What if......

[Chuck Taylor]

I feel like I'm reading a poorly written Chatelain blog post

   

[PimpMario]

What ifs are pointless exercises designed, usually, just to mock the way things are. What if ...

George Washington's boat sank crossing the Delaware

Lee Harvey Oswald missed.

The bomb killed Hitler

Alexander Fleming hadn't gone on holiday in 1928 allowing time for his "mold juice" to impact some of his petri dishes for longer than planned.

Pfizer hadn't developed the little blue UK92480 pill (a.k.a. Viagra) to help relieve coronary heart pain.

And perhaps most importantly, Nebraska doesn't beat OU in football in '78

The point is all those things are NOT true and can never BE true so so asking what if they COULD be true is a waste of time.

We are in the off season. What else do you want us to talk about?

[ajb5856]

This thread sucks so much.

[jimmykc]

Perhaps someone can post Dana's enthusiastic Pig Sooooey to break up the sucking a little

[Dean Smith]

I think Altman is a very good coach, but if you remember he left Creighton after an 18-16 year with a lot of grumbling going on from lots of the blue vests with the big checks. 

[rwmctrofholz]

Altman is getting plenty of higher-end talent at Oregon, perhaps that Swoosh has had a bigger impact than the 'Dana factor' could in the midwest. Altman is a very good coach, I'm looking forward to seeing the Ducks vs Sooners, i.e. Altman facing his mentor, Lon Kruger, for the right to play in the Final Four. Pretty neat for a couple of great guys.

 

I am in agreement with this statement.  Having money is one thing; Nebraska does.  Having money, as well a effective nationwide branding, is whole different beast.  

[hhcmatt]

I think Altman is a very good coach, but if you remember he left Creighton after an 18-16 year with a lot of grumbling going on from lots of the blue vests with the big checks. 

 

Not to mention this

http://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/2014/05/14/dana-altman-deserves-to-be-fired-for-mess-at-oregon/

[throwback]

I think Altman is a very good coach, but if you remember he left Creighton after an 18-16 year with a lot of grumbling going on from lots of the blue vests with the big checks. 

Good point. The bluebirds were more than happy to see him take his show out of town at the time. 

 

Apologies if my early response got this going in a bad direction. But I will admit the 'what if' thought has crossed my mind a few times this season with Oregon's success. 

 

And to clarify, I'm not bitter/angry Altman wasn't hired a decade-plus ago. There's just no point in being angry about it - the people who made those decisions are long gone from NU. 

 

At this point I prefer thinking about the 'what if' scenario of NU signing a couple of big men for 2016-17 and thinking about playing Oregon in next season's Elite Eight. 

[hskr4life]

It's not about feeling better, but if your constantly asking what if , it makes accepting what we have and what we can be much harder. What happened is what happened why revisit it.

Here are a couple reasons to try to learn from the past:

1) 63-67 in 4 seasons

2) 27-45 in conference play

3) 0-13 career vs. McDermott

4) 0-4 vs. Creighton

 

Are we satisfied with the decisions we've made in Husker basketball in the past decade?

I'm just wondering... Standard board questions...

Do you like golf?

Coach any youth sports?

Have any nickname that would deal with and internal body part?

[throwback]

So, I'm thinking he was at least attainable with the right deal in 2007.

Sorry, but no way. It simply was not going to happen at that time. Our esteemed AD was too busy being booed on big screens across the state - he was in full time CYOA mode. He couldn't even put together the support for a deal to fire Collier.

 

And besides, Altman was not leaving his job at the time - in August no less - to work for that buffoon in that toxic environment. He's too smart for that .... the pig sooey incident being the outlier of course. 

[HB]

 

 

 

It's not about feeling better, but if your constantly asking what if , it makes accepting what we have and what we can be much harder. What happened is what happened why revisit it.

Here are a couple reasons to try to learn from the past:

1) 63-67 in 4 seasons

2) 27-45 in conference play

3) 0-13 career vs. McDermott

4) 0-4 vs. Creighton

 

Are we satisfied with the decisions we've made in Husker basketball in the past decade?

 

 

Given the circumstances we faced at the time of Sadler's hire, I would say, "Yes." No doubt you recall that we were trying to fill a vacancy that came up at a very bad time for hiring a coach and that a number of good coaching prospects were approached but declined in part because of that timing and further that Doc Sadler was a fairly "hot" coaching prospect who was eager to come. Did it work out as well as we would have liked? Clearly not. But since you have gained such wisdom from your perusal of the past perhaps you can share why the decision to hire him was not a good one as it was made at the time. Heaven forbid, though, you posit some nonsensical idea like "we should have hired Dana Altman." Why not instead say, "we should have hired Coach K or Bill Self?" I mean, if we are going to play "what if" let's at least play it right.

 

 

 

So, I'm thinking he was at least attainable with the right deal in 2007.

 

 

 

 

Well, you're thinking wrong.  By that time Dana was established and wasn't going to take a career-killing job like Nebraska.   No way is he taking that job.  He was going to pick his job, and it wasn't going to be this one.    We couldn't hire Self when he was a newbie at Tulsa, and we sure as hell couldn't have hired Altman in '07.  Go ahead and throw as much crap around here as you want, but at least have it be remotely realistic.   Anyone who has spent 5 minutes with the Altmans know you're pipe dream was never happening.  

[Norm Peterson]

The time we blew it was hiring Collier over Altman.  We actually had a chance back then and he wanted to come here and replace Nee.  But, in spite of how he turned around the program at Creighton and took it from dumpster fire to respectability, there was still his less-than-impressive run at KSU fresh in the minds of the AD and Regents.  They, I suspect, couldn't get past the whole "he's done well at a mid-major but fizzled at a major conference program" way of thinking.

[Hoops_Legend]

 

 

 

 

It's not about feeling better, but if your constantly asking what if , it makes accepting what we have and what we can be much harder. What happened is what happened why revisit it.

Here are a couple reasons to try to learn from the past:

1) 63-67 in 4 seasons

2) 27-45 in conference play

3) 0-13 career vs. McDermott

4) 0-4 vs. Creighton

 

Are we satisfied with the decisions we've made in Husker basketball in the past decade?

 

 

Given the circumstances we faced at the time of Sadler's hire, I would say, "Yes." No doubt you recall that we were trying to fill a vacancy that came up at a very bad time for hiring a coach and that a number of good coaching prospects were approached but declined in part because of that timing and further that Doc Sadler was a fairly "hot" coaching prospect who was eager to come. Did it work out as well as we would have liked? Clearly not. But since you have gained such wisdom from your perusal of the past perhaps you can share why the decision to hire him was not a good one as it was made at the time. Heaven forbid, though, you posit some nonsensical idea like "we should have hired Dana Altman." Why not instead say, "we should have hired Coach K or Bill Self?" I mean, if we are going to play "what if" let's at least play it right.

 

 

 

So, I'm thinking he was at least attainable with the right deal in 2007.

 

 

 

 

Well, you're thinking wrong.  By that time Dana was established and wasn't going to take a career-killing job like Nebraska.   No way is he taking that job.  He was going to pick his job, and it wasn't going to be this one.    We couldn't hire Self when he was a newbie at Tulsa, and we sure as hell couldn't have hired Altman in '07.  Go ahead and throw as much crap around here as you want, but at least have it be remotely realistic.   Anyone who has spent 5 minutes with the Altmans know you're pipe dream was never happening.  

 

The reality of the world is that money talks.  Altman accepted a preliminarily position at Arkansas for 1.5M per year.  We are paying over 2M today for not even playing in the NIT.

 

And you don't think we could've gotten a deal done????

 

It would have been worth a full blown effort and if he turned down a 500K higher bid, then I would happily say "at least we tried". But, we didn't.  Too proud to go after the Creighton guy.

[Bugeaters1]

This must be how Hoops_Legend feels.

[Chuck Taylor]

  

[HB]

 

 

 

 

 

It's not about feeling better, but if your constantly asking what if , it makes accepting what we have and what we can be much harder. What happened is what happened why revisit it.

Here are a couple reasons to try to learn from the past:

1) 63-67 in 4 seasons

2) 27-45 in conference play

3) 0-13 career vs. McDermott

4) 0-4 vs. Creighton

 

Are we satisfied with the decisions we've made in Husker basketball in the past decade?

 

 

Given the circumstances we faced at the time of Sadler's hire, I would say, "Yes." No doubt you recall that we were trying to fill a vacancy that came up at a very bad time for hiring a coach and that a number of good coaching prospects were approached but declined in part because of that timing and further that Doc Sadler was a fairly "hot" coaching prospect who was eager to come. Did it work out as well as we would have liked? Clearly not. But since you have gained such wisdom from your perusal of the past perhaps you can share why the decision to hire him was not a good one as it was made at the time. Heaven forbid, though, you posit some nonsensical idea like "we should have hired Dana Altman." Why not instead say, "we should have hired Coach K or Bill Self?" I mean, if we are going to play "what if" let's at least play it right.

 

 

 

So, I'm thinking he was at least attainable with the right deal in 2007.

 

 

 

 

Well, you're thinking wrong.  By that time Dana was established and wasn't going to take a career-killing job like Nebraska.   No way is he taking that job.  He was going to pick his job, and it wasn't going to be this one.    We couldn't hire Self when he was a newbie at Tulsa, and we sure as hell couldn't have hired Altman in '07.  Go ahead and throw as much crap around here as you want, but at least have it be remotely realistic.   Anyone who has spent 5 minutes with the Altmans know you're pipe dream was never happening.  

 

The reality of the world is that money talks.  Altman accepted a preliminarily position at Arkansas for 1.5M per year.  We are paying over 2M today for not even playing in the NIT.

 

And you don't think we could've gotten a deal done????

 

It would have been worth a full blown effort and if he turned down a 500K higher bid, then I would happily say "at least we tried". But, we didn't.  Too proud to go after the Creighton guy.

 

 

Yeah, I'm positive we couldn't have gotten a deal done.   Your "pride" conspiracy is pathetic.

[PimpMario]

And to answer the thread, yes I would have loved to get Dana at any point.

Clearly Altman is better than any coach Nebraska has ever had.

[ajb5856]

Ok everyone lets stop. It's clear that golfer central legend's goal is to have a majority of the threads on this board shut down by his own doing. Let's not help him out no matter how tempting.

[KZRider]

The time we blew it was hiring Collier over Altman.  We actually had a chance back then and he wanted to come here and replace Nee.  But, in spite of how he turned around the program at Creighton and took it from dumpster fire to respectability, there was still his less-than-impressive run at KSU fresh in the minds of the AD and Regents.  They, I suspect, couldn't get past the whole "he's done well at a mid-major but fizzled at a major conference program" way of thinking.

 

Even when Collier was hired it looked like a good decision at the time. He turned Butler into a regular in the NCAA tournament dancer. If I had been AD at the time I doubt I would have preferred Altman over Collier. Again, it didn't turn out as we hoped. Our erstwhile thorn troll has made this all about coaching hires but AT THE TIME they were made, Collier, Sadler and Miles were all good choices. I believe T.O. understood that developing a successful basketball program needed more than that and made a LOT of very good decisions -- including but not limited to hiring Miles and building PBA and a great practice facility. One result of that is we were in the NCAA tournament for the first time in ages. It is not sunshine pumping to see us on the cusp of that on a regular basis. Miles has us SO CLOSE to it. We are a quality big man away IMO. What would it be like for us to have Jacobson and/or Morrow on the floor AT THE SAME TIME as our legit 5 in the middle! If we ever get over the hump this will be a very exciting program to cheer for!

[*Deleted Account*]

It's all about timing. Dana wasn't leaving Creighton in a lurch in August of 2006, AD Bruce Rasmussen was a close friend. However, Dana was ready to leave. But Steve Pederson was at NEB and Dana would not take a job with an unstable AD. He learned that at Kansas state. By the time Nebraska was looking to hire after firing Sadler, I think Altman had just been at Oregon for 1 year. He wasn't leaving. He's loyal. If Tim Miles was hired away tomorrow, Dana would leave oregon for Nebraska. No doubt

[Fullbacksympathy]

And to answer the thread, yes I would have loved to get Dana at any point.

Clearly Altman is better than any coach Nebraska has ever had.

 

Danny Nee went 12-6 against Altman between K-State and Creighton, and the wins over Creighton were almost always blowouts.  There was no rivalry until Nee was fired.  

 

So, no, clearly Altman isn't, but he was extremely smart for taking the Oregon job as his system works great with good athletes.  Altman was never a great recruiter, but Oregon recruits itself.  He was probably a better in-game coach than anyone we've had, but he was a below average recruiter, in my opinion, and recruiting in college basketball is about 5 times more important than in-game coaching.  

 

Altman would've been another Sadler at UNL--solid in-game coaching, sub par talent.  If we're talking upside alone (recruiting ability plus coaching), I think TM has displayed recruiting potential we haven't seen since Nee, and Nee was definitely a better coach than Altman because of his ability to recruit.  

[Buglem]

Wait...just wait a second. Hmm, didn't we hire Connie Yori, and wasn't she a Creighton coach? I am not sure the fact that Dana coached at Creighton had much if any effect on whether we did or didn't go after him. Maybe I am dead wrong, but that sure seems strange.

Man- no offense, but that is women's basketball. I think it's safe to say that the pressure of beating Creighton doesn't quite measure up. Stealing the coach that owned us at Creighton is what my point was. I don't think we had the fortitude to swallow the pride and get the guy we needed.

So here we sit.

Offense taken...it is certainly relevant IF you are saying that UNL will not consider hiring a coach from Creighton. That was not the stumbling block in hiring Dana.

No, let me dumb this down for you. Coni Yori posed little threat to the pride of Nebrasketball. When hired, most didn't know who she was, and the others didn't give a damn. Dana Altman was putting teams (that were relevant to sports in Nebraska) on the court that were better than ours. He out coached us and won. He has won 2 NCAA tourney games at a mid-major, while we...well never mind.

We would rather try to beat him than hire him. That certainly was a poor choice (I'll refrain from citing his overall record vs. NU, definitely won't mention his record against Collier).

For anyone on this board to not give Dana Altman his due props, or not lement not going after him full force, I believe is sour grapes. We got Collier, then we got Doc, now, we're on the outside looking in again.

Dana has us winning in the tourney. Guarantee it.

This post and your sentiment is the very definition of sour grapes.

Dana is clearly a great coach. They're having a great run. Using that as an excuse to complain about the state of the Husker program makes as much sense as Grayson Allen complaining about sportsmanship.

[Hoops_Legend]

 

And to answer the thread, yes I would have loved to get Dana at any point.

Clearly Altman is better than any coach Nebraska has ever had.

 

Danny Nee went 12-6 against Altman between K-State and Creighton, and the wins over Creighton were almost always blowouts.  There was no rivalry until Nee was fired.  

 

So, no, clearly Altman isn't, but he was extremely smart for taking the Oregon job as his system works great with good athletes.  Altman was never a great recruiter, but Oregon recruits itself.  He was probably a better in-game coach than anyone we've had, but he was a below average recruiter, in my opinion, and recruiting in college basketball is about 5 times more important than in-game coaching.  

 

Altman would've been another Sadler at UNL--solid in-game coaching, sub par talent.  If we're talking upside alone (recruiting ability plus coaching), I think TM has displayed recruiting potential we haven't seen since Nee, and Nee was definitely a better coach than Altman because of his ability to recruit.  

 

In fairness to Altman, he inherited a horrid program.  He closed the talent gap with NU by 1999 and they turned in a winning season.  So if you want to compare going head to head with reasonably comparable talent levels, you can't hold pre 1999 Creighton against him.  They were a bad mid major when he arrived.  He went 7-19 in year one, four years later the guy is winning an NCAA tourney game...AT CREIGHTON!

 

His record after that vs NU is 8-2.  Let's at least call it the way it was.  How can you turn around a 7-19 mid major in 4 years and not be a good recruiter??

[PimpMario]

And to answer the thread, yes I would have loved to get Dana at any point.

Clearly Altman is better than any coach Nebraska has ever had.

Danny Nee went 12-6 against Altman between K-State and Creighton, and the wins over Creighton were almost always blowouts. There was no rivalry until Nee was fired.

So, no, clearly Altman isn't, but he was extremely smart for taking the Oregon job as his system works great with good athletes. Altman was never a great recruiter, but Oregon recruits itself. He was probably a better in-game coach than anyone we've had, but he was a below average recruiter, in my opinion, and recruiting in college basketball is about 5 times more important than in-game coaching.

Altman would've been another Sadler at UNL--solid in-game coaching, sub par talent. If we're talking upside alone (recruiting ability plus coaching), I think TM has displayed recruiting potential we haven't seen since Nee, and Nee was definitely a better coach than Altman because of his ability to recruit.

Yeah.... No. Altman is better than Nee. Altman is 9-11 in the tournament.

Maybe some of nees teams were better than Altman's but that doesn't mean nee is a better coach.

By the logic of head to head only matters miles is better than izzo. And therefore McDermott is way better than izzo.

[Fullbacksympathy]

 

 

And to answer the thread, yes I would have loved to get Dana at any point.

Clearly Altman is better than any coach Nebraska has ever had.

 

Danny Nee went 12-6 against Altman between K-State and Creighton, and the wins over Creighton were almost always blowouts.  There was no rivalry until Nee was fired.  

 

So, no, clearly Altman isn't, but he was extremely smart for taking the Oregon job as his system works great with good athletes.  Altman was never a great recruiter, but Oregon recruits itself.  He was probably a better in-game coach than anyone we've had, but he was a below average recruiter, in my opinion, and recruiting in college basketball is about 5 times more important than in-game coaching.  

 

Altman would've been another Sadler at UNL--solid in-game coaching, sub par talent.  If we're talking upside alone (recruiting ability plus coaching), I think TM has displayed recruiting potential we haven't seen since Nee, and Nee was definitely a better coach than Altman because of his ability to recruit.  

 

In fairness to Altman, he inherited a horrid program.  He closed the talent gap with NU by 1999 and they turned in a winning season.  So if you want to compare going head to head with reasonably comparable talent levels, you can't hold pre 1999 Creighton against him.  They were a bad mid major when he arrived.  He went 7-19 in year one, four years later the guy is winning an NCAA tourney game...AT CREIGHTON!

 

His record after that vs NU is 8-2.  Let's at least call it the way it was.  How can you turn around a 7-19 mid major in 4 years and not be a good recruiter??

 

 

Indeed, let's do.  KSU had just come off 3 straight tournament appearances and a top 10 finish when Altman took over and brought it back to mediocrity.  He inherited a great program at K-State and still managed to have a losing record to Nee.  

 

Mid-majors don't require good recruiters.  That's the whole point.  If you have one or two D-League players every season, you'll win the MVC, and that's exactly what happened.