Reusse 1500 column: Four years in, Tubby is a big time flop

Donate To GopherHole

I am not going to rip on Reusse because that gets old. Just a couple points:

-I have some issue with him saying the Gophers got a "gift" NCAA bid two years ago. An NCAA bid is an NCAA bid.
-Holtz is (IMO) a WAY bigger flop than Tubby (for leaving, not his results while here)
 

In all fairness to Holtz who is a complete clown, he did have it in his contract if ND came calling he could leave. I'm not sure if Smith followed his lead and put every damn D1 school in the nation in his contract or what....
 


This guy is a hack so let me rebuttle with some facts.

If 20 wins a season is so easy how come Minnesota has only done it 10 times in it's entire history because none of the Clem years count. Tubby has 2 of your 10 so chew on that one for a bit.

Gifts of NCAA tournaments.. Well you only have 7 in your entire history that count.. 2 which came from Tubby so it's not as easy as he's making it out to be.

I could go on. But you better be careful because he's going to have a good team next year and if you don't lock him up he might be gone for a better opportunity. The last 20 years for your program have been marred by ncaa sanctions and dan monson(1 ncaa tournament in 8 years) so again I'd say you better get some perspective on just how successful Tubby has been there in just 4 years.
 


At least get your facts straight

notagopherfan said:
. ... because none of the Clem years count.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not a true statement. You should use facts if you're trying to make a point. Clem's 1986-87 through 1992-93 seasons do count in the eyes of the NCAA. It's the 1993-94 through 1998-99 seasons that were vacated.
 

notagopherfan said:
This guy is a hack so let me rebuttle with some facts.

If 20 wins a season is so easy how come Minnesota has only done it 10 times in it's entire history because none of the Clem years count. Tubby has 2 of your 10 so chew on that one for a bit.

Gifts of NCAA tournaments.. Well you only have 7 in your entire history that count.. 2 which came from Tubby so it's not as easy as he's making it out to be.

I could go on. But you better be careful because he's going to have a good team next year and if you don't lock him up he might be gone for a better opportunity. The last 20 years for your program have been marred by ncaa sanctions and dan monson(1 ncaa tournament in 8 years) so again I'd say you better get some perspective on just how successful Tubby has been there in just 4 years.
Click to expand...
Hello again Friend of Tubby.
 

Maybe this should be called the "tubby Smith is the worst thing ever for mn basketball and should be burned at a stake because he is an evil witch" basketball forum ...
 

so 2 of clems appearances count.. 89 90 but it doesn't change the facts. You only have 7 that count, 2 for Tubby. I am not this friend of Tubby Guy. My name is George and I'm a UK fan but have always been a fan of Coach Tubby Smith, even when he was at Tulsa and Georgia. I was a fan of Clem too because I went to WKU for 2 years, so did my cousin and Uncle.

Let me just remind you that your basketball program is in good capable hands. It's not to say you can't criticize the man but he's done pretty well especially compared to your history and it's only going to be better going forward.
 



The only part of the column with which I disagree is the list of big name coaches. I don't think Mauch counts. Maybe Lemaire and then Holtz, Grant (round two) and Tubby. Winning 20 with our schedule is meaningless. Failing to finish above sixth in the B10 in four years is, at the very least, a disappointment.

Tubby doesn't help his cause by coming off in interviews as arrogant, dismissive and evasive. It's his program and right now it's not in good shape. Instead of taking responsibility, he's pointing fingers.
 

Respectfully, who in this thread (other than perhaps Patrick Reusse) said that? I don't see anything in this thread that even remotely suggests Tubby is the worst thing ever for Gopher basketball (yes, I'm aware you're using hyperbole). Speaking for myself, I just prefer that when people use facts to support an argument, the "facts" should actually be facts.
 

Winning 20 isn't meaningless when you've only done it 10 times in YOUR ENTIRE PROGRAM HISTORY. You beat 4 ncaa tournament teams before you ever played a conference game. So 1/3 of your non conference schedule contained tournament teams Wofford, WVU, UNC and Akron. You went 11-1. You're telling me at Minnesota, those are cup cake wins? You beat 2 teams ranked in the top 10.. unc and purdue. You were ranked as high as #13

When was the last time that happened? Has to be 10 years or so. Haven't checked that but I can't remember seeing you in a top 25 poll for a while until Tubby got there.

The fact is you got bit this year by circumstances but it was looking really good till late January. I know going 1-10 down the stretch had to be painful to watch but it doesn't erase all the good that happened before that.
 

I disagree that the program is "not in good shape." Last year was a terrible year. Nobody can possibly deny that. Whether you lay that at the door of the injuries, Devoe the quitter, poor play by the players on the court, insufficient recruiting, or bad coaching, or a combo, it was a bad year. However, this is still a staff that took over for absolute garbage and has put us in the position of perennial NCAA contender, with a strong foundation to build if we ever manage to catch a break. I think we'll surprise some folks next year. I'm not even going to read the Reusse column, because it's clear that the man has abandoned any journalistic integrity he ever had in his quest for pageviews and controversy. But I'm not sure how any Gopher fan can say that this program "is in trouble." We've got a good class coming in next year. Let's be a little optimistic.
 



the challenge of 20 wins

notagopherfan said:
Winning 20 isn't meaningless when you've only done it 10 times in YOUR ENTIRE PROGRAM HISTORY. You beat 4 ncaa tournament teams before you ever played a conference game. So 1/3 of your non conference schedule contained tournament teams Wofford, WVU, UNC and Akron. You went 11-1. You're telling me at Minnesota, those are cup cake wins? You beat 2 teams ranked in the top 10.. unc and purdue. You were ranked as high as #13

When was the last time that happened? Has to be 10 years or so. Haven't checked that but I can't remember seeing you in a top 25 poll for a while until Tubby got there.

The fact is you got bit this year by circumstances but it was looking really good till late January. I know going 1-10 down the stretch had to be painful to watch but it doesn't erase all the good that happened before that.
Click to expand...

Right around 115 teams in NCAA Div 1 won at least 20 games this year.
 

jmag21 said:
I disagree that the program is "not in good shape." Last year was a terrible year. Nobody can possibly deny that. Whether you lay that at the door of the injuries, Devoe the quitter, poor play by the players on the court, insufficient recruiting, or bad coaching, or a combo, it was a bad year. However, this is still a staff that took over for absolute garbage and has put us in the position of perennial NCAA contender, with a strong foundation to build if we ever manage to catch a break. I think we'll surprise some folks next year. I'm not even going to read the Reusse column, because it's clear that the man has abandoned any journalistic integrity he ever had in his quest for pageviews and controversy. But I'm not sure how any Gopher fan can say that this program "is in trouble." We've got a good class coming in next year. Let's be a little optimistic.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

Go Gophers
 

ShowinGoldyLove said:
Hello again Friend of Tubby.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure this person was posting well before FOT got banned.

If everything went right, meaning he didn't have issues outside of his control messing up stuff, and we got the same results, then I'd call him a big time flop. Evaluating the entire situation, I'd say it's more of just "okay". He's done some really good things, and has come up short in numerous other ways. We beat top 10 teams virtually every year. We've also lost to Michigan too many times. We're +.500 in BTT games, but we haven't won an NCAAT game. It's a mixed bag. But to call it a "big time flop" is just over the top hyperbole to gather more hits on the article.
 

George, you seem to be missing some pretty strong points here:
* this was a columnist, not a Gopher fan who said Tubby was a flop. At this point, a minuscule number of Gopher fans would call Tubby a flop.
* winning 20 games in this era is not the same as pre-1990. This past season, the Gophers played 31 regular season games. Before 1991, no Gopher squad played as many as 30 games in a regular season. Additionally, pre-1991 the Gophers played more true road games and the overall quality of the non-conference schedule was stronger. This argument is similar to those people who point to a college football program in this era and how many bowl games they've been invited to in comparison to the program's history.
* I think everyone that's a Gopher fan would acknowledge that the results from the non-conference were stellar. From my perspective, that's what makes the 1-10 finish so disappointing, regardless of the injuries/defection that beset the team. It was an absolute free fall and obviously there was talent on the team that helped them achieve their solid non-conference mark.
* Trying to say that the Gopher fanbase should appreciate the great non-conference record is really stretching things. If such great results had continued through the regular season and then the Gophers got bounced in the first round of the NCAA tournament, sure I can see the point. But baseball fans don't celebrate a great May when a team battles mediocrity the rest of the season, nor do football fans talk about the solid October their team played when they miss the playoffs.
* Please, please, please don't play the "you better appreciate Tubby or he's going to leave" card. It's such a tired line of thinking.
 

coolhandgopher said:
George, you seem to be missing some pretty strong points here:
* this was a columnist, not a Gopher fan who said Tubby was a flop.
Click to expand...

Seems to me he is somewhat of a Gopher's fan, big on Austin Hollins when I have heard him on the radio. 90% of these old school reports in town understand basketball and love hockey and baseball.
 

SS: ... Speaking for myself, I just prefer that when people use facts to support an argument, the "facts" should actually be facts.

What? Do you mean to say that peoples' opinions are less important and are not as valuable as facts? C'mon, SS, Get REAL!!! No way does that happen on The GopherHole. :banghead:
 

coolhandgopher said:
George, you seem to be missing some pretty strong points here:
* this was a columnist, not a Gopher fan who said Tubby was a flop. At this point, a minuscule number of Gopher fans would call Tubby a flop.
* winning 20 games in this era is not the same as pre-1990. This past season, the Gophers played 31 regular season games. Before 1991, no Gopher squad played as many as 30 games in a regular season. Additionally, pre-1991 the Gophers played more true road games and the overall quality of the non-conference schedule was stronger. This argument is similar to those people who point to a college football program in this era and how many bowl games they've been invited to in comparison to the program's history.
* I think everyone that's a Gopher fan would acknowledge that the results from the non-conference were stellar. From my perspective, that's what makes the 1-10 finish so disappointing, regardless of the injuries/defection that beset the team. It was an absolute free fall and obviously there was talent on the team that helped them achieve their solid non-conference mark.
* Trying to say that the Gopher fanbase should appreciate the great non-conference record is really stretching things. If such great results had continued through the regular season and then the Gophers got bounced in the first round of the NCAA tournament, sure I can see the point. But baseball fans don't celebrate a great May when a team battles mediocrity the rest of the season, nor do football fans talk about the solid October their team played when they miss the playoffs.
* Please, please, please don't play the "you better appreciate Tubby or he's going to leave" card. It's such a tired line of thinking.
Click to expand...

My uncle is an award winning sports journalist, he's covered the nfl, ncaa, nascar, hunting, fishing, golf over a 40 year career in journalism. My cousin covers college basketball in Indiana. I know good journalism when I see it. That article was not good journalism.

20 wins- most teams started playing closer to 30 games around 1980 not 1990 and you saying winning 20 games is no big deal is laughable when you've only done it 6 times since 1990 and only 7 since 1980. I know most teams play 30 regular season games these days, still a 20-10 regular season isn't all bad because there are far more good teams now than in 1990. Mid Majors are light years ahead of where they were in 1980 or 1990. Combine that with a really good Big 10 conference top to bottom it makes 20 wins even harder to come by IMO. You guys have played a top 30 and top 40 SOS the last 2 years so you're not playing a chump Utah State schedule. Again, which only bolsters my case.
 

notagopherfan said:
My uncle is an award winning sports journalist, he's covered the nfl, ncaa, nascar, hunting, fishing, golf over a 40 year career in journalism. My cousin covers college basketball in Indiana.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, what are their names?
 

The Big 10 Top to Bottom is one of the best conferences. You got 7 in the ncaa and 1 in the NIT. 8 of 11 teams made the post season. I'd say you get 6 next year excluding MN. I think MN makes it in though. You guys have some good players coming in with Coleman and Hollins. Maurice Walker is going to be a NBA Center some day. You have 4 future NBA players on your current roster. Mbakwe, Williams, Austin Hollins and Walker. I really love Austin Hollins, this kid is going to be a great player and I wouldn't be surprised to see him takin to the hole with the game on the line a hell of a lot next year. Great Athlete.
 

As far as practice facility is concerned, has Tubby said that not having the facility is one of the reasons for the last season outcome? To me, Tubby is just talking about future, not past, when he states that the program needs it to be more competitive, which is true at least in the long run. My read of the statement is that he is using it as a bargaining chip for contract extension, which, again, is fair as in any business negotiation (no need to moralize it based on one's subjective beliefs and values).

Is it really fair to characterize Tubby’s statement regarding the facility as an attempt to find a scapegoat? Any member of the media can ask Tubby whether he thinks not having the facility was one of the factors for the failure. Tubby must be nuts to think so and use it as an excuse. I don’t think the man is nuts. I would rather suspect that Pat’s insistence on the worst possible interpretation of it is part of his campaign of character assassination.

Beilein has managed 30-42 in the Big Ten and two NCAA tourney appearances/no NIT. Though Beilein has not really awed anybody with the record, I don’t think he has been a big flop or doing such a lousy job at rebuilding UMich. It just takes some time and even trial and error to build and rebuild.

Yes, the 1-10 slide was big. But, that should not define the Tubby era just yet. That is not conclusive evidence to disprove Tubby as a coach. Anything can happen in the short run, and it did. If it happens again, then it is a different story.

What we have is uncertainty, not conclusive evidence against Tubby as a coach.

Yes, Tubby is responsible for creating the uncertainty. But, final judgment can wait until we get the conclusive evidence.
 

Just listened to Reusse and Mackey while going to the store. Pat first stated, "I wanted to stir things up a bit," and then quickly amended it to a more general Tubby has been bugging him a while. Both before and after this little segment, there was an urging of the audience to click on the story because, "It's really good.". It's amazing how blatant the trolling for hits has become. It affects what is said and written, and it doesn't mean we're actually benefiting as an audience or as readers.
 

Mulligan said:
Just listened to Reusse and Mackey while going to the store. Pat first stated, "I wanted to stir things up a bit," and then quickly amended it to a more general Tubby has been bugging him a while. Both before and after this little segment, there was an urging of the audience to click on the story because, "It's really good.". It's amazing how blatant the trolling for hits has become. It affects what is said and written, and it doesn't mean we're actually benefiting as an audience or as readers.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. It's pretty blatantly obvious what he's up to, and it's a shame that this is what journalism has become.
 

20

notagopherfan said:
This guy is a hack so let me rebuttle with some facts.

If 20 wins a season is so easy how come Minnesota has only done it 10 times in it's entire history because none of the Clem years count. Tubby has 2 of your 10 so chew on that one for a bit.

Gifts of NCAA tournaments.. Well you only have 7 in your entire history that count.. 2 which came from Tubby so it's not as easy as he's making it out to be.

I could go on. But you better be careful because he's going to have a good team next year and if you don't lock him up he might be gone for a better opportunity. The last 20 years for your program have been marred by ncaa sanctions and dan monson(1 ncaa tournament in 8 years) so again I'd say you better get some perspective on just how successful Tubby has been there in just 4 years.
Click to expand...

20 wins doesn't mean jack anymore. Since 2006 teams can get in exempt Tourneys ever year. For example the 07-08 team scored wins in Las Vegas vs Kennesaw & Nicholls State & the 08-09 team beat Concordia, Georgia St & Bowling Green. Additonal opportunities exist now that the Big 10 Tourney exists.
 

The good thing about Reusse writing a column taking shots at a guy like Tubby is Pat loves to bury and I mean BURY his thesis. For example, it took him 16-17 paragraphs in this column before he starts going after Tubby. Pat's style is to talk about players/coaches from a few decades ago the first half of a column (I have no idea why, but he consistently does this) and then doesn't get into his thesis until well past the page turn (in a print edition) or well beyond the virtual page turn (in an online edition) and the overwhelming majority of readership analytics show that most readers won't read past the first half of an article. Us die-hards will finish the column because it's a subject we care about, but the majority will read the headline and skim the first few paragraphs before moving on. I guess this underscores the importance of headlines, so my point is somewhat moot I guess since it wasn't a positive headline!

Go Gophers!!
 

Patrick is better than this. It's as if he took a previously written reasonable critic of Tubby, said 'he sad WHAT? Well now he's the 'biggest flop of all time.' and changed the headline. Poorly done.
 

Pat is good at bringing down conscious guards of people. His tactics are similar to the ones salesmen often employ. Salesmen must gain your good-will and trust preferably before he engages in the actual act of sales. Pat gains the good-will and trust of the readers with prep talks. It also establishes agreeability. Then, it gets easier to manipulate the readers and sell his product or the real point of the column. He is an excellent writer. No doubt about it.
 

BleedGopher said:
The good thing about Reusse writing a column taking shots at a guy like Tubby is Pat loves to bury and I mean BURY his thesis. For example, it took him 16-17 paragraphs in this column before he starts going after Tubby. Pat's style is to talk about players/coaches from a few decades ago the first half of a column (I have no idea why, but he consistently does this) and then doesn't get into his thesis until well past the page turn (in a print edition) or well beyond the virtual page turn (in an online edition) and the overwhelming majority of readership analytics show that most readers won't read past the first half of an article. Us die-hards will finish the column because it's a subject we care about, but the majority will read the headline and skim the first few paragraphs before moving on. I guess this underscores the importance of headlines, so my point is somewhat moot I guess since it wasn't a positive headline!

Go Gophers!!
Click to expand...

This is so true. I have been saying it for years.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom