I'm a Tubby supporter. That said, I think Patrick makes a couple of decent points. Tubby is not perfect. He has made some mistakes. No doubt communication breakdowns created some of this issue.
But, I also think Reusse took a couple of unnecessary cheap shots. How does he know Cobbs is Horizon League? That's just stupid to say and frankly irresponsible. He's an 18-year old and this old, crabby-ass writer is gonna rip him in the major newspaper in the market? Low blow. Uncalled for, but something we should expect from this lazy writer.
On top of which, he totally omits the fact that Johnson, Westbrook, and Hoffarber have all developed under Tubby and developed well. Westbrook as a freshman under Monson/Molinari made Cobbs look like Lebron James. Yet, Tubby has him playing good basketball. Johnson was doing nothing under Monson/Molinari and Tubby has him going. Nolen has definitely gotten better since his freshman year. My gosh, did Pat even look at the stats? Nolen didn't play a great deal as a freshman, he was a backup to McKenzie and filled in some. He played well at times last year, and was playing okay this year, but to say he hasn't gotten better since his freshman year is just stupid (again). Pat - as lazy writers do - just leaves out stuff in order to prove his straw man's argument.
The straw man's argument here is that Tubby is getting a free pass. I don't think that's the case. Sure, he has his defenders (like me), but that doesn't mean there aren't things to criticize and people have done that (including me). But, it also doesn't mean the lazy Ruesse should just be able to write a hatchet job (as he usually does) leaving out some glaringly important facts. And, in this case he brings nothing new to the table. There are no interesting new tidbits in here. No quotes from players, former players, basketball experts, etc. Just drivel from a lazy guy who needed to fill 16-inches of column space by his deadline, so he threw together this masterpiece.
Remember Reusse for what he is. A lazy, well past his prime writer who loves to play the role of contrarian by using half-truths to prove a point that is based on a false straw man's argument to begin with. He's made a career out of is, so I'll give him his due. But, he has no real convictions. He writes to stir the pot and nothing else. There's no "craft" in that. There isn't any writing for what you believe in. It is simply lazy writing to get a response, and that is sad. Its like the older brother picking on the younger brother for no other reason than to elicit a response. It is immature and silly. But, after 30 years, that's what he's come to.
Sure, about once every 90 days, Pat will write that heart-tugging story about the assistant women's soccer coach at Carleton College who's cat was dying from some strange disease and they brought the cat on all the road trips and used that as motivation to beat Gustavus. Heartwarming stuff, no doubt, but the template is getting a little old.
I'd love to see someone do a column like this on Reusse's career. Seriously, here's a guy who has written for 30 years in this market. His writing has become so unimportant and irrelevant that the paper decided he could become a part time employee. After 30 years, they basically told him he didn't really matter. He writes only a handful of columns a month, most of them appear on page 8. In the meantime, after all of these years, he is relegated to having to get up at 3 am every stinking day to host a terrible talk radio show that has about 17 listeners, is absolutely tanking in the ratings and is dying on the vine. What do you suppose goes through his mind every Monday morning when that alarm striked 3?? "How'd it come to this?" Way to parlay that long career into something great! And, this is the guy who is giving out career advice to Tubby Smith?? Ok, Pat, you go dude!
