Maybe we should start to accept that we are not landing any of the "big three"....

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68 said:
The NCAA tournament game was won in the 1st half of the season, apparently.

It's also specious to suggest that the program was being "destroyed", given that the most successful season under Tubby Smith was his last. If something is being "destroyed", it would seem to suggest a downward trend, not an upward one.
Click to expand...

Tubby's last season here was a definite under-achievement. We were 8th in the nation in the first half of the season, and sputtered our way to a bubble team through the Big Ten season. We beat a UCLA team that was injured and in disarray, whom had their head coach fired after losing to us. That Gopher team could have been so much more. You can't argue against that no matter how much you liked Tubby.

For the record, I supported Coach Smith till the end.
 

GoldyForLife said:
Tubby's last season here was a definite under-achievement. We were 8th in the nation in the first half of the season, and sputtered our way to a bubble team through the Big Ten season. We beat a UCLA team that was injured and in disarray, whom had their head coach fired after losing to us. That Gopher team could have been so much more. You can't argue against that no matter how much you liked Tubby.

For the record, I supported Coach Smith till the end.
Click to expand...

Underachievement or not, it was still the best season by a Minnesota basketball team in 23 years. You can't argue against that no matter how much you disliked Tubby.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Link?

If there's any truth to this (there isn't), firing a coach on the basis of whether he may or may not sign some recruits that may or may not help the team in the future is an absolute f8cking joke. You don't retain or dismiss coaches on the basis of recruiting, you retain or dismiss coaches on the basis of winning (cleanly). Minnesota fired Tubby Smith because they think they can do better than their best coach in 23 years, not on the basis of whether or not he may or may not have signed some hyped recruits. What a completely asinine and ridiculous assertion.
Click to expand...

You serious think he would have been fired if Tyus-Rashad-Reid were high on a package play for Tubby/stay-at-home deal? C'mon mane.

Ok, he may not have been fired for that reason, but it would have saved his job if he had GREAT relationships with 2 or 3 of them.
 

katze019 said:
You serious think he would have been fired if Tyus-Rashad-Reid were high on a package play for Tubby/stay-at-home deal? C'mon mane.

Ok, he may not have been fired for that reason, but it would have saved his job if he had GREAT relationships with 2 or 3 of them.
Click to expand...

I absolutely believe he would have been fired regardless of what relationship he had with 2 or 3 of them. What matters is the results on the court and in the classroom. Not what type of salesman he is in the living room of Minnesota kids. He had mediocre results and the fan base was getting anxious. That sentiment would not have been appeased because he had a GREAT relationship with two Minnesota kids for 2014. We need to aim a little higher than just trying to sign the best two or three Minnesota kids. That shouldn't be the bar here.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Underachievement or not, it was still the best season by a Minnesota basketball team in 23 years. You can't argue against that no matter how much you disliked Tubby.
Click to expand...

There was the 97 Final Four year.
 


golfing18now said:
I absolutely believe he would have been fired regardless of what relationship he had with 2 or 3 of them.
Click to expand...

If there was the feeling Tubby was going to land 2 of all 3, it would have bought him another year.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Underachievement or not, it was still the best season by a Minnesota basketball team in 23 years. You can't argue against that no matter how much you disliked Tubby.
Click to expand...

The 2004-05 team finished fourth in the Big Ten, highest finish in the last 23 years and second best finish in the last 31 years so yes, *gasp* some can argue that's more impressive than 2012-13.
 

Maximus said:
The 2004-05 team finished fourth in the Big Ten, highest finish in the last 23 years and second best finish in the last 31 years so yes, *gasp* some can argue that's more impressive than 2012-13.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing which is more impressive, I'm arguing which was better. Winning one Tournament game is always better than winning zero. Always. By your logic, it is more impressive to finish 2nd in the Big Ten and not make the Tournament than it is to finish 7th and win the national title. I'm interested in getting to the Tournament and winning games there. I'd rather win the Big Ten than not, but if we're not winning it, the place is irrelevant as long as we make the Tournament and win there.
 

dpodoll68 said:
I'm not arguing which is more impressive, I'm arguing which was better. Winning one Tournament game is always better than winning zero. Always.
Click to expand...

Finishing 4th in the Big Ten is always better than finishing 9th or whatever we finished last year. Always.
 




dpodoll68 said:
I'm interested in getting to the Tournament and winning games there.
Click to expand...

That's super and many feel the exact same way. Unfortunately, that's your opinion so spare us the "you can't argue against that".

Yes, some of us can.

The best Big Ten finish in 23 years with a win against Indiana in the Big Ten Tournament can be considered by some "better" than a win over UCLA and a 21 point halftime deficit against Florida.
 

MadtownGopher said:
Finishing 4th in the Big Ten is always better than finishing 9th or whatever we finished last year. Always.
Click to expand...

So you'd rather finish 4th in the Big Ten and miss the Tournament than finish 9th in the Big Ten and win the national championship?
 

dpodoll68 said:
So you'd rather finish 4th in the Big Ten and miss the Tournament than finish 9th in the Big Ten and win the national championship?
Click to expand...

I was just showing that you are picking and choosing portions of both seasons to make your argument look stronger.

Let's put this Tubby argument to rest though. We all know who loved the guy and we all know who was happy to see the change. No need in polluting another thread with regurgitated banter.
 



MadtownGopher said:
Finishing 4th in the Big Ten is always better than finishing 9th or whatever we finished last year. Always.
Click to expand...

It looks better, but it can also depend on the strength of the conference. For instance in 2004-05 when we finished 4th, the Big Ten only got 5 teams into the tournament, compared to 7 last year. So I think you could make the argument that last year's team, which finished 7th was comparable to the team that finished 4th. And obviously we got our first official tournament win in 23 years last year.
 

Back to the OP subject...

I believe there is value in making the best possible attempt to recruit the Big 3, even if it is likely that none will land here (and i'm not saying that none will land here, but...). It is an opportunity for Pitino to show and demonstrate his personal philosophy: relentlessness in recruiting, class and style in his message, and confidence in his system as he explains it. Being able to do this, and showing a not-out-of-it until it's over attitude while being classy, will pay dividends in recruiting the next set of in-state recruits, in my opinion. So whether it is true or not that we are out of the running, I'm happy with the approach and tenacity shown by Pitino. Even if it doesn't pay immediate dividends.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Underachievement or not, it was still the best season by a Minnesota basketball team in 23 years. You can't argue against that no matter how much you disliked Tubby.
Click to expand...

Can you stop with this "The Gophers never existed in the 1990s" *&^!#*&^!#*&^!#*&^!#? It's really old and stupid.
 

dpodoll68 said:
So you'd rather finish 4th in the Big Ten and miss the Tournament than finish 9th in the Big Ten and win the national championship?
Click to expand...

In almost any scenario, I would prefer winning a national championship to not winning a national championship. However, I do not think it is as simple as saying, "winning one game in the tournament is always better than none." As has been stated previously, if you compare season to season, sometimes I believe it is more impressive to finish 4th in the conference than to finish 3rd, because of the strength of schedule.

Within the same season, I would prefer to win more big ten games than less.
I would prefer to win more tournament games than less.
I would prefer to win more NIT games than less.

If you want to start mixing the results, I do not think it is as clear. I would prefer to make the final four of the NIT than to play in the tournament and lose in the first (sorry, second) round. I'd rather win the NIT than make it to the round of 32. I'd rather make the Sweet 16 than win the NIT. You can mix in regular season results to muddy the picture more, but I do not believe that winning one tournament game is better than any other result. For example, this year, I would have preferred to win the Big 10 and lose in the first round of the tournament as opposed to finishing 7th/8th/9th and winning one game in the tournament. The additional wins that give you the first place finish are more important to me. Would I rather win the B10 or a national championship? I would take an 0-16 record in the B10 if we would go on to win the national title. It depends, and I'm sure everyone has their own nuances. Yours happens to be that tournament wins are more important than any other, no matter what.
 

As to the original topic, I hope we can land one or more of the recruits, but it does not bother me if we do not, as long as we still have talented players coming to the team who can help us compete and win.
 

hyaluronic said:
As to the original topic, I hope we can land one or more of the recruits, but it does not bother me if we do not, as long as we still have talented players coming to the team who can help us compete and win.
Click to expand...

Spot on, brother...spot on.
 

OP titled: "Maybe we should start to accept that we are not landing any of the "big three"."

We have all accepted the fact that you will never get laid by Jessica Alba.
 



I think it is a huge leap of faith that both Jones and Vaughn would even get drafted in the first round after one year. Maybe they come to a college and are able to play at a level that enables them to enter the draft and play in the NBA, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit of that isn't even an option for them after one year. I'd actually be more surprised if they were able to play in the NBA after one year of college.
 

bemidjigopher said:
Even if you win the NIT, I would still rather make the big dance.
Click to expand...

That's fair. I can understand why you would say that. I prefer a deep NIT run to a first round NCAA exit. Gives me something to cheer for, gives players a chance to develop against quality (but not elite) talent. It helped fuel our '97 team - and looked to do the same with the '12-'13 Gopher team in the first half of the season. Like I said, you can muddy the picture. I'd probably prefer (if using the '12-'13 B10) a 3rd place finish and a first round exit to a 10th place finish and an NIT championship run. Given our 7th/8th/9th place finish and one win in the tourney, I'd put that close to on par w/ an NIT championship run - though this year, the NIT would have been a huge disappointment.

To me, it has the appearance of being highly subjective. You can probably put objective quantities on it to derive where I split the hairs 'subjectively,' but the reiterations are far too many to do so in foresight.
 

hyaluronic said:
That's fair. I can understand why you would say that. I prefer a deep NIT run to a first round NCAA exit. Gives me something to cheer for, gives players a chance to develop against quality (but not elite) talent. It helped fuel our '97 team - and looked to do the same with the '12-'13 Gopher team in the first half of the season. Like I said, you can muddy the picture. I'd probably prefer (if using the '12-'13 B10) a 3rd place finish and a first round exit to a 10th place finish and an NIT championship run. Given our 7th/8th/9th place finish and one win in the tourney, I'd put that close to on par w/ an NIT championship run - though this year, the NIT would have been a huge disappointment.

To me, it has the appearance of being highly subjective. You can probably put objective quantities on it to derive where I split the hairs 'subjectively,' but the reiterations are far too many to do so in foresight.
Click to expand...
To each their own, but the way I see it the selection committee thinks the last few bubble teams were better than the NIT champ. I can see the argument if you win the NIT, it will set up your team better than a trip to Dayton or a round 64 exit for the future. I don't see it that way, but I can see why others do, but if you reach the round 32 there is no way I'd trade that for an NIT run. Was it the 96 or 98 team that won the NIT, I remember the 96 team losing to Tulane. Like I said I understand where your coming from, heck there was a time teams turn down the big dance to go to the NIT.
 

cncmin said:
Can you stop with this "The Gophers never existed in the 1990s" *&^!#*&^!#*&^!#*&^!#? It's really old and stupid.
Click to expand...

No. People want to forget, and I will never let them. If you don't like it...too bad.
 


Everyone keep mentioning the Gophers went to the Final Four in 97. It will send Dpo's blood pressure through the roof.:cool02:
 

station19 said:
Everyone keep mentioning the Gophers went to the Final Four in 97. It will send Dpo's blood pressure through the roof.:cool02:
Click to expand...

19, I just put on a new roof a couple of years ago, I don't want to go do it again for about 30 more years. :)
 

cncmin said:
Can you stop with this "The Gophers never existed in the 1990s" *&^!#*&^!#*&^!#*&^!#? It's really old and stupid.
Click to expand...
You don't hear Michigan folks say there was no Fab Five. Minnesota stupid.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom