Doogie column: Embarrassing loss is evidence Tubby Smith has checked out

Donate To GopherHole
I don't get it. People on this board, and TV commentators like Dakich on Sunday act like Minnesota has never been a competitive BB program. That's simply not true. The Gophers played competitive (and entertaining) basketball under Bill Musselman, under Jim Dutcher, and especially under Clem Haskins.

It's not impossible to win at the U or to have competitive, entertaining teams. Other coaches have done it.

In my opinion, the people who keep talking about MN as some kind of black hole of basketball are simply trying to make Tubby look better. "Hey, no one has ever won at MN, so you can't blame Tubby."

I believe that fans can and should expect more from the program then Tubby is providing this season. And as far as his first 3 years being successful - then I say "show me the NCAA tournament victories."

In retrospect, the Gophs in Tubby got a coach on the downside of his career. Next time, let's try and find a coach with some upside. (and I don't put Flip in that category - too big of a risk to find out whether he can recruit.)
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I don't get it. People on this board, and TV commentators like Dakich on Sunday act like Minnesota has never been a competitive BB program. That's simply not true. The Gophers played competitive (and entertaining) basketball under Bill Musselman, under Jim Dutcher, and especially under Clem Haskins.

It's not impossible to win at the U or to have competitive, entertaining teams. Other coaches have done it.

In my opinion, the people who keep talking about MN as some kind of black hole of basketball are simply trying to make Tubby look better. "Hey, no one has ever won at MN, so you can't blame Tubby."

I believe that fans can and should expect more from the program then Tubby is providing this season. And as far as his first 3 years being successful - then I say "show me the NCAA tournament victories."

In retrospect, the Gophs in Tubby got a coach on the downside of his career. Next time, let's try and find a coach with some upside. (and I don't put Flip in that category - too big of a risk to find out whether he can recruit.)
Click to expand...

Because the majority of that success doesn't count.
 

scher215 said:
Because the majority of that success doesn't count.
Click to expand...

You're right it it doesn't count but it should count as much as all the Championships that took place during UCLA's "Sam Gilbert/John Wooden" years.
 





Moonlight said:
There is a distinct difference between not counting and not happening.
Click to expand...

The point is that no one has really shown it can happen and count here.
 


short ornery norwegian said:
I don't get it. People on this board, and TV commentators like Dakich on Sunday act like Minnesota has never been a competitive BB program. That's simply not true. The Gophers played competitive (and entertaining) basketball under Bill Musselman, under Jim Dutcher, and especially under Clem Haskins.

It's not impossible to win at the U or to have competitive, entertaining teams. Other coaches have done it.

In my opinion, the people who keep talking about MN as some kind of black hole of basketball are simply trying to make Tubby look better. "Hey, no one has ever won at MN, so you can't blame Tubby."

I believe that fans can and should expect more from the program then Tubby is providing this season. And as far as his first 3 years being successful - then I say "show me the NCAA tournament victories."

In retrospect, the Gophs in Tubby got a coach on the downside of his career. Next time, let's try and find a coach with some upside. (and I don't put Flip in that category - too big of a risk to find out whether he can recruit.)
Click to expand...

I'm renaming you Short Smart Norwegian- you are absolutely right! We have been successful here and this place was a FEARED place to play. No doubt there has been some wrong doings here but success has been had. Something about those past woes that I will factor in: We have a local press that tends to loath Gopher sports and enjoy raking up problems. The propensity for this program to get caught is much higher in a big city location than on some cornfield campus. Bottom line is I'm not so sure we have cheated more than anyone else- we have just been under the local media eye. That doesn't make it right -any of it -but its silly to say that we have not had success when we all saw it and we all know how corrupt big time college sports are across the board.
 



short ornery norwegian said:
I don't get it. People on this board, and TV commentators like Dakich on Sunday act like Minnesota has never been a competitive BB program. That's simply not true. The Gophers played competitive (and entertaining) basketball under Bill Musselman, under Jim Dutcher, and especially under Clem Haskins.

It's not impossible to win at the U or to have competitive, entertaining teams. Other coaches have done it.

In my opinion, the people who keep talking about MN as some kind of black hole of basketball are simply trying to make Tubby look better. "Hey, no one has ever won at MN, so you can't blame Tubby."

I believe that fans can and should expect more from the program then Tubby is providing this season. And as far as his first 3 years being successful - then I say "show me the NCAA tournament victories."

In retrospect, the Gophs in Tubby got a coach on the downside of his career. Next time, let's try and find a coach with some upside. (and I don't put Flip in that category - too big of a risk to find out whether he can recruit.)
Click to expand...

Don't leave out John Kundla
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I don't get it. People on this board, and TV commentators like Dakich on Sunday act like Minnesota has never been a competitive BB program. That's simply not true. The Gophers played competitive (and entertaining) basketball under Bill Musselman, under Jim Dutcher, and especially under Clem Haskins.

It's not impossible to win at the U or to have competitive, entertaining teams. Other coaches have done it.
Click to expand...

Tubby's performance is right in line with the historical average over the last 32 years. MV already did the numbers for everyone to see. Key quote:
Consider this: over the last 34 years, the average season for all Minnesota head basketball coaches is 18.09 wins, 12.65 losses, 8.5 B1G wins, 9.2 B1G L's with a losing season once every five years, a losing conference record roughly once every other year and an NCAA tournament berth every three years. Under Tubby through last year, his average season in Minnesota is 20 wins, 13.75 losses, 8 B1G wins, 10 B1G losses with zero losing seasons and 2 NCAA one-and-dones.
Click to expand...

Musselman coached here from 1971-1975 and he left the school under NCAA sanctions. I'd also note that '71-'75 is pretty pointless to cling to if you're making an argument of historical importance. Its on par with someone saying the Gopher football team has been competitive and then pointing to the Warmath years. Dutcher's last great year was his B1G title year. That was 30 years ago. Also not a sign of recent success. Clem's overall win % at MN wass .59 (Tubby's is currently .61) and his big record was .497 (Tubby's is .435). His next best conference finish was 4th (which he did 5 times).

Since Michigan State joined the conference in 1950 the Gophers have only won 2 B1G titles (3 if you ignore the NCAA vacation of the Clem title). The issue is that folks are recalling the great seasons that were the exceptions to the rule and turning them into the rule. People aren't saying the Gophers are a black hole or the suckiest program ever. They're just pointing out (accurately) that the program is/was never a powerhouse and that Tubby is performing in like with the relevant and most recent (if up to 34 years can be called recent) performance levels of his predecessors.

None of this is meant to say what Tubby is doing should be acceptable. It's simply intended to force people to view his performance here accurately in light of the program's actual history instead of the rosy "good old days" arguments that get trotted out.
 

bga1 said:
We have been successful here and this place was a FEARED place to play.
Click to expand...
This is the other issue. Fans who were lucky enough to experience The Barn when it was truly rocking use this argument all the time. All it means is that the Gophers used to have a great home court record/advantage. That is not a sign of overall success and competitiveness (as evidenced by the lack of B1G titles and overall W/L avg that Tubby is on par with).
 

GoAUpher said:
This is the other issue. Fans who were lucky enough to experience The Barn when it was truly rocking use this argument all the time. All it means is that the Gophers used to have a great home court record/advantage. That is not a sign of overall success and competitiveness (as evidenced by the lack of B1G titles and overall W/L avg that Tubby is on par with).
Click to expand...


Even in the good old days- when we had a bad team the Barn was dead. When the Barn was rocking it was reflective of a competitive team or a team that was building towards that. Every year doesn't have to be great.
 



bga1 said:
Even in the good old days- when we had a bad team the Barn was dead. When the Barn was rocking it was reflective of a competitive team or a team that was building towards that. Every year doesn't have to be great.
Click to expand...
Certainly, but you raised this in support of a post that claimed that there is a larger history of success that is being ignored. I'm simply saying that the previously great home atmosphere/record doesn't support that claim. All it supports is a claim that the atmosphere/record AT HOME used to be a lot better.
 

GoAUpher said:
Certainly, but you raised this in support of a post that claimed that there is a larger history of success that is being ignored. I'm simply saying that the previously great home atmosphere/record doesn't support that claim. All it supports is a claim that the atmosphere/record AT HOME used to be a lot better.
Click to expand...

My claim is that the atmosphere was driven by the fact that coaches were putting teams on the floor that competed hard and that were either good or on their way to it. With Mussy you have a great recruiter that gave you the buzz of big time players coming in. With Dutcher, he was a pretty good recruiter but he was also a steady developer of teams. He would tend to recruit a good core squad and then build with them and you had a sense that given time they would be in the upper half of the Big Ten or better. Then Clem was also a guy that developed guys-he had three main groups of players during his time and every group went to the tournament. Only the Leonard group didn't have success in the tourney. All of those coaches, even the midl mannered Dutcher got wholly into the games and had a passion for building the program. The crowd senses this. Tubby is a guy that I think everyone respects but I don't think he has given poeple the sense of building and connection and passion that these others did. That connection drives the crowd- not the reverse.
 

GoAUpher said:
This is the other issue. Fans who were lucky enough to experience The Barn when it was truly rocking use this argument all the time. All it means is that the Gophers used to have a great home court record/advantage. That is not a sign of overall success and competitiveness (as evidenced by the lack of B1G titles and overall W/L avg that Tubby is on par with).
Click to expand...

though not a sign of overall success it was a sign of competitiveness at least on their home court. they have lost 11 out their last 13 conference home games so Tubby is not on par with regards to competitiveness on his home court.
 

scools12 said:
they have lost 11 out their last 13 conference home games so Tubby is not on par with regards to competitiveness on his home court.
Click to expand...
Very true, but I wasn't saying different.
 

bga1 said:
My claim is that the atmosphere was driven by the fact that coaches were putting teams on the floor that competed hard and that were either good or on their way to it.
Click to expand...
bga1 said:
Tubby is a guy that I think everyone respects but I don't think he has given poeple the sense of building and connection and passion that these others did. That connection drives the crowd- not the reverse.
Click to expand...
So basically your point is that people haven't responded to Tubby as a coach or responded to the type of teams he put on the floor?
 

Doesn't Miles Tarver have a brother or two we can get in here to light a fire under someone's ass on the court? Even when past teams were not great we at least competed. Tubby's teams don't compete. They remind of the kid who keeps getting picked on in school because he is unwilling to stick up for himself.

Doogie is right. Tubby has checked out on us.
 

GoAUpher said:
Tubby's performance is right in line with the historical average over the last 32 years. MV already did the numbers for everyone to see. Key quote:


Musselman coached here from 1971-1975 and he left the school under NCAA sanctions. I'd also note that '71-'75 is pretty pointless to cling to if you're making an argument of historical importance. Its on par with someone saying the Gopher football team has been competitive and then pointing to the Warmath years. Dutcher's last great year was his B1G title year. That was 30 years ago. Also not a sign of recent success. Clem's overall win % at MN wass .59 (Tubby's is currently .61) and his big record was .497 (Tubby's is .435). His next best conference finish was 4th (which he did 5 times).

Since Michigan State joined the conference in 1950 the Gophers have only won 2 B1G titles (3 if you ignore the NCAA vacation of the Clem title). The issue is that folks are recalling the great seasons that were the exceptions to the rule and turning them into the rule. People aren't saying the Gophers are a black hole or the suckiest program ever. They're just pointing out (accurately) that the program is/was never a powerhouse and that Tubby is performing in like with the relevant and most recent (if up to 34 years can be called recent) performance levels of his predecessors.

None of this is meant to say what Tubby is doing should be acceptable. It's simply intended to force people to view his performance here accurately in light of the program's actual history instead of the rosy "good old days" arguments that get trotted out.
Click to expand...

I agree with pretty much all of this.

1. No matter how you try to spin it, our history is not that good. We have a below .500 Big Ten record in our history. The longest "above .500 in conference play" streak we've ever had is four seasons, happening twice. Only once has it happened since 1955. And that streak technically doesn't count anymore.

2. Regardless, that's not an excuse for our lack of success. There's no reason we can't be a consistent tourney team with a long run every once in awhile.
 

GophersInIowa said:
2. Regardless, that's not an excuse for our lack of success. There's no reason we can't be a consistent tourney team with a long run every once in awhile.
Click to expand...
Agree. I don't cite the stats to outright defend Tubby's results as being acceptable. I just think that any decision/discussion of his future at Minnesota needs to take into account actual facts as opposed to mistaken memories of the "good old days" being better than they were.
 

GoAUpher said:
Agree. I don't cite the stats to outright defend Tubby's results as being acceptable. I just think that any decision/discussion of his future at Minnesota needs to take into account actual facts as opposed to mistaken memories of the "good old days" being better than they were.
Click to expand...
Let's also remember that since 1950 Minnesota is just below .500 in conference and Wisconsin is around .400, this is even with Bo Ryan's 11 year run of .700 conference basketball.
 


MN basketball has changed. More local talent than ever. Not like in the 60's or 70's. No reason for not winning here. Just be in the top half more than not. It can happen.
 

Not much doubt that Gopher basketball has had soft results over the years. However, I don't think 18 or 19 wins and 500 in the big 10 is too much to ask. That's usually a recipe for a trip to the big dance and at $2mil a year (1.9, 1.8 or whatever) is probably expected.

Basketball is not football - you can make a serious run with 1 or 2 good players and a few role players.

This program is in complete chaos - and most astute observers can see where its going to end - in the permanent lower tier of the Big 10. And Buggs, Ellenson (sp) or Mo Walker will not change the trajectory.
 

zubb said:
Not much doubt that Gopher basketball has had soft results over the years. However, I don't think 18 or 19 wins and 500 in the big 10 is too much to ask. That's usually a recipe for a trip to the big dance and at $2mil a year (1.9, 1.8 or whatever) is probably expected.

Basketball is not football - you can make a serious run with 1 or 2 good players and a few role players.

This program is in complete chaos - and most astute observers can see where its going to end - in the permanent lower tier of the Big 10. And Buggs, Ellenson (sp) or Mo Walker will not change the trajectory.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree completely, but I think it isn't chaos yet. I still think Tubby gets another year.

However, you start by saying it only takes 1-2 good players. How do you know that isn't ellenson, Buggs or big mo? Add an improved Andre and Joe plus Rodney and things could be okay.

With no transfers next year, I'd hope for a better showing and less complete chaos.
 

Your forgetting the coaching part... . And please enlighten me...why do we think Walker is the answer to anything??
 

zubb said:
Your forgetting the coaching part... . And please enlighten me...why do we think Walker is the answer to anything??
Click to expand...

I'm not saying he is. I just don't see how you can say he isn't either? He's played about 5 games. No one knows either way.
 

It certainly doesn't help that two of the team's starters lack any true fire: Sampson and Williams. Sampson has finally started playing hard the past 3 games. We've only been waiting 4 years for that. Williams still isn't playing that aggressively. He's only got one year left to show it. I don't know why no one can light a fire under those two guys on the court, but let's face it, some people you just can't reach. And all that said, Sampson and Williams both appear to be good kids; so even though they are not leading the team to lots of victories, they also don't appear to be putting egg on the University either, which is more than we can say for some other past team members.

There are 4 guys on the team that play very aggressively consistently: Andre Hollins, Oseninks (sp?), Eliason, and Coleman. The fact that all 4 of those aggressive players are freshman is why I believe we actually have a good future!!!

Once all of the passive players are gone, tenacity could take over. Tenacity is what Clem's best teams brought. Randy Carter, Townsend Orr, Willie Burton, Kevin Lynch, John Thomas, and many more. They were physical, they were mean and meant business on the court, even if they weren't always the most talented. I see that in some of our young players.
 

minngg said:
MN basketball has changed. More local talent than ever. Not like in the 60's or 70's. No reason for not winning here. Just be in the top half more than not. It can happen.
Click to expand...
Wow - a whole paragraph w/o one negative Tubby comment. You even made sense...."more local talent then ever".
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom