I would guess that if somebody asked Tubby off the record about his goal for the program he would say top ten. (Actually, his first goal at this point would probably be to get rid of the AD.) I assume that he's a competitive guy which is why he's had the success that he's had.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Myron's story
- Thread starter SelectionSunday
- Start date
I would guess that if somebody asked Tubby off the record about his goal for the program he would say top ten. (Actually, his first goal at this point would probably be to get rid of the AD.) I assume that he's a competitive guy which is why he's had the success that he's had.
Saying Tubby was hired to make us one of the top 10 basketball programs in the country is pure hyperbole. Was he hired (and paid a big salary, yes) to make Minnesota relevant again and get the Gopher program to the point where we're it's legitimate factor in the Big Ten and then the NCAA Tournament? To that I would answer a definitive yes. I think the Gophers are relevant again, now the next step (and the tougher one) is climbing the Big Ten ladder and following it with NCAA success.
By my calculations, the top 10 basketball programs over the last 10+ seasons have been Arizona, Duke, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan State, North Carolina, Syracuse, UCLA & UConn. Those are some pretty heady names. Maybe I'm out to lunch, but I don't know any reasonable person who would expect the Gopher program to be hangin' with that company after just a 4- or 5-year time frame. Holy crap.
Some posts on this thread have suggested that Tubby can be expected, after a certain amount of time, to compete for B10 titles. (Last year's team could have if everyone had played). That means that we would be competing with Illinois and MSU. By your definition, wouldn't that make us a top ten program?
This being the fourth season coming up, you expect the Gophers to be a top ten team otherwise you're disappointed?
They clearly won't be top ten this year and, no, I won't be disappointed. I'm hopeful that the group he's brought will not have anyone with a one and done agenda and, therefore, will be willing to play as a team. Sometimes that is the way a program can develop in a sustainable way.
If you are consistently competing for a B10 title that makes you one of the 10 best programs in the country so we are essentially saying the same thing. I said a four to five year period is a reasonable time frame to see if that is achievable. I'm not bitter about anything because there has been a definite improvement and because it's just a basketball team, not life.. I am, as a customer, aggravated about the home NC schedule, which I've said early and often.
No argument on the home NC schedule. However, I think there's a difference between consistently competing for Big 10 titles and being a 'Top 10' national program. In the year you actually win the big 10, sure you're top 10. In years you finish 3rd or 4th, you're not. But, I took your comment as an expectation to be one of the top 10 overall. Right now, that's probably Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, UConn, Florida, UCLA, Michigan State, Syracuse and Louisville (obviously a few are subjective). Winning a big 10 title once every four years and competing for it the other 3 wouldn't vault us into that level. Wisconsin competes every year, Purdue has recently, Illinois has now and then. I don't consider any of them top 10 national programs. Indiana will be if they ever rise back up.
No argument on the home NC schedule. However, I think there's a difference between consistently competing for Big 10 titles and being a 'Top 10' national program. In the year you actually win the big 10, sure you're top 10. In years you finish 3rd or 4th, you're not. But, I took your comment as an expectation to be one of the top 10 overall. Right now, that's probably Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, UConn, Florida, UCLA, Michigan State, Syracuse and Louisville (obviously a few are subjective). Winning a big 10 title once every four years and competing for it the other 3 wouldn't vault us into that level. Wisconsin competes every year, Purdue has recently, Illinois has now and then. I don't consider any of them top 10 national programs. Indiana will be if they ever rise back up.
UNC was nowhere near the top ten this year but, historically, it is a top tier program. A top ten program doesn't mean that you win the conf title every year but it means that you are there more often than not. Tubby has (had) a reputation as a coach who could produce those kinds of results. When he became available they jumped on it. Did the U expect a FF every year? Of course not. Did they and do they hope for regular Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight appearances. I think the answer is yes.
What are you smokin? Tubby was hired to turn the program around not make wine out of water. Turning it around will bring greater expectations (see this thread) but anyone who thinks Tubby was hired to make us a Top 10 program is dreaming.
tubby was hired at roughly 2 million a year or there about to make this a 9-9 6th place program in the B10 year after year? yea right.
anthoer thread full of nothing but excuses!
I completely agree with Myron's article and am dismayed that some people seem ok with setting the bar lower. If I told you on the day Tubby was hired that he'd be here 4 years and not win a tournament game, I assume everyone would have called me crazy (or assume I'd taken over the Art Vandelay account). That's not to say I think Tubby should be fired or anything crazy like that, just that his tenure would be falling well short of expectations through 4 years.
I agree with Jamiche to a point. I think Tubby was hired to have the Gophers competing for Big Ten titles which likely would put them in or near the top ten some years. I certainly don't expect the top 10 every year (UConn, Arizona, UNC, and UCLA didn't even make the NCAA's this year), but I think they should be there some years.
Looking at the team coming back, it's tough for me to see progress next year (a solidly in the tournament team that advances at least one round). We lack size in the backcourt and athleticism everywhere. The team has only 6 returning players (assuming no Mbakwe or White) and will probably dress only 10 scholarship players. This team won't be able to rotate like last year due to lack of depth, won't be able to defend the same way due to losing Damian, and still lacks a go to scorer and has no power forward on the roster (again).
I agree with Jamiche to a point. I think Tubby was hired to have the Gophers competing for Big Ten titles which likely would put them in or near the top ten some years. I certainly don't expect the top 10 every year (UConn, Arizona, UNC, and UCLA didn't even make the NCAA's this year), but I think they should be there some years.
Looking at the team coming back, it's tough for me to see progress next year (a solidly in the tournament team that advances at least one round). We lack size in the backcourt and athleticism everywhere. The team has only 6 returning players (assuming no Mbakwe or White) and will probably dress only 10 scholarship players. This team won't be able to rotate like last year due to lack of depth, won't be able to defend the same way due to losing Damian, and still lacks a go to scorer and has no power forward on the roster (again).
Why would you bring someone of Tubby's stature in and pay him 2-3 times what you would have to pay someone without a big name without the expectation that he would turn the gophers into an elite program? There's no other reason to do it. At some point just barely getting into the tournament and losing in the first round will be considered underachieving.
SelectionSunday
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 24,401
- Reaction score
- 4,458
- Points
- 113
"Some posts on this thread have suggested that Tubby can be expected, after a certain amount of time, to compete for B10 titles. (Last year's team could have if everyone had played). That means that we would be competing with Illinois and MSU. By your definition, wouldn't that make us a top ten program?"
To answer your question, absolutely not. You're plenty knowledgeable enough to know I was referring to (10) programs that have been, arguably, the 10 best programs for roughly the last decade. One season sniffing at the top 10 doesn't make one a top-10 program; it makes one a top-10 program for one season (like the Gophers were in '97).
We're certainly in agreement on the nonconference home schedule. That's the one area where Dan Monson has outperformed Tubby. Monson at least scheduled some home-and-homes (Arizona State, Iowa State, Marquette, Oregon, Texas Tech) or 4-year deals (Georgia) vs. "Big 6" programs. Also had home-and-homes vs. UAB & UNLV, two consistently good programs.
"At some point just barely getting into the tournament and losing in the first round will be considered underachieving."
I'm in 100% agreement with you on that. ... starting this coming season (Year 4). I don't think the Gophers are as bereft of talent as others seem to think. True, we won't be as deep, and certainly we won't have MSU or Purdue talent/experience. Nevertheless, I expect the Gophers to compete favorably with the rest of the Big Ten, OSU included. I'm not expecting a one-and-done in 2010-11, not in the least.
To answer your question, absolutely not. You're plenty knowledgeable enough to know I was referring to (10) programs that have been, arguably, the 10 best programs for roughly the last decade. One season sniffing at the top 10 doesn't make one a top-10 program; it makes one a top-10 program for one season (like the Gophers were in '97).
We're certainly in agreement on the nonconference home schedule. That's the one area where Dan Monson has outperformed Tubby. Monson at least scheduled some home-and-homes (Arizona State, Iowa State, Marquette, Oregon, Texas Tech) or 4-year deals (Georgia) vs. "Big 6" programs. Also had home-and-homes vs. UAB & UNLV, two consistently good programs.
"At some point just barely getting into the tournament and losing in the first round will be considered underachieving."
I'm in 100% agreement with you on that. ... starting this coming season (Year 4). I don't think the Gophers are as bereft of talent as others seem to think. True, we won't be as deep, and certainly we won't have MSU or Purdue talent/experience. Nevertheless, I expect the Gophers to compete favorably with the rest of the Big Ten, OSU included. I'm not expecting a one-and-done in 2010-11, not in the least.
Why all the doom and gloom. Player development is as important as the number of stars a player has when starting the program. A good proportion of the 5* recruits leave after a year or two anyway.
Granted it does not hold the promise it did a year ago but things might change in the next month or two. If the Gophers start the season with the current roster, they are still ahead of the Monson years. Tubby's first recruiting class was probably lower than the current and those players have had significant improvement.
2008 - Ralph Sampson, III C 6'11" 220 Northview H.S. (GA) C #23 89
2008 - Colton Iverson C 6'10" 250 Yankton H.S. (SD) C #27 88 Signed Minnesota
2008 - Devoe Joseph SG 6'2" 170 Pickering H.S. (CAN) SG #81 76 Signed Minnesota
2010 - Maurice Walker Center 6-10 270 Brewster Academy (NH) C #9 92 Signed
2010 - Austin Hollins Shooting Guard 6-4 170 Germantown H.S. (TN) SG #65 89 Signed
2010 - Elliott Eliason C 6'11" 235 Chadron H.S. (NE) C #54 87
2010 - Oto Osenieks Power Forward 6-8 205 Brehm Prep (IL) PF #86 87 Signed
2010 - Maverick Ahanmisi Shooting Guard 6-2 Stoneridge Prep (CA) POST 84 Signed
Granted it does not hold the promise it did a year ago but things might change in the next month or two. If the Gophers start the season with the current roster, they are still ahead of the Monson years. Tubby's first recruiting class was probably lower than the current and those players have had significant improvement.
2008 - Ralph Sampson, III C 6'11" 220 Northview H.S. (GA) C #23 89
2008 - Colton Iverson C 6'10" 250 Yankton H.S. (SD) C #27 88 Signed Minnesota
2008 - Devoe Joseph SG 6'2" 170 Pickering H.S. (CAN) SG #81 76 Signed Minnesota
2010 - Maurice Walker Center 6-10 270 Brewster Academy (NH) C #9 92 Signed
2010 - Austin Hollins Shooting Guard 6-4 170 Germantown H.S. (TN) SG #65 89 Signed
2010 - Elliott Eliason C 6'11" 235 Chadron H.S. (NE) C #54 87
2010 - Oto Osenieks Power Forward 6-8 205 Brehm Prep (IL) PF #86 87 Signed
2010 - Maverick Ahanmisi Shooting Guard 6-2 Stoneridge Prep (CA) POST 84 Signed
"Some posts on this thread have suggested that Tubby can be expected, after a certain amount of time, to compete for B10 titles. (Last year's team could have if everyone had played). That means that we would be competing with Illinois and MSU. By your definition, wouldn't that make us a top ten program?"
To answer your question, absolutely not. You're plenty knowledgeable enough to know I was referring to (10) programs that have been, arguably, the 10 best programs for roughly the last decade. One season sniffing at the top 10 doesn't make one a top-10 program; it makes one a top-10 program for one season (like the Gophers were in '97).
We're certainly in agreement on the nonconference home schedule. That's the one area where Dan Monson has outperformed Tubby. Monson at least scheduled some home-and-homes (Arizona State, Iowa State, Marquette, Oregon, Texas Tech) or 4-year deals (Georgia) vs. "Big 6" programs. Also had home-and-homes vs. UAB & UNLV, two consistently good programs.
"At some point just barely getting into the tournament and losing in the first round will be considered underachieving."
I'm in 100% agreement with you on that. ... starting this coming season (Year 4). I don't think the Gophers are as bereft of talent as others seem to think. True, we won't be as deep, and certainly we won't have MSU or Purdue talent/experience. Nevertheless, I expect the Gophers to compete favorably with the rest of the Big Ten, OSU included. I'm not expecting a one-and-done in 2010-11, not in the least.
I think that we are in agreement which is why I used the word "titles" instead of "title". A one year run is a fluke or an aberration. However, my position is the same. There's no reason to bring in someone of Tubby's stature and at Tubby's salary if, after a reasonable period of time, the team isn't going to consistently be in the hunt for B10 titles. Once that happens it's ipso facto that the gophers are a top ten program.
I think that we are in agreement which is why I used the word "titles" instead of "title". A one year run is a fluke or an aberration. However, my position is the same. There's no reason to bring in someone of Tubby's stature and at Tubby's salary if, after a reasonable period of time, the team isn't going to consistently be in the hunt for B10 titles. Once that happens it's ipso facto that the gophers are a top ten program.
I think you're a bit too fixated on Tubby's salary. It's in the top 10 (or was last season) that is true. It does not correlate to an expectation as high as what you have. Anthony Grant is higher on the list then Tubby. No one would argue he's a top 10 coach. So is Rick Barnes. I certainly do not view him as a top 10 coach either. Coaches that have won National Championships don't generally change schools. If they do, they're probably going to get paid well in doing so. And certainly the new school will have expectations. But to expect him to vault us into the same stratesphere as Duke, UNC, Michigan State and Syracuse in a 5-year period is ridiculous. That is not my expectation. There is a difference between competing for conference titles and being in the top 10 overall programs. I don't understand how you can't see that. IF we are ever to reach that level, it will only happen over a much longer period of time, say 10 years or so.