yet, it sure didn't produce a lot better scoring opportunities / attempts than TL's style, which has so often been (erroneously) claimed as "boring" and "unwatchable". In fact, the winningest season in the last 20+ years came in at just 6.1 points more and, most importantly, only 2.4 scoring opportunities more, per game, than this last season, which is the losingest season ever.
But how can this be, Still? TL is out! Next guy will play "modern" bball. Iowa is saved from irrelevance and will instantly be competitive, again!
As in all sports, it comes down to execution. You need only look at a few key stat lines to see how this current group failed so miserably, especially the "veterans". The team had 5 more scoring attempts per game this year vs last year (1629 fga vs 1469 fga over 32 games each season) yet shot 41.4% vs 44.2%. Gatens attempted 80 more shots, 48 more 3's, yet shot a miserable 37% / 32.8% compared to 42.2% / 40.3%. Cole had 50 turnovers (1.7 / game) vs 29 (0.9 / game) last year. (I know I've had a tendency to pick on MG over the course of this year but, imo, he had one of the epic "sophomore slumps" I've ever seen. As more comes out about his role in TL's dismissal -- his frustrations -- I find myself even more disappointed in his mental toughness and focus. Dude had 30% more shot attempts and simply didn't get it done. Frustrated or not, that's on him, not "the system" which gave him that many more opportunities to produce.)
This isn't a crusade to defend TL or argue against his firing (although I firmly believe he should have been given another year, as long has he kept the team intact). It is undeniably a reality check on what so many are already expecting to see by default that TL is no longer the Iowa coach.
You still have the same players / talents / skills that struggled to execute in a deliberate system. I find it hard to believe that they will magically overcome their size and athletic mismatches, not to mention their simple, unforced blunders, when the tempo is accelerated. Jon even stated this in nearly every candidate on his list: plays up-tempo when gets the right players. This is exactly what TL's intent was, accept it or not.
Re: RawkHawk73: "Overinflated Opinion" part 2 (long, what else is new)
Lick's history suggests he never intended to play up-tempo. His Butler teams always have very low possession-per-game statistics.
I think you make a valid point that the current roster as constructed consists of primarily below-average Big 10 players. Gatens sophomore slump in my opinion, was more a by-product of being forced to do thinks he isn't capable of doing in the court, because his team lacks talent. Same will Cully. Cole turns the ball-over because he is not that good.
We need a coach that can get better talent, period. A coach that makes Gatens a spot-up shooter. A coach that has recruited talent that keeps Payne a back-up PG until at least his junior year. A coach that recruits so that Cole comes off the bench to provides 10 minutes of energy. A coach that doesn't recruit some of players on this team.
I will agree that people's expectations are high, and I think unless the coach brings more players we are not going real good next year, regardless of the coach.
Lick's history suggests he never intended to play up-tempo. His Butler teams always have very low possession-per-game statistics.
I think you make a valid point that the current roster as constructed consists of primarily below-average Big 10 players. Gatens sophomore slump in my opinion, was more a by-product of being forced to do thinks he isn't capable of doing in the court, because his team lacks talent. Same will Cully. Cole turns the ball-over because he is not that good.
We need a coach that can get better talent, period. A coach that makes Gatens a spot-up shooter. A coach that has recruited talent that keeps Payne a back-up PG until at least his junior year. A coach that recruits so that Cole comes off the bench to provides 10 minutes of energy. A coach that doesn't recruit some of players on this team.
I will agree that people's expectations are high, and I think unless the coach brings more players we are not going real good next year, regardless of the coach.
FreddyBrown
Moderator
Re: RawkHawk73: "Overinflated Opinion" part 2 (long, what else is new)
Stillbuster, I share at least a part of your concern that far too many of us are focused on some specific "candidate"--in most cases Pearl--and are setting themselves up for disappointment and setting the program for instant turmoil by defining success as landing only that coach. I wish people could back off of that some.
But, in response to the paragraph quoted above: I don't think what we had on the team this season was upper division Big Ten talent, but I also don't think they're nearly as bad as they looked. That's part of the issue, isn't it? That Lickliter wasn't getting the most out of these guys? Now we (hopefully) get those guys back a year older and add some decent recruits to them, and I don't think it's out of the realm of reason that with the right coach they might play substantially better as a group next season. I've often thought (and said) this season that if you gave the same roster to Tom Davis, they would have played a helluva lot better than what Lickliter got out of them. I still believe that.
Stillbuster, I share at least a part of your concern that far too many of us are focused on some specific "candidate"--in most cases Pearl--and are setting themselves up for disappointment and setting the program for instant turmoil by defining success as landing only that coach. I wish people could back off of that some.
But, in response to the paragraph quoted above: I don't think what we had on the team this season was upper division Big Ten talent, but I also don't think they're nearly as bad as they looked. That's part of the issue, isn't it? That Lickliter wasn't getting the most out of these guys? Now we (hopefully) get those guys back a year older and add some decent recruits to them, and I don't think it's out of the realm of reason that with the right coach they might play substantially better as a group next season. I've often thought (and said) this season that if you gave the same roster to Tom Davis, they would have played a helluva lot better than what Lickliter got out of them. I still believe that.
83Hawk
Banned
There is a difference between "trying" and going all out. There are ways in addition to money.
Remember how Virginia landed Ralph Sampson? Had "Ralph's House" painted on the roof of the basketball arena so he could see it from the air when he flew in for his campus visit. You also can't really compare Iowa to Notre Dame....the standards and expectations of Notre Dame are in a different league.
Better to have a "pipe dream" than no dream at all.
trj
Well-Known Member
I don't care about style of play. Don't care about the coach's charisma or his ability to connect to with the fan base. I care about the following: Can he win games and it doesn't take a decade to do so. Can he do so without violating NCAA rules? Can the players he recruit stay out of legal trouble?
If the answer is yes to all 3 of those questions, then he is my guy.
Get to the tournament 3 out of every 5 years, of those 3 years make a sweet 16 or elite 8 run once. If what I stated above happens, everything else will take care of itself. Not being unrealistic, nor do I think it is impossible to find a coach who can accomplish this.
If the answer is yes to all 3 of those questions, then he is my guy.
Get to the tournament 3 out of every 5 years, of those 3 years make a sweet 16 or elite 8 run once. If what I stated above happens, everything else will take care of itself. Not being unrealistic, nor do I think it is impossible to find a coach who can accomplish this.
