Amelia: We will either have an NCAA tournament win, or a coaching search on our hands

Status
Not open for further replies.
Donate To GopherHole
howeda7 said:
If the result of one game makes the AD's decision for him, you have a crappy AD and he won't make a good hire anyway. We've all seen it happen here before.
Click to expand...

Whatever decision is made regarding the coach if you believe the AD made the decision based on the result of one game you are kidding yourself.
 

Anyone who wants us to either not make the tournament or lose in the first round should be ashamed. Support the team no matter what. And no, I don't believe that cheering for them to lose even if it removes the coach is being a good supportive fan. You have no guarantee the administration makes a coaching move anyway. I want to see the boys win in the NCAA and represent their school in a positive manner.
 

As much as I, and it sounds like most people on here, would love to see a new coach....I have a feeling Tubby will be back next year...
 

I stopped going to the games in December and I thought then that the team lacked intrinsic motivation. That is a coaching problem when the fire has gone out. You can tell they didn't have the intrinsic "right stuff" when they hit the road. They only fed off the home court advantage. You can't feed off external motivators as your reason for playing to your potential. It just doesn't last. If schedules were the equivalent of victories, I would say were were a lock. But, I don't buy the whole strength of schedule thing as a valid reason to land the Gophers in the dance. They played poorly in conference and that record suggests they need not attend the big dance. Will they get an invite? Sure. I'm just saying I wouldn't give it to them.
 

baseball_stud said:
As much as I, and it sounds like most people on here, would love to see a new coach....I have a feeling Tubby will be back next year...
Click to expand...

I believe you are probably correct.
 


dpodoll68 said:
So Tubby gets zero credit for assembling "the most talented roster we've seen in how long", and yet he receives 100% of the blame for mildly underachieving with this rock-star roster? Makes perfect sense.

You can spin it any way you want, but the fact is that a hypothetical 2nd round loss would be the most successful Gopher men's basketball season in 23 years. I challenge you to find a non-cheating, non-law-breaking coach (in any sport, really) who was fired immediately coming off his school's most successful season in 23 years.
Click to expand...

i give him (along with his assistants) 100% credit for assembling this team. but you can get the most talented players in the world and if you can't coach them in game it won't really matter. i for one don't want to settle with winning one tourney game. i would like to see a team playing to its potential. i would like to see a team (and a coach) that looks like it gives a sh!t for the entire game all season long. I would like to see a team that doesn't crumble under the pressure and can sustain that grit for a series of several games. Sure every team can get up for a game or two during the season and pull of one upset. If tubby gives us a couple ncaa wins i'm behind him all the way. But if this team folds up shop in the 1st or second round against a team that they've shown they have the potential to be better than, then its time to make a change.

i'm just saying the teams look complacent under tubby and need an infusion of something. hence why i see the reason for a change. Now if tubby lights a fire under them and they come out and win some games, then it shows he has the ability to do it and i'm comfortable keeping him at the helm.
 

upnorthkid said:
i for one don't want to settle with winning one tourney game.
Click to expand...

And, just for clarity's sake, you do realize that you'd be "settling" for better results than this school has seen in 23 years?

upnorthkid said:
If tubby gives us a couple ncaa wins i'm behind him all the way.
Click to expand...

So your entire hiring/firing decision is based on one game?
 

dpodoll68 said:
And, just for clarity's sake, you do realize that you'd be "settling" for better results than this school has seen in 23 years?



So your entire hiring/firing decision is based on one game?
Click to expand...

Yawwwwnnn. Same argument, different words. AD's don't base hiring/firing off one game, but there's almost certainly the "game (straw) that broke the camel's back". This isn't pro sports, playoffs aren't 7 game series' and they're single-game eliminations, leaving more at stake.

23 years blah blah blah you're just waiting for someone to argue with you about our teams that didn't count due to scandal. If you're looking for people to validate your argument that we should expect crappy results b/c of the last 23 years, then take it to a penn st. or northwestern board buddy.
 

dpodoll68 said:
So your entire hiring/firing decision is based on one game?
Click to expand...

I think it marginalizes the idea to say that firing him if he lost the first round game would be "basing it on one game". It would be basing it on three first round games, and three seasons worth of games where we didn't even get a chance to win a first round game. Tubby had us at one and done in year two, and it is not unreasonable to expect some kind of better playoff performance over the course of the next four. At some point there is a straw that breaks the camel's back, but a firing would be based on the body of work, not that last game.

Also, the way NCAA runs its playoffs, being a national champion and not being one comes down to one game. In the tournament, those are big one games.
 



dpodoll68 said:
And, just for clarity's sake, you do realize that you'd be "settling" for better results than this school has seen in 23 years?



So your entire hiring/firing decision is based on one game?
Click to expand...

no. the idea is that tubby has allowed us to skid into a rut at the worst possible time. if he can't snap us out of it for the biggest games of the season, i don't see a reason to let him keep going. if we win 1 game, that just reaffirms he can get them going for one game (ie indiana, wisky, mich st.) all over again but can't sustain it. for me to be behind him, he needs to show he can reinvigorate a team that he appears to have lost and do what it takes to win a few games in the clutch when it matters most.

and yes i get with the settling for one tourney win its better than in 23 years (given that we are eliminating seasons, which is technically the way it is). still, is that where you wanna be? being happy to win one in the tourney?

i just want to see that tubby can get the team going. when he had them playing fast and loose and confident, they looked unstoppable. now they look scared and like they just are trying to not make a mistake all the time which is not the way to play. i put that on tubby.

I just want a coach that has the potential to take us to the next level (ie perennial tourney team). tubby has had his time and i really like the guy and wish it would've worked. but if he can't get it done with this talented of a roster (that he assembled, and yes i give him credit for that), its time to head in another direction.

just my opinion and you're entitled to yours as well
 

Golden13 said:
Yawwwwnnn. Same argument, different words. AD's don't base hiring/firing off one game, but there's almost certainly the "game (straw) that broke the camel's back". This isn't pro sports, playoffs aren't 7 game series' and they're single-game eliminations, leaving more at stake.

23 years blah blah blah you're just waiting for someone to argue with you about our teams that didn't count due to scandal. If you're looking for people to validate your argument that we should expect crappy results b/c of the last 23 years, then take it to a penn st. or northwestern board buddy.
Click to expand...

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I think it marginalizes the idea to say that firing him if he lost the first round game would be "basing it on one game". It would be basing it on three first round games, and three seasons worth of games where we didn't even get a chance to win a first round game. Tubby had us at one and done in year two, and it is not unreasonable to expect some kind of better playoff performance over the course of the next four. At some point there is a straw that breaks the camel's back, but a firing would be based on the body of work, not that last game.

Also, the way NCAA runs its playoffs, being a national champion and not being one comes down to one game. In the tournament, those are big one games.
Click to expand...

thanks guys. precisely what i'm getting at
 

You can all rationalize it any way you want, but if you fire him for losing in the 2nd round and keep him for losing in the S16, you are basing a monumentally important personnel decision on the basis of one game. This is inarguable. Saying "yeah but Tournament" doesn't change this fact.

Speaking of facts, it is also a fact that this school hasn't had a Tournament victory in 23 years. This may annoy or upset you or whatever, but it is a fact nonetheless. Facts indeed are pesky things when they don't fit into your agenda.
 

Maturi certainly made it tough on the program by giving an extension to Tubby for the initial years of mediocrity. It was too soon and too much. Maybe we can hire Flip as a very high paid consultant to the program and keep Tubby. Turn over the assistants to get some hard charging mavericks in here. Keep the figure head of Tubby and let him retire in place gracefully.
 



dpodoll68 said:
You can all rationalize it any way you want, but if you fire him for losing in the 2nd round and keep him for losing in the S16, you are basing a monumentally important personnel decision on the basis of one game. This is inarguable. Saying "yeah but Tournament" doesn't change this fact.

Speaking of facts, it is also a fact that this school hasn't had a Tournament victory in 23 years. This may annoy or upset you or whatever, but it is a fact nonetheless. Facts indeed are pesky things when they don't fit into your agenda.
Click to expand...

If I have an employee who showed up late multiple times, and he comes in an hour late and I fire him, but I wouldn't have fired him if he was only one minute late, then you could work your way down from 60 minutes or up from 1 minute, and eventually you would have to come to a threshold where he goes from not fired to fired. I guess you could technically say that there was a point where I would have fired him over 1 minute, but you have to draw the line somewhere.

Also, I am less concerned about what happened with the last 23 years then what we do with the next 23.
 

dpodoll68 said:
You can all rationalize it any way you want, but if you fire him for losing in the 2nd round and keep him for losing in the S16, you are basing a monumentally important personnel decision on the basis of one game. This is inarguable. Saying "yeah but Tournament" doesn't change this fact.

Speaking of facts, it is also a fact that this school hasn't had a Tournament victory in 23 years. This may annoy or upset you or whatever, but it is a fact nonetheless. Facts indeed are pesky things when they don't fit into your agenda.
Click to expand...

the only reason i don't for one game is, as i've said, tubby has the ability to get a team up for ONE game. this team may rally around its seniors and win one against a team they should beat if they play at all like they're capable. 2nd round youre looking at more likely a coin flip in terms of talent. if tubby can win that one, it shows me progress. that's why i say two. i don't wanna be teased by a guy who wins us one and says "hey its better than the last 23 years!" since when do the last 23 years have any bearing on this year?? its a what have you done for me lately philosophy now and in order to improve, we need to look at it as such. the 2nd round vs sweet 16 barrier doesn't have to do with "just this one game." it has to do with his track record of getting the team up for one game but not sustaining, as i've tried to say multiple times but you just don't seem to get it.
 

As Tubby's #1 supporter in Gopherhole I believe he will need more than just one win in the NCAA Tourney. There is already too much pressure by media and fans to let him go. Teague will be forced to make another big payout to keep everybody happy.
 

Parski1 said:
As Tubby's #1 supporter in Gopherhole I believe he will need more than just one win in the NCAA Tourney. There is already too much pressure by media and fans to let him go. Teague will be forced to make another big payout to keep everybody happy.
Click to expand...

I agree, two wins needed to keep his job. Ellis was about as frontal as an Assoc AD gets on Dubay today, he essentially blamed Tubby for the issues this team has had.
 

dpodoll68 said:
You can all rationalize it any way you want, but if you fire him for losing in the 2nd round and keep him for losing in the S16, you are basing a monumentally important personnel decision on the basis of one game. This is inarguable. Saying "yeah but Tournament" doesn't change this fact.

Speaking of facts, it is also a fact that this school hasn't had a Tournament victory in 23 years. This may annoy or upset you or whatever, but it is a fact nonetheless. Facts indeed are pesky things when they don't fit into your agenda.
Click to expand...

It's also a fact that the Gophers went to the Final Four in 1997. They won in that tournament. That's a fact. The game was later vacated and that's a fact. You can spin a fact all you want if that makes you satisfied. I'm not saying that Tubby should be kept depending on how he plays in the final 32. I'm already at the point that he should be fired after the season. And yes, there's obviously a tipping point that swings the pendulum the other way. If he brought the team on a run to the elite 8 or final four and showed much greater coaching judgement than he has the past 6 years, then I may re-consider my stance to want a coaching change. I generally refrain from judgements like this until the season is over, because that's obviously the best time to truly asses it... coming from my fan perspective.
 

Golden13 said:
It's also a fact that the Gophers went to the Final Four in 1997. They won in that tournament. That's a fact. The game was later vacated and that's a fact. You can spin a fact all you want if that makes you satisfied. I'm not saying that Tubby should be kept depending on how he plays in the final 32. I'm already at the point that he should be fired after the season. And yes, there's obviously a tipping point that swings the pendulum the other way. If he brought the team on a run to the elite 8 or final four and showed much greater coaching judgement than he has the past 6 years, then I may re-consider my stance to want a coaching change. I generally refrain from judgements like this until the season is over, because that's obviously the best time to truly asses it... coming from my fan perspective.
Click to expand...

Know need to justify your reasoning to him, he's simply a champion of mediocrity on GH.
 

goldengophers said:
Know need to justify your reasoning to him, he's simply a champion of mediocrity on GH.
Click to expand...

I'll put aside your stunning homophonic fallibility for the moment, and ask you a few questions, if you have a moment between brain surgeries:

1) What exactly does it mean to be a "champion of mediocrity"? Did I have to compete in a tournament? Did I win something? Do I get to wear a belt and/or hoist a trophy?

2) How does accurately, factually, and correctly pointing out that a Tournament victory would make this the most successful season for Minnesota in 23 years make me a "champion of mediocrity"?

3) How does finishing among the top 32 teams in the country (in other words, among the top 10% of existing Division I teams) make the team or the season "mediocre"? Last I checked, being in the 90th percentile or better is by definition not "mediocre".

I'll hang up and listen.
 

Parski1 said:
As Tubby's #1 supporter in Gopherhole I believe he will need more than just one win in the NCAA Tourney. There is already too much pressure by media and fans to let him go. Teague will be forced to make another big payout to keep everybody happy.
Click to expand...

beat a top 12 team (3 seed) or lose your job?
 

dpodoll68 said:
I'll put aside your stunning homophonic fallibility for the moment, and ask you a few questions, if you have a moment between brain surgeries:
Click to expand...
dpodoll68 said:
1) What exactly does it mean to be a "champion of mediocrity"? Did I have to compete in a tournament? Did I win something? Do I get to wear a belt and/or hoist a trophy?

2) How does accurately, factually, and correctly pointing out that a Tournament victory would make this the most successful season for Minnesota in 23 years make me a "champion of mediocrity"?

3) How does finishing among the top 32 teams in the country (in other words, among the top 10% of existing Division I teams) make the team or the season "mediocre"? Last I checked, being in the 90th percentile or better is by definition not "mediocre".

I'll hang up and listen.
Click to expand...

Condescend much?
 


Status
Not open for further replies.



Top Bottom