Souhan: The new athletic director should reassess Tubby Smith's tenure as well.

Donate To GopherHole

The new AD should assess the issue of players transferring. I believe that has been the single biggest stumbling block for the program in the last two-and-a-half seasons. There is a lot of talent playing elsewhere that used to play here. I believe Tubby is a good coach, but he has been hamstrung by defections (whether his fault or not).
 


zambam said:
Bet everyone said the same thing about Jeremy Lin...
Click to expand...

I doubt it because Lin has the size to play NBA pg. Andre isn't even pg and he is way too short to play sg. Lin is 6'3 and reminded me of Wolters in college. Andres big problem is even if he develops he doesn't have a position in the NBA. As far as Austin goes, he is also without a position. No way he could play shooting guard in the NBA. Coleman has a chance but he needs to improve his outside shot tremendously. He won't score around the rim in the NBA. If you disagree, fine. I am just giving you my opinion.
 

minngg said:
I doubt it because Lin has the size to play NBA pg. Andre isn't even pg and he is way too short to play sg. Lin is 6'3 and reminded me of Wolters in college. Andres big problem is even if he develops he doesn't have a position in the NBA. As far as Austin goes, he is also without a position. No way he could play shooting guard in the NBA. Coleman has a chance but he needs to improve his outside shot tremendously. He won't score around the rim in the NBA. If you disagree, fine. I am just giving you my opinion.
Click to expand...
Idk about you, but I had never even heard of Lin until 5 days ago.
 


If the new AD doesn't give Tubby an extension and a firm commitment to upgrade facilities immediately, my guess is he just retires.
 

Becky Vadger said:
If the new AD doesn't give Tubby an extension and a firm commitment to upgrade facilities immediately, my guess is he just retires.
Click to expand...

You know, I don't remember people giving Monson the benefit of the doubt when he didn't have a practice facility. He had sanctions, scholarship restrictions and the cheating stigma to overcome, plus the facilities problems. We ran him out of town with a similar Big Ten record as Tubby. Extending Tubby now makes zero sense IMO.
 

minngg said:
You know, I don't remember people giving Monson the benefit of the doubt when he didn't have a practice facility. He had sanctions, scholarship restrictions and the cheating stigma to overcome, plus the facilities problems. We ran him out of town with a similar Big Ten record as Tubby. Extending Tubby now makes zero sense IMO.
Click to expand...
Extending Tubby now does make sense because when we fired Monson we weren't the only team in the Big Ten without a practice facility.
Also, like I've already said, if we don't extend Tubby just fire him. Recruiting with only 2 years left on his contract would make it even more difficult.
 

Tubby will get an extension...or they will fire him. And I don't see a new AD coming into a job and his first act is firing Tubby Smith. That just ain't gonna happen....period. People are really stupid if they think Tubby will continue to coach with just 2 years on the contract. That would kill recruiting. It's either extension or go home...there's no middle ground.
 



minngg said:
You know, I don't remember people giving Monson the benefit of the doubt when he didn't have a practice facility. He had sanctions, scholarship restrictions and the cheating stigma to overcome, plus the facilities problems. We ran him out of town with a similar Big Ten record as Tubby. Extending Tubby now makes zero sense IMO.
Click to expand...

I was still fairly young when Monson got fired, but if i remember correctly he was fired because he underachieved w/ a senior laden led by Vincent Grier then followed that up by starting 2-5 and losing to teams like montana, marist and southern illinois. Also including those 3 there was a spanking by clemson.
 

scher215 said:
Short of firing him, what other ways do you hold him accountable? Speak to him in a stern tone?
Click to expand...

WHat ways do other schools (those schools that MN aspires to be like in terms of wins) hold coaches accountable?

Do you believe tubby should be held accoubatable to those standards?
 

BarnBurner said:
WHat ways do other schools (those schools that MN aspires to be like in terms of wins) hold coaches accountable?

Do you believe tubby should be held accoubatable to those standards?
Click to expand...

What actions, besides firing, do they take to hold them accountable? That's my question. What do you expect the U to do to him? Yell at him? Give him a spanking? What?
 

scher215 said:
What actions, besides firing, do they take to hold them accountable? That's my question. What do you expect the U to do to him? Yell at him? Give him a spanking? What?
Click to expand...

How much time should Tubby receive at MN to win to the level MN aspires?

Or perhaps you cant quantify the success MN aspires?
 



minngg said:
You know, I don't remember people giving Monson the benefit of the doubt when he didn't have a practice facility. He had sanctions, scholarship restrictions and the cheating stigma to overcome, plus the facilities problems. We ran him out of town with a similar Big Ten record as Tubby. Extending Tubby now makes zero sense IMO.
Click to expand...

1) Monson was run out of town after EIGHT seasons. I think he was given the benefit of the doubt to even begin his eighth season. Many thought he should be gone after seven. It wasn't like he was shown the door after 3 or 4 or 6. Even Dan admitted that his program had lost momentum and there was little hope for regaining it. IMO, Tubby has shown enough improvement from those last four miserable Monson years to be given the benefit of the doubt for another few years.

2) Actually, the records aren't that similar, IMO. Monson's Big Ten winning percentage was .403 in his time here. But, to me there is a HUGE distinction - Dan gets the benefit of not having the final 3-13 season on his Big Ten record since he was fired. Molinari gets that record and it is easily forgotten. It shouldn't be. It is a big part of what Tubby stepped into. I see little to no chance that Dan was going to do any better than 3-13 that year. So if you factor that final year in, then the "Monson Years" Big Ten record was a terrible 49-81 (.376). Tubby is currently .457 (I understand, not great, but certainly a marginal upgrade over Monson). And, as Selection Sunday has pointed out numerous times, Tubby's teams have won many, many more important games against ranked teams and against NCAA tourney teams, both road games and neutral site games.

3) As for practice facilities, it is a different fight now. Iowa, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Northwestern did not have practice facilities for most of Dan Monson's tenure as coach at Minnesota. All of them do have facilities (most of them gawdy and nice) now. Monson didn't have to contend with that as a recruiting disadvantage. Tubby does. And, the gap is growing fast.
 

minngg said:
I doubt it because Lin has the size to play NBA pg. Andre isn't even pg and he is way too short to play sg. Lin is 6'3 and reminded me of Wolters in college. Andres big problem is even if he develops he doesn't have a position in the NBA. As far as Austin goes, he is also without a position. No way he could play shooting guard in the NBA. Coleman has a chance but he needs to improve his outside shot tremendously. He won't score around the rim in the NBA. If you disagree, fine. I am just giving you my opinion.
Click to expand...

Wasn't Bobby Jackson- no taller than Andre- 6th man of the year in the NBA? Not saying Andre is any Bobby Jackson but he can shoot it and he is plenty athletic. Lots to learn but plenty of time to do it.
 

tjgopher said:
1) Monson was run out of town after EIGHT seasons. It wasn't like he was shown the door after 3 or 4 or 6. Tubby should be allowed the same time, IMO.

2) Actually, the records aren't that similar, IMO. Monson's Big Ten winning percentage was .403 in his time here. But, to me there is a HUGE distinction - Dan gets the benefit of not having the final 3-13 season on his Big Ten record since he was fired. Molinari gets that record and it is easily forgotten. It shouldn't be. It is a big part of what Tubby stepped into. I see little to no chance that Dan was going to do any better than 3-13 that year. So if you factor that final year in, then the "Monson Years" Big Ten record was a terrible 49-81 (.376). Tubby is currently .457 (I understand, not great, but certainly a marginal upgrade over Monson). And, as Selection Sunday has pointed out numerous times, Tubby's teams have won many, many more important games against ranked teams and against NCAA tourney teams, both road games and neutral site games.

3) As for practice facilities, it is a different fight now. Iowa, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Northwestern did not have practice facilities for most of Dan Monson's tenure as coach at Minnesota. All of them do have facilities (most of them gawdy and nice) now. Monson didn't have to contend with that as a recruiting disadvantage. Tubby does. And, the gap is growing fast.
Click to expand...

TJ- Tubby was not denied recruiting visits and a half dozen scholarships either, nor has he worked under the cloud of a national scandal. When Monson took over people were saying that the program would be ruined for 10 years. Tubby has had a far easier situation to deal with, has his own name brand on his side and is paid double what Monson was. Tubby has done marginally better, but has not performed to expectations. I don't know how anyone can argue differently, other than via the bad luck angle. That said, Tubby remains our best shot.
 

tjgopher said:
1) Monson was run out of town after EIGHT seasons. I think he was given the benefit of the doubt to even begin his eighth season. Many thought he should be gone after seven. It wasn't like he was shown the door after 3 or 4 or 6. Even Dan admitted that his program had lost momentum and there was little hope for regaining it. IMO, Tubby has shown enough improvement from those last four miserable Monson years to be given the benefit of the doubt for another few years.

2) Actually, the records aren't that similar, IMO. Monson's Big Ten winning percentage was .403 in his time here. But, to me there is a HUGE distinction - Dan gets the benefit of not having the final 3-13 season on his Big Ten record since he was fired. Molinari gets that record and it is easily forgotten. It shouldn't be. It is a big part of what Tubby stepped into. I see little to no chance that Dan was going to do any better than 3-13 that year. So if you factor that final year in, then the "Monson Years" Big Ten record was a terrible 49-81 (.376). Tubby is currently .457 (I understand, not great, but certainly a marginal upgrade over Monson). And, as Selection Sunday has pointed out numerous times, Tubby's teams have won many, many more important games against ranked teams and against NCAA tourney teams, both road games and neutral site games.

3) As for practice facilities, it is a different fight now. Iowa, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State, Michigan, Nebraska, and Northwestern did not have practice facilities for most of Dan Monson's tenure as coach at Minnesota. All of them do have facilities (most of them gawdy and nice) now. Monson didn't have to contend with that as a recruiting disadvantage. Tubby does. And, the gap is growing fast.
Click to expand...

More excuses from another Tubby apologist.

What are your expectations tj? How much longer to achieve them?

Remember, you were saying Monson received too much time......
 

bga1 said:
TJ- Tubby was not denied recruiting visits and a half dozen scholarships either, nor has he worked under the cloud of a national scandal. When Monson took over people were saying that the program would be ruined for 10 years. Tubby has had a far easier situation to deal with, has his own name brand on his side and is paid double what Monson was. Tubby has done marginally better, but has not performed to expectations. I don't know how anyone can argue differently, other than via the bad luck angle. That said, Tubby remains our best shot.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying that Monson had an uphill fight and it looked like he was headed in the right direction for the early years. I liked Dan, thought he was going to get it done. Then, he lost the momentum and it was over. It was clearly time to move on. I'm not sure it is that time yet with Tubby, but certainly concede without a nice finishing run here this year or a good full season next year, then tough decisions might be in order.

I also really believe people forget what a mess this program was when Tubby got here. We were 21-43 in the four years prior to his arrival with three tenth-place finishes. We were the "easy" win on everybody's schedule for three of the four previous years.

When Tubby took over there were people thinking we might make the NIT by year two, maybe the NCAA in year three. Lickliter took over an Iowa program with more recent success the same year. Well, Iowa has not sniffed the postseason of any kind. Tubby was in NIT in 1st yr and NCAA in 2nd yr and 3rd yr. If Tubby did anything wrong, he probably was too 'good' too soon (relatively speaking). But, that all said, he is in danger of losing any early momentum, too, and if they muff the stretch run here, then next season becomes paramount. A bad year next season and all bets are off.

Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't extend him on reasonable terms this off-season. Certainly, Tubby doesn't have a lot of leverage at this point. But, it wouldn't hurt to give the guy a vote of confidence on paper, knowing terms should be less restrictive to dump the coach if need be.
 

tjgopher said:
I'm not denying that Monson had an uphill fight and it looked like he was headed in the right direction for the early years. I liked Dan, thought he was going to get it done. Then, he lost the momentum and it was over. It was clearly time to move on. I'm not sure it is that time yet with Tubby, but certainly concede without a nice finishing run here this year or a good full season next year, then tough decisions might be in order.

I also really believe people forget what a mess this program was when Tubby got here. We were 21-43 in the four years prior to his arrival with three tenth-place finishes. We were the "easy" win on everybody's schedule for three of the four previous years.

When Tubby took over there were people thinking we might make the NIT by year two, maybe the NCAA in year three. Lickliter took over an Iowa program with more recent success the same year. Well, Iowa has not sniffed the postseason of any kind. Tubby was in NIT in 1st yr and NCAA in 2nd yr and 3rd yr. If Tubby did anything wrong, he probably was too 'good' too soon (relatively speaking). But, that all said, he is in danger of losing any early momentum, too, and if they muff the stretch run here, then next season becomes paramount. A bad year next season and all bets are off.

Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't extend him on reasonable terms this off-season. Certainly, Tubby doesn't have a lot of leverage at this point. But, it wouldn't hurt to give the guy a vote of confidence on paper, knowing terms should be less restrictive to dump the coach if need be.
Click to expand...

Comparing MN to recent Iowa teams? Nice tj. Real nice.

You mentioned the super sport writings - hailing the "big wins" Tubby has achieved.

What, exactly, have those "big wins" done for the team?
 

tjgopher said:
I'm not denying that Monson had an uphill fight and it looked like he was headed in the right direction for the early years. I liked Dan, thought he was going to get it done. Then, he lost the momentum and it was over. It was clearly time to move on. I'm not sure it is that time yet with Tubby, but certainly concede without a nice finishing run here this year or a good full season next year, then tough decisions might be in order.

I also really believe people forget what a mess this program was when Tubby got here. We were 21-43 in the four years prior to his arrival with three tenth-place finishes. We were the "easy" win on everybody's schedule for three of the four previous years.

When Tubby took over there were people thinking we might make the NIT by year two, maybe the NCAA in year three. Lickliter took over an Iowa program with more recent success the same year. Well, Iowa has not sniffed the postseason of any kind. Tubby was in NIT in 1st yr and NCAA in 2nd yr and 3rd yr. If Tubby did anything wrong, he probably was too 'good' too soon (relatively speaking). But, that all said, he is in danger of losing any early momentum, too, and if they muff the stretch run here, then next season becomes paramount. A bad year next season and all bets are off.

Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't extend him on reasonable terms this off-season. Certainly, Tubby doesn't have a lot of leverage at this point. But, it wouldn't hurt to give the guy a vote of confidence on paper, knowing terms should be less restrictive to dump the coach if need be.
Click to expand...

Great way to look at it. Pretty much my take as well. I'd say more rests on next year though than this year. If there are no transfers, things should go much better, any non-encouraged transfers happen tho and the season isn't successful, you take a long long look at things.
 

tjgopher said:
I'm not denying that Monson had an uphill fight and it looked like he was headed in the right direction for the early years. I liked Dan, thought he was going to get it done. Then, he lost the momentum and it was over. It was clearly time to move on. I'm not sure it is that time yet with Tubby, but certainly concede without a nice finishing run here this year or a good full season next year, then tough decisions might be in order.

I also really believe people forget what a mess this program was when Tubby got here. We were 21-43 in the four years prior to his arrival with three tenth-place finishes. We were the "easy" win on everybody's schedule for three of the four previous years.

When Tubby took over there were people thinking we might make the NIT by year two, maybe the NCAA in year three. Lickliter took over an Iowa program with more recent success the same year. Well, Iowa has not sniffed the postseason of any kind. Tubby was in NIT in 1st yr and NCAA in 2nd yr and 3rd yr. If Tubby did anything wrong, he probably was too 'good' too soon (relatively speaking). But, that all said, he is in danger of losing any early momentum, too, and if they muff the stretch run here, then next season becomes paramount. A bad year next season and all bets are off.

Doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't extend him on reasonable terms this off-season. Certainly, Tubby doesn't have a lot of leverage at this point. But, it wouldn't hurt to give the guy a vote of confidence on paper, knowing terms should be less restrictive to dump the coach if need be.
Click to expand...

What? Monson came in with sanctions. The program in disgrace. Impossible to recruit. He got the program back on it's feet but couldn't sustain it in large part because of recruiting and players leaving early for the NBA. Tubby inherited a team that has been his most successful team with Monson recruits. I say the talent was better when he got here than it is now. How is that possible?
 

BarnBurner said:
Comparing MN to recent Iowa teams? Nice tj. Real nice.
Click to expand...

I don't follow. Are you suggesting Iowa had not had more recent success? Are you suggesting that Tubby walked into a better situation than Lickliter??

Iowa previous four years before Lickliter:
36-28 (two NCAAs, one NIT, one 2nd place Big Ten finish, two 4th place Big Ten finishes)

Minnesota previous four years before Tubby:
21-43 (one NCAA, one NIT, one 4th-place Big Ten finish, three 10th place Big Ten finishes)

BarnBurner said:
What, exactly, have those "big wins" done for the team?
Click to expand...

Call me crazy, but they helped get the team into the NCAA twice.


Look, the difference between you and me, is you're loyal to a person - Monson. I'm loyal to the GOPHERS. If I had my preference, then Monson would have been wildly successful, we'd be going to tourneys every year and Tubby would be coaching somewhere else. Why? Not because I like Dan or not; or like Tubby or not. But, because that would be good for the GOPHERS. When I point out how poorly Dan's teams had done, it isn't to say he's a bad coach (I don't believe that.) It is to point out that this is a hard place to win and that Tubby walked into a quagmire.

You, on the other hand, revel in Tubby's recent strugles to vindicate some stupid belief you have that Monson was somehow wronged here. Monson had his chance. It didn't work out. Doesn't make him a bad guy. Just means he couldn't get the job done here.

If Tubby doesn't get it done, then we move on again. Doesn't mean he's a bad guy. Also, means the next guy has a similar uphill fight. Hopefully, the GOPHERS will contend for Big Ten titles with the next guy, if it comes to it.

I take no delight in the GOPHERS losing. You sure seem to get a kick out of it, though.
 

BarnBurner said:
Comparing MN to recent Iowa teams? Nice tj. Real nice.

You mentioned the super sport writings - hailing the "big wins" Tubby has achieved.

What, exactly, have those "big wins" done for the team?
Click to expand...

1) what's wrong with comparing to Iowa teams? Both made a coaching change and Minnesota's worked out better than Iowa's. Had Lickliter been a huge success you'd be bringing up Iowa teams constantly.

2) big wins get you national pub. Recruits like national publicity. When recruits like you they are more likely to sign with you. You don't think the Cameron Crazies chanting "Minnesota" was cool at all? You don't see how beating Louisville, UNC, Indiana, Purdue, OSU, Wisconsin, Butler were good for the program??? Then again, you'd prefer we lost.

We get it, you love Dan Monson, you're bitter he's gone. Go be a Long beach fan then. It's been five years, I know it's hard, but at some point you have to move on, it's okay. I've heard a lot of girls cry and eat ice cream? We are all here for you.
 

minngg said:
What? Monson came in with sanctions. The program in disgrace. Impossible to recruit. He got the program back on it's feet but couldn't sustain it in large part because of recruiting and players leaving early for the NBA. Tubby inherited a team that has been his most successful team with Monson recruits. I say the talent was better when he got here than it is now. How is that possible?
Click to expand...

Maybe Tubby developed Monson's recruits over their 4 years? Nah, that can't be it.

Guess we'd have to see when this current group are seniors.

(tubby will never keep guys until they are seniors, they'll all transfer!!!!!!!)

So let's fire him for things that haven't even happened yet. Got it.
 

tjgopher said:
I don't follow. Are you suggesting Iowa had not had more recent success? Are you suggesting that Tubby walked into a better situation than Lickliter??

Iowa previous four years before Lickliter:
36-28 (two NCAAs, one NIT, one 2nd place Big Ten finish, two 4th place Big Ten finishes)

Minnesota previous four years before Tubby:
21-43 (one NCAA, one NIT, one 4th-place Big Ten finish, three 10th place Big Ten finishes)

Call me crazy, but they helped get the team into the NCAA twice.

Look, the difference between you and me, is you're loyal to a person - Monson. I'm loyal to the GOPHERS. If I had my preference, then Monson would have been wildly successful, we'd be going to tourneys every year and Tubby would be coaching somewhere else. Why? Not because I like Dan or not; or like Tubby or not. But, because that would be good for the GOPHERS. When I point out how poorly Dan's teams had done, it isn't to say he's a bad coach (I don't believe that.) It is to point out that this is a hard place to win and that Tubby walked into a quagmire.

You, on the other hand, revel in Tubby's recent strugles to vindicate some stupid belief you have that Monson was somehow wronged here. Monson had his chance. It didn't work out. Doesn't make him a bad guy. Just means he couldn't get the job done here.

If Tubby doesn't get it done, then we move on again. Doesn't mean he's a bad guy. Also, means the next guy has a similar uphill fight. Hopefully, the GOPHERS will contend for Big Ten titles with the next guy, if it comes to it.

I take no delight in the GOPHERS losing. You sure seem to get a kick out of it, though.
Click to expand...

Perfect.
 

minngg said:
What? Monson came in with sanctions. The program in disgrace. Impossible to recruit. He got the program back on it's feet but couldn't sustain it in large part because of recruiting and players leaving early for the NBA.
Click to expand...

Agree with that. Also agree it was time to move on.

minngg said:
Tubby inherited a team that has been his most successful team with Monson recruits. I say the talent was better when he got here than it is now. How is that possible?
Click to expand...

Player retention. That's Tubby's biggest issue and must be addressed. I think he has to take a lot of blame for that.
 

scher215 said:
Maybe Tubby developed Monson's recruits over their 4 years? Nah, that can't be it.

Guess we'd have to see when this current group are seniors.

(tubby will never keep guys until they are seniors, they'll all transfer!!!!!!!)

So let's fire him for things that haven't even happened yet. Got it.
Click to expand...

I said the talent was better. You haven't disputed that. Tubby's two best years (not 4 years of development) were with Monson's players for the most part in his first 2 years. The talent was better then than it is now.
 

Whathavewedone said:
I wouldn't dispute that, but if you feel someone is "burnt out", how do you quare that with believing they are giving a good effort? Wouldn't it almost be requisite that to be burnt out you'd have to be letting up in your effort?
Click to expand...

In your fervor, you should still avoid twisting people's words. I stated that we're getting his best effort. He's giving this everything he's got. When you're dealing with burnout, you do have less to give, at least at the moment.
 

I posed a similar question to this when everyone was all doom and gloom because we were undefeated but had only won some of our games by a narrow margin earlier in the year. For people that seem reasonably happy with the direction Tubby has taken us, how long do you give him to make the round of 32 in the tourney before firing? For people who want to fire Tubby, what kind of results this year or next would change your mind?
 

Until the facilities are improved, Minnesota isn't even an top 50 coaching job.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom