Page 37 of 40 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 555 of 587
  1. #541

    Default

    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.


  2. #542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeshurun View Post
    Minnesota is a sleeping giant in the same sense that Lazarus was sleeping.
    Agreed. Gonna take a miracle...

  3. #543

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moonlight View Post
    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.

  4. #544

    Default

    - 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 by oak_street1981; 02-10-2019 at 04:38 PM.

  5. #545

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oak_street1981 View Post
    - 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.

  6. #546

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyJamesMD View Post
    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.

  7. #547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cjbfbp View Post
    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 by Former Goofer; 02-10-2019 at 08:29 PM.

  8. #548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    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?

  9. #549

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyJamesMD View Post
    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.

  10. #550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GringaGopher View Post
    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.

  11. #551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Former Goofer View Post
    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.

  12. #552
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Shoreview
    Posts
    14,568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beavergopher View Post
    Not sleeping. We are in a coma.
    A state of suspended animation - like Khan in "Space Seed." Then they woke him up, and he started dominating.

  13. #553
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Shoreview
    Posts
    14,568

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ltf View Post
    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.

  14. #554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Gopher View Post
    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.

  15. #555

    Default

    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •