Pitino and the state of the program

If there has been any desire for a failed men's athletic program, it would have come from the academics whose standing was diminished by the academic cheating scandal, which was assisted by the men's coach. Shoe scandals, money changing hands by alums, etc - these things don't affect/diminsh the reputation of the academic standing of the school. This did. On a sports board, we can discuss the relative impact and rulings at other places but that isnt pertinent. The entire University experienced this as a refelction on them.

The stories I heard about what the men were able to get away with in class just prior to all this might not bother you, but instructors had to put up with a lot. A friend sat through a speech class where a football player gave a demonstration speech on how to use a tampon. There was a lot of pent up anger following the Clem debacle, and many important things were adjusted in how academics and sports were handled. Women's sports have come into their own, hockey and volleyball have had significant success, and I hear the basketball team has a new coach who might make some noise - so an admin specifically was no longer needed. That happened because old AD's often had no interest in developing women's sports and just werent capable of supporting them.

BUT.
No one cares about that anymore. There's no agenda against mens sports that has any traction here different from any other school.
 


If there has been any desire for a failed men's athletic program, it would have come from the academics whose standing was diminished by the academic cheating scandal, which was assisted by the men's coach. Shoe scandals, money changing hands by alums, etc - these things don't affect/diminsh the reputation of the academic standing of the school. This did. On a sports board, we can discuss the relative impact and rulings at other places but that isnt pertinent. The entire University experienced this as a refelction on them.

The stories I heard about what the men were able to get away with in class just prior to all this might not bother you, but instructors had to put up with a lot. A friend sat through a speech class where a football player gave a demonstration speech on how to use a tampon. There was a lot of pent up anger following the Clem debacle, and many important things were adjusted in how academics and sports were handled. Women's sports have come into their own, hockey and volleyball have had significant success, and I hear the basketball team has a new coach who might make some noise - so an admin specifically was no longer needed. That happened because old AD's often had no interest in developing women's sports and just werent capable of supporting them.

BUT.
No one cares about that anymore. There's no agenda against mens sports that has any traction here different from any other school.
Moonlight, I don't doubt the need to fight for equality and I don't disparage the fight.
I simply observe a society bent on emasculating men as an over-reaction to past wrongs. Even if equity is reached, there is a "pay back" mentality in feminist acadamia. Many would love to see men's sports utterly fail at all times.
 

- so an admin specifically was no longer needed. That happened because old AD's often had no interest in developing women's sports and just werent capable of supporting them. (quote)_


My recollection of the 15 year Chris Voelz reign of leadership as AD of the Women's Department, was that there was endless conflict and dysfunction in both departments.

I probably need to try to look it up, since the specifics are not clear to me right now, but it seemed like there was a lot of hostility directed towards the Men's side that flared up and disrupted attempts to move the Football Program forward, and deal with other routine facilities issues. It seemed like the men's ADs were taking a lot of steps to work around roadblocks almost constantly.

I think one of the reasons Maturi seemed so ineffective was that he had to bend over backwards to not inflame the remaining Voelztistas once she finally left. Rick Bay, McKinley Boston, Mark Dienhart, and Tom Moe could probably tell some stories that would make your head explode.

Since MBB and FB funded most of both departments, I always found this non-team approach of Chris Voelz to be very destructive. I think she may have set back the whole thing years, but the problem went much deeper than any militant feminist war.
 
Last edited:

- so an admin specifically was no longer needed. That happened because old AD's often had no interest in developing women's sports and just werent capable of supporting them. (quote)_


My recollection of the 15 year Chris Voelz reign of leadership as AD of the Women's Department, was that there was endless conflict and dysfunction in both departments.

I probably need to try to look it up, since the specifics are not clear to me right now, but it seemed like there was a lot of hostility directed towards the Men's side that flared up and disrupted attempts to move the Football Program forward, and deal with other routine facilities issues. It seemed like the men's ADs were taking a lot of steps to work around roadblocks almost constantly. I think one of the reasons Maturi seemed so ineffective was that he had to bend over backwards to not inflame the remaining Voelztistas once she finally left.

Since MBB and FB funded most of both departments, I always found this non-team approach of Chris Voelz to be very destructive. I think she may have set back the whole thing years, but the problem went much deeper than any militant feminist war.
I'm speaking broadly of why there was a trend toward having 2 ADs. Voeltz was a disaster! She probably did more to undermine women's sports than she accomplished.
 


Look at Michigan State pre Izzo.
Look at Virgina. Bennett has turned them into top 5 team every year
UNLV became one for a minute with Tark.

Examples that came from the top of my head. The right coach can pull it off.

Football, Clemson was a nobody until they hired their current coach.

I did leave a little wiggle room with the "for the most part".

And a team/program being really good for a few years isn't really waking a giant IMO.

But I guess I will relent and say that if we can somehow hire one of the best recruiting and basketball X's and O's coaches then there might be a chance we could turn into a long term winner.
 

I agree (mostly) with your last statement but the "giants" can change. There was no bigger giant for decades than UCLA but I don't think they can be called one anymore. Kentucky, Kansas, and North Carolina have, as you've said, built their reputations over decades and continue to be top contenders most years across different coaches. Duke's great period of success has been under one coach; before him the great years were sporadic. It's possible that they could slide out of the giant category in the extended period after Coach K retires the way UCLA gradually did after Wooden. Houston frequently was a power house under Guy Lewis but they've barely been heard from since until Kelvin Sampson recently resurrected the program.

I never said it was impossible but Kentucky, Kansas, NC, etc already have the benefit of decades upon decades of greatness and I just don't see a way that those blue blood schools will ever be dethroned (if that makes sense). They have may a few down years but they will always bounce back because of their history.

They have the benefit of being regarded as THE place to be. We somehow have to find to consistently compete with them with players that they don't want (that's a general statement, of course not every top player goes to every blue blood school) and be successful at it for a very long time.

I do believe we have the potential to build a program that can pretty much be a shoe-in every year for the tournament and hopefully be considered a top 25 team most years.

But to do that we are going to have to hit the jackpot with our next hire. I am 10000000% convinced that Pitino wont lead us there.
 
Last edited:

4 wins and he stays and he would have earned it. Less and he probably is toast.

Pitino's job after 6 years should not be decided on getting 4 more wins. If you are already set on firing him if he doesn't get 4 more wins then why on earth do you keep him around?
 

Look at Michigan State pre Izzo.
Look at Virgina. Bennett has turned them into top 5 team every year
UNLV became one for a minute with Tark.

Examples that came from the top of my head. The right coach can pull it off.

Football, Clemson was a nobody until they hired their current coach.

You must be young. All of those programs you speak of had good if not great at times successs at one point before those coaches took over. Do some research.
 



Your paranoid feminist conspiracy theory is a joke. The U has lacked key leadership partnerships for years but most of it has been between the various presidents and the AD's. A great example of this was Donna Shalala hiring Barry Alvarez @ WI. which started a very successful era in their sports program. It literally is weak minded to blame " the progressive feminist movement " - whatever you think that is ? If you are referring to the investigations those could always be handled better but failures occurred on many levels .

I don't agree wit MennSota on this one. But angry shouting down of opinions that don't agree with liberal orthodoxy feed belief in the theories like Sota's.
 

Pitino's job after 6 years should not be decided on getting 4 more wins. If you are already set on firing him if he doesn't get 4 more wins then why on earth do you keep him around?

Because I think an NCAA bid would be an indication that he has things going in the right direction and it will help the fan base. One of the reasons the AD has to dump a coach for, is when he loses the fans. He probably has lost you, but I would say that the majority would be with him and for him staying if he makes the tournament. If he fails to make it, regardless of how the AD feels about him, I think he faces too much headwind from the fans at that point.
 


If we dont make the tourney and Pitino returns for next sesson, would your opinion of Coyle be diminished?

This is really the question: what Coyle thinks and what he will do. On one hand, what builtbadgers said is true: your conference winning percentage through 6 years is what you are. Even if it trends up from there over the next 6, how much better? Keep in mind that Richard has a losing home record in conference play and hasn't beaten Wisconsin at Williams Arena since 2014. In my opinion, if you fire him, it's not for missing the Tournament this year; it's a evaluation of six years of work.

The counterpoint is that I think this team has exceeded expectations this year. To me, talent wise, they were a solid NIT team with a small chance at the NCAA's. That they're still in contention this late in the season is a pleasant surprise. Again, that's my eval, and I might be way off base. The counterpoint to the counterpoint is that both Oturu and Kalscheur have been better than expected, and Eric Curry has been sharper than I expected him to be after such a long layoff. Had we known that going in, perhaps the expectation SHOULD have been the NCAA Tournament. This is a tough team to handicap.
 



This is really the question: what Coyle thinks and what he will do. On one hand, what builtbadgers said is true: your conference winning percentage through 6 years is what you are. Even if it trends up from there over the next 6, how much better? Keep in mind that Richard has a losing home record in conference play and hasn't beaten Wisconsin at Williams Arena since 2014. In my opinion, if you fire him, it's not for missing the Tournament this year; it's a evaluation of six years of work.

The counterpoint is that I think this team has exceeded expectations this year. To me, talent wise, they were a solid NIT team with a small chance at the NCAA's. That they're still in contention this late in the season is a pleasant surprise. Again, that's my eval, and I might be way off base. The counterpoint to the counterpoint is that both Oturu and Kalscheur have been better than expected, and Eric Curry has been sharper than I expected him to be after such a long layoff. Had we known that going in, perhaps the expectation SHOULD have been the NCAA Tournament. This is a tough team to handicap.

Your second paragraph makes the point for your first. If a Big Ten coach in six years has constructed a roster with the expectation that it will make the NIT, he no longer deserves to be employed as a Big Ten coach.
 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like basketball is far more transient in terms of people coming and going .... in the sense that six years is TOO long of a window to be saying like "you've had six years to build up a roster".

Do the people who he recruited to be on the team six years ago have any effect on the people being recruited now, at this point?

I guess I'm trying to say, in college BB it doesn't seem like the roster momentum carries through for as long, perhaps, as say college football. Just feels like current recruits would only be affected by say maybe last one or two seasons. Again maybe I'm way off.


He has practice facilities to show off now, those are pretty new. Williams is what it is. The school is what it is. The weather is what it is, those last three haven't changed. Practice facilities are new.
 

Your second paragraph makes the point for your first. If a Big Ten coach in six years has constructed a roster with the expectation that it will make the NIT, he no longer deserves to be employed as a Big Ten coach.

That's just a one-year snapshot, of course. In fairness, last year's team had legit NCAA expectations before the wheels fell off, and it's not unusual or shameful to have an NIT-caliber year in the wake of a senior-led team that graduated its best players. Moreover, had Marcus Carr been ruled eligible, they would have gone from NCAA hopeful to a soft probable in my opinion. Obviously lots of moving parts here, and it's not simple. My overall point is that the whole thing clarifies and comes out in the wash if you do your evaluation of the program over the entire six years.
 

For better or worse, the standard for a power-5 conference D1 team is making the NCAA. If you don't make the NCAA tournament, it was not a successful season. Now, for a program like MN, I'm not saying you should expect them to make the NCAA every year, but at the very least I would say 3 trips in 5 years should be the expectation.

The pundits are saying that 9 or possible 10 of the 14 B1G teams could make the tournament this year. if you don't make it, it is not a good season.

I like Pitino as a person. he seems like a decent guy. but what evidence is there to suggest that he is poised to take the Gophers to a new level? I don't see it.

Barring some kind of late-season push, or a big run in the B1G tournament, if I was the AD, I would be sending out feelers to agents and putting a list together - if for no other reason, just to keep my options open.
 

Pitino's job after 6 years should not be decided on getting 4 more wins. If you are already set on firing him if he doesn't get 4 more wins then why on earth do you keep him around?

You have to draw the line between firing/not firing him somewhere.
 

Coyle should Fire pitino for the same reason he fired T Clays. No positive momentum, he is out coached, poor recruiting, a nice guy!! also, Pitino is not his hire. Oh ya,we have a first class facility now....time to move on....I think musselman or Jim Pete are on his short list

Pitino's job after 6 years should not be decided on getting 4 more wins. If you are already set on firing him if he doesn't get 4 more wins then why on earth do you keep him around?
 

You have to draw the line between firing/not firing him somewhere.

Agreed, but if the line is too thin, you risk an impulse decision that could easily be a disaster. The AD's evaluation has to be on larger swaths of information than a small basket of games in a grind of a season. He should have a good sense of how things are going in the program off the court. He needs to get a feel for how he is connecting in the community, how the new coaches are succeeding, how the program is being managed, mostly things that the general public is not going to have access to. Our last two firings have been for opposite reasons. Monson was canned for horrible performance on the court. I and many others on this board will never forget that game against Clemson. Still a nightmare. Tubby went down because it was clear the recruiting was heading south (and perhaps the powers that be thought they were brilliant basketball people that other brilliant basketball people wanted to be around). In my mind, both of the firings were justified for different reasons.

The biggest off-court related observable concern is recruiting. One early signee is troubling. (Edit-I keep forgetting we have Carr and Willis coming in that can be included in the "recruiting class" so the one signee concern is slightly mitigated, but the program has to make strides quickly in getting more talented players here.) We can all hope that is turning around, but we won't know until spring or maybe even next fall. The tough recruiting could be because of the coaching transition, but no one knows for sure. It certainly is possible that the new coaches aren't great recruiters. That's for the AD to sort out in his evaluation process. As a fan, the prospect of getting a new coach in the face of the great 2020 class in Minnesota is demoralizing. In the end, Coyle has to decide if the overall program is headed in the right direction, and that decision could go either way and be easily justified.
 
Last edited:

For better or worse, the standard for a power-5 conference D1 team is making the NCAA. If you don't make the NCAA tournament, it was not a successful season. Now, for a program like MN, I'm not saying you should expect them to make the NCAA every year, but at the very least I would say 3 trips in 5 years should be the expectation.

The pundits are saying that 9 or possible 10 of the 14 B1G teams could make the tournament this year. if you don't make it, it is not a good season.

I like Pitino as a person. he seems like a decent guy. but what evidence is there to suggest that he is poised to take the Gophers to a new level? I don't see it.

Barring some kind of late-season push, or a big run in the B1G tournament, if I was the AD, I would be sending out feelers to agents and putting a list together - if for no other reason, just to keep my options open.

It's important to remember that the Gophers were cyclical under Clem Haskins, with NIT teams and teams that didn't make the postseason. Most people around here would be fine with that if it were counterbalanced with a Sweet Sixteen or Elite Eight from time to time, as it was under him. Just because we talk about emulating Wisconsin's success - and that stands as a worthy top-end goal if all goes well - it doesn't mean we're going to hold our breath until our face turns blue if we don't get there. Ironically, the NIT runs under Clem were pretty enjoyable, largely because we knew there would probably be more NCAA runs to look forward to, so we were just enjoying the moment for what it was. Richard's NIT title was very fun, but much of it was that we thought it was a harbinger of even better things to come under him. Since then, though, not one postseason win in four years of competition.
 

It's important to remember that the Gophers were cyclical under Clem Haskins, with NIT teams and teams that didn't make the postseason. Most people around here would be fine with that if it were counterbalanced with a Sweet Sixteen or Elite Eight from time to time, as it was under him. Just because we talk about emulating Wisconsin's success - and that stands as a worthy top-end goal if all goes well - it doesn't mean we're going to hold our breath until our face turns blue if we don't get there. Ironically, the NIT runs under Clem were pretty enjoyable, largely because we knew there would probably be more NCAA runs to look forward to, so we were just enjoying the moment for what it was. Richard's NIT title was very fun, but much of it was that we thought it was a harbinger of even better things to come under him. Since then, though, not one postseason win in four years of competition.
Each person can have their own expectation. For me, i could care less what Clem did, his program cheated and set us back a long time. Pitino got his NIT on Clem's leftovers and the body of work over 5 1/2 tears is historically bad. There is a ton of truth to what you say about perceptions and i am not a sucker for a run to the elite 8 as that takes 3 games, 3 wins. Tourney is a crapshoot. I am looking for a battle at the top 3-4 of the conference most years. And the occasional conference title. Those are high standards and still below what UW has done. The question though is are there any signs that Pitino is the guy that can do that or can we hire the guy that can ? Win a whole lot down the stretch now, win 27 or so next year and be top 3 in the conference and count me in. It is going to be really hard going forward as i see Ohio State and IU picking up dramatically.
 

Clem Haskins left in 1999. You're thinking of Tubby Smith. But they are both black so there's that.
 

Tubby was mostly fired because he'd checked out on most of his responsibilities preferring to let his son do the work.
 


What? Give one example of this.

I'd never heard that either. I did get the impression that he checked out to a degree, but it seemed like Saul wasn't even allowed to recruit, so "letting his son do the work" is hard to believe.
 

Agreed, but if the line is too thin, you risk an impulse decision that could easily be a disaster. The AD's evaluation has to be on larger swaths of information than a small basket of games in a grind of a season. He should have a good sense of how things are going in the program off the court. He needs to get a feel for how he is connecting in the community, how the new coaches are succeeding, how the program is being managed, mostly things that the general public is not going to have access to. Our last two firings have been for opposite reasons. Monson was canned for horrible performance on the court. I and many others on this board will never forget that game against Clemson. Still a nightmare. Tubby went down because it was clear the recruiting was heading south (and perhaps the powers that be thought they were brilliant basketball people that other brilliant basketball people wanted to be around). In my mind, both of the firings were justified for different reasons.

The biggest off-court related observable concern is recruiting. One early signee is troubling. (Edit-I keep forgetting we have Carr and Willis coming in that can be included in the "recruiting class" so the one signee concern is slightly mitigated, but the program has to make strides quickly in getting more talented players here.) We can all hope that is turning around, but we won't know until spring or maybe even next fall. The tough recruiting could be because of the coaching transition, but no one knows for sure. It certainly is possible that the new coaches aren't great recruiters. That's for the AD to sort out in his evaluation process. As a fan, the prospect of getting a new coach in the face of the great 2020 class in Minnesota is demoralizing. In the end, Coyle has to decide if the overall program is headed in the right direction, and that decision could go either way and be easily justified.

How much bigger of a disaster could things be? Pitino is 37-66 in Big Ten play. He has by far the worst conference winning percentage of any Gopher coach going back 50 years.

Payton Willis was an ineffective bench player for a Vanderbilt team that was every bit as bad as Minnesota in '17-18. He didn't start for a 12-20 team and shot 34.8% from the field.

We are currently either 13 or 14th in recruiting for the 2019 cycle depending on your site of choice. Pitino will probably completely whiff on the 2019 class in Minnesota unless Hurt pulls a surprise. He's said on his radio show that the poor year last year has made it difficult on the recruiting trail. Going in to this season, Pitino was the Vegas favorite to be the first coach fired in college basketball. I believe that his status on the hot seat is a big reason for the recruiting struggle.

Lets say the Gophers win 4 more games to finish .500 in the conference. They make the NCAA tournament as somewhere between a 10 and 12 seed...and get bounced in the first round. Where are we then? I feel like we are right back where we are this year with Pitino in limbo depending on his performance in 2019-2020. I don't think he recruits the 2020 class successfully under this scenario...and it's one of the rosier scenarios you can paint at this point.

A new coach would almost certainly have a better shot at the top 2020 kids unless Pitino can turn this season around to the point that he's safe for a couple years. The minimum for that to occur is finishing with a winning conference record and finally winning his first NCAA game.
 

How much bigger of a disaster could things be? Pitino is 37-66 in Big Ten play. He has by far the worst conference winning percentage of any Gopher coach going back 50 years.

Payton Willis was an ineffective bench player for a Vanderbilt team that was every bit as bad as Minnesota in '17-18. He didn't start for a 12-20 team and shot 34.8% from the field.

We are currently either 13 or 14th in recruiting for the 2019 cycle depending on your site of choice. Pitino will probably completely whiff on the 2019 class in Minnesota unless Hurt pulls a surprise. He's said on his radio show that the poor year last year has made it difficult on the recruiting trail. Going in to this season, Pitino was the Vegas favorite to be the first coach fired in college basketball. I believe that his status on the hot seat is a big reason for the recruiting struggle.

Lets say the Gophers win 4 more games to finish .500 in the conference. They make the NCAA tournament as somewhere between a 10 and 12 seed...and get bounced in the first round. Where are we then? I feel like we are right back where we are this year with Pitino in limbo depending on his performance in 2019-2020. I don't think he recruits the 2020 class successfully under this scenario...and it's one of the rosier scenarios you can paint at this point.

A new coach would almost certainly have a better shot at the top 2020 kids unless Pitino can turn this season around to the point that he's safe for a couple years. The minimum for that to occur is finishing with a winning conference record and finally winning his first NCAA game.

Yeah..if you want to argue to keep Pitino, fine. But "we'll have to start over!" is a terrible reason. Willis and Carr just sat out a year. Curry already did. Oturu, Gabe, Coffey, Omersa and Hurt are local kids. That leaves IW and the freshman as legit transfer concerns. IW may leave regardless. Neither would be a huge loss at this point.
 

Yeah..if you want to argue to keep Pitino, fine. But "we'll have to start over!" is a terrible reason. Willis and Carr just sat out a year. Curry already did. Oturu, Gabe, Coffey, Omersa and Hurt are local kids. That leaves IW and the freshman as legit transfer concerns. IW may leave regardless. Neither would be a huge loss at this point.

Hurt and Amir could grad transfer. Curry could apply for hardship and move home. Not all these guys are guarantees to stay. Same with Carr or Willis on hardships too. Would be some sweet irony there lol
 

Yeah..if you want to argue to keep Pitino, fine. But "we'll have to start over!" is a terrible reason. Willis and Carr just sat out a year. Curry already did. Oturu, Gabe, Coffey, Omersa and Hurt are local kids. That leaves IW and the freshman as legit transfer concerns. IW may leave regardless. Neither would be a huge loss at this point.

People vastly overestimate what starting over in college basketball is. Steve Prohm was in a similar situation to Pitino in that he had talent on his roster left from Hoiberg, but due to Hoiberg reliance on transfers, year 3 was going to be tough. Obviously, Hoiberg left far more talent than Tubby but they were both bare cupboards for year 3. Prohm went 4-14 in the Big 12 in year 3. His year 4? He's 7-3 and Iowa State is currently a top 4 seed in the NCAA release. Jamie Dixon took over a terrible TCU program and was in the NCAA tournament in year 2. Even at Minnesota, Tubby took over for Monson who had been the least successful coach (before Pitino) and was in the NCAA tournament in year 2. I wouldn't rule out the right coach/recruiter having Minnesota in the tournament in year 1. Pitino, to his credit, was basically one bad home loss to Northwestern (Mathieu layup does't beat the buzzer) from being in the tournament his first year.
 




Top Bottom