Time to start looking fora new head coach

Donate To GopherHole
my gut tells me Pitino knew this season was in the bag from day 1. This season has one goal - develop the freshmen. If they can win some games while developing the freshmen, great. But winning games is way down the list of priorities.

The Pitino plan (as I see it): develop the FR this year, add the two transfers and the three recruits next year, and that is the Gophers' 9-man rotation for next year. (10 man with Mason). I'll bet you even money Konate doesn't play more than 5-7 minutes a game next season, and that strictly to spell Lynch or if Lynch gets in foul trouble. Gas = gone.

Plus - an added benefit. Let's say the Gophs finish the season with 10-12 wins. Next year, if they can win 20 games, it looks like a big year-to-year improvement, and the Pitino supporters will all be saying, "Look, he can win when he gets HIS type of players on the team."

I could be dead wrong, but that's my take. Pitino doesn't give a bleep how many games they win this year. It's all about making a push next season. (and hoping the lack of a permanent AD keeps the U from canning him before he can bring the master plan to fruition.)
 



Just officially checking in, not that it matters. No way would I or anyone else respect a program that hired an inexperienced coach and then dumped him after 2 years. He didn't misrepresent himself, there was no deception. We hired him knowing he was untested, and so he is now our project, whether we like it or not.
 

Roughly 35 years ago same story played out. Team hires coach in his early thirties, whose main qualities are his links to serious coaching pedigree. Team goes through significant growing pains. Their closest rival goes to (but wins) the NCAA tourney and the next closest is heading for a resurgence. Meanwhile, your team has not improved (read the results) and almost all of the fans want said coach gone. Some even wanted the AD gone for his insistence on keeping the young coach around.

Of course, we all know now that Coach K had a great fourth year... but he did have a better roster coming into his stint. He also did not set the school record for wins in his first season. Either way, his processes were solid and Tom Butters was rewarded for not listening to the boosters (he actually gave the coach a 5 year extension).

If you're giving up on a D-1 coach in year 3, it better be for something other than w/l and the specific programs that beat you. Winning programs are built through solid process that are consistently applied, and subject to continuous improvement. Not some half-ass ESPN rhetoric. After reading the entire thread, no one gave anything resembling a strong reason to even bring this topic up.
 


Moonlight said:
Just officially checking in, not that it matters. No way would I or anyone else respect a program that hired an inexperienced coach and then dumped him after 2 years. He didn't misrepresent himself, there was no deception. We hired him knowing he was untested, and so he is now our project, whether we like it or not.
Click to expand...

It's been 3, not 2.
 


atsgopher said:
Roughly 35 years ago same story played out. Team hires coach in his early thirties, whose main qualities are his links to serious coaching pedigree. Team goes through significant growing pains. Their closest rival goes to (but wins) the NCAA tourney and the next closest is heading for a resurgence. Meanwhile, your team has not improved (read the results) and almost all of the fans want said coach gone. Some even wanted the AD gone for his insistence on keeping the young coach around.

Of course, we all know now that Coach K had a great fourth year... but he did have a better roster coming into his stint. He also did not set the school record for wins in his first season. Either way, his processes were solid and Tom Butters was rewarded for not listening to the boosters (he actually gave the coach a 5 year extension).

If you're giving up on a D-1 coach in year 3, it better be for something other than w/l and the specific programs that beat you. Winning programs are built through solid process that are consistently applied, and subject to continuous improvement. Not some half-ass ESPN rhetoric. After reading the entire thread, no one gave anything resembling a strong reason to even bring this topic up.
Click to expand...

Go back about 7 years deeper. Same school. Canned their coach after one year and hired a guy that put them into the National title game.
 

atsgopher said:
Roughly 35 years ago same story played out.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't the same story. Stop with the Coach K comparisons. Coach K played for Bob Knight at Army. He was then an army officer for five years (where he learned something about leadership). Then, he assisted Knight briefly at Indiana. After that, he was the head coach at Army for five years where he had three winning seasons. Finally, Coach K didn't have a famous name or his father's connections.
 



atsgopher said:
Roughly 35 years ago same story played out. Team hires coach in his early thirties, whose main qualities are his links to serious coaching pedigree. Team goes through significant growing pains. Their closest rival goes to (but wins) the NCAA tourney and the next closest is heading for a resurgence. Meanwhile, your team has not improved (read the results) and almost all of the fans want said coach gone. Some even wanted the AD gone for his insistence on keeping the young coach around. Of course, we all know now that Coach K had a great fourth year... but he did have a better roster coming into his stint. He also did not set the school record for wins in his first season. Either way, his processes were solid and Tom Butters was rewarded for not listening to the boosters (he actually gave the coach a 5 year extension). If you're giving up on a D-1 coach in year 3, it better be for something other than w/l and the specific programs that beat you. Winning programs are built through solid process that are consistently applied, and subject to continuous improvement. Not some half-ass ESPN rhetoric. After reading the entire thread, no one gave anything resembling a strong reason to even bring this topic up.
Click to expand...

Cute story. You seemed to have failed to mention though that Coach K by the time he took the Duke job had already been a head coach for 5 years at West Point.
 

atsgopher said:
Roughly 35 years ago same story played out. Team hires coach in his early thirties, whose main qualities are his links to serious coaching pedigree. Team goes through significant growing pains. Their closest rival goes to (but wins) the NCAA tourney and the next closest is heading for a resurgence. Meanwhile, your team has not improved (read the results) and almost all of the fans want said coach gone. Some even wanted the AD gone for his insistence on keeping the young coach around.

Of course, we all know now that Coach K had a great fourth year... but he did have a better roster coming into his stint. He also did not set the school record for wins in his first season. Either way, his processes were solid and Tom Butters was rewarded for not listening to the boosters (he actually gave the coach a 5 year extension).

If you're giving up on a D-1 coach in year 3, it better be for something other than w/l and the specific programs that beat you. Winning programs are built through solid process that are consistently applied, and subject to continuous improvement. Not some half-ass ESPN rhetoric. After reading the entire thread, no one gave anything resembling a strong reason to even bring this topic up.
Click to expand...

Horrible analogy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

GopherGod said:
Cute story. You seemed to have failed to mention though that Coach K by the time he took the Duke job had already been a head coach for 5 years at West Point.
Click to expand...

Yes, in addition, the probability that we have a younger version of a hall of fame coach is pretty low. I don't like betting on uncertain outcomes but I'd bet against that.
 




And Coach K had a strong endorsement from Knight. Then he , from day one installed solid fundamentals and bloodletting defense. If your building a program you must have high character to stay qualified and be able to handle the growing pains of losing. Pitino needs next year and must make the tourney. He has fallen short on character, fundamentals and defense
 

builtbadgers said:
And Coach K had a strong endorsement from Knight. Then he , from day one installed solid fundamentals and bloodletting defense. If your building a program you must have high character to stay qualified and be able to handle the growing pains of losing. Pitino needs next year and must make the tourney. He has fallen short on character, fundamentals and defense
Click to expand...

Tough to argue with you on fundamentals and defense. What is your problem with his character though?
 

Moonlight said:
He's completed 3 years? or is he starting his third year?
I think I count better than you.
Click to expand...

He still has a job. Therefore, he wasn't "dumped after 2 years". But please, lecture me some more about counting.
 

Sorry, did not mean his character but he reached on more than one kid that would not pass the character test.
 

atsgopher said:
Roughly 35 years ago same story played out. Team hires coach in his early thirties, whose main qualities are his links to serious coaching pedigree. Team goes through significant growing pains. Their closest rival goes to (but wins) the NCAA tourney and the next closest is heading for a resurgence. Meanwhile, your team has not improved (read the results) and almost all of the fans want said coach gone. Some even wanted the AD gone for his insistence on keeping the young coach around.

Of course, we all know now that Coach K had a great fourth year... but he did have a better roster coming into his stint. He also did not set the school record for wins in his first season. Either way, his processes were solid and Tom Butters was rewarded for not listening to the boosters (he actually gave the coach a 5 year extension).

If you're giving up on a D-1 coach in year 3, it better be for something other than w/l and the specific programs that beat you. Winning programs are built through solid process that are consistently applied, and subject to continuous improvement. Not some half-ass ESPN rhetoric. After reading the entire thread, no one gave anything resembling a strong reason to even bring this topic up.
Click to expand...

Bingo! Of course not all of the facts are the same and no one is about to crown Pitino as the next coach K. The point is, if you decide to go the young coach route, you are locked in for the whole deal. You need to finish the 5 yr plan and see how it develops. You can't cut it short and say it didn't work.

It looks like Pitino may have thought he could count on his upper class men to be the foundation and bring in the freshman along gradually. Well coached teams are not having a problem out playing the upper class men so Pitino will need to throw the freshman in the fire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

builtbadgers said:
Sorry, did not mean his character but he reached on more than one kid that would not pass the character test.
Click to expand...

Lofton and who else? I don't think there was any character issues for McNeil coming out of high school.
 

dpodoll68 said:
He still has a job. Therefore, he wasn't "dumped after 2 years". But please, lecture me some more about counting.
Click to expand...
Well, you're the one who had to to jump in and correct me, but if you insist.
So you see: Ok, he's in his third year. If he were fired now which is the theme of this thread, it would be after 2 years, not 3.
Is there anything else you'd like me to clear up for you?
 

Moonlight said:
Well, you're the one who had to to jump in and correct me, but if you insist.
So you see: Ok, he's in his third year. If he were fired now which is the theme of this thread, it would be after 2 years, not 3.
Is there anything else you'd like me to clear up for you?
Click to expand...

Not that Dpo needs me to come to his defense, but I think most of us who are talking about him being potentially fired are talking about him being fired later in the year or at the end of the year.

In my head, if he was fired after two years, he wouldn't be coaching this team. He has been given 3 seasons (in my head).
 

Let's wait and see how the team is playing in February and early March.

With a young team, personal progress for each player is what we should be looking for.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Not that Dpo needs me to come to his defense, but I think most of us who are talking about him being potentially fired are talking about him being fired later in the year or at the end of the year.

In my head, if he was fired after two years, he wouldn't be coaching this team. He has been given 3 seasons (in my head).
Click to expand...

In many people's heads, the 3rd season is over.
 


Moonlight said:
In many people's heads, the 3rd season is over.
Click to expand...

I think we all see the writing on the wall for this season and assume it's going to keep going down this road. There is an assumption that this season is going to be a complete disaster.
 


Golden_Sloth said:
He skipped class a lot and hung out with the wrong crowd for a while after his parents died. That would be enough for you not to offer him a scholarship?
Click to expand...

Did I say anything about a scholarship? Keep making **** up.

The question was did he have any character issues? Answer; yes.
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
I think we all see the writing on the wall for this season and assume it's going to keep going down this road. There is an assumption that this season is going to be a complete disaster.
Click to expand...
A lot of assumptions in that post.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom