Jump to content

Hot Seat


GoBigFred
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, coughunter said:

The sample size thus far says a lot from both coaches.  Its still early for Fred but 19 wins in 3 years with only 6 power 5 wins isnt looking good.  If this year ends bad as its trending, its hard to sell that somehow year 4 will change, like year 5 in fb, running it back. We want both to succeed but its insane to think it will change at least on the bb front unless improvement is obtained the rest of the year.

Both were obviously seen as Home Run hires at the time, but Fred’s job was always more daunting. Scott has achieved something no other Football Coach here has done, make winning six games seem like climbing to the summit of a Mountain. Based on nothing but a hunch I’ll say Fred’s still here after Scott has left the building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, coughunter said:

The sample size thus far says a lot from both coaches.  Its still early for Fred but 19 wins in 3 years with only 6 power 5 wins isnt looking good.  If this year ends bad as its trending, its hard to sell that somehow year 4 will change, like year 5 in fb, running it back. We want both to succeed but its insane to think it will change at least on the bb front unless improvement is obtained the rest of the year.

 

Agreed.

 

Recruiting generally sells either a) proven success or b) the hope of improvement.  When Fred got here, he could sell both based on his track record at ISU/NBA and the natural hopefulness that occurs with a coaching change.  Fast forward three years, and his past coaching successes seem like ancient history to 17 year olds.  And he can't really sell the hope for improvement, when the product on the floor gets more embarrassing each year despite "talent upgrades."

 

For those reasons, I expect we have hit the peak in terms of recruiting and we will now see a steady decline in the talent he signs moving forward.  And if he can't get the job done with a supposedly talented roster, then what hope do we have that he can succeed with a less talented one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Handy Johnson said:

Both were obviously seen as Home Run hires at the time, but Fred’s job was always more daunting. Scott has achieved something no other Football Coach here has done, make winning six games seem like climbing to the summit of a Mountain. Based on nothing but a hunch I’ll say Fred’s still here after Scott has left the building.

Freds job is more daunting based on history, but it is easier or should be to turn it around in bb based on #s.  The $, resources, fan support, facilities, etc shouldnt make either one of those jobs that difficult.  It comes down to coaching and finding the right person who understands that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Agreed.

 

Recruiting generally sells either a) proven success or b) the hope of improvement.  When Fred got here, he could sell both based on his track record at ISU/NBA and the natural hopefulness that occurs with a coaching change.  Fast forward three years, and his past coaching successes seem like ancient history to 17 year olds.  And he can't really sell the hope for improvement, when the product on the floor gets more embarrassing each year despite "talent upgrades."

 

For those reasons, I expect we have hit the peak in terms of recruiting and we will now see a steady decline in the talent he signs moving forward.  And if he can't get the job done with a supposedly talented roster, then what hope do we have that he can succeed with a less talented one?

I almost think you need less "stars" and coach and develop players at a place like this until you can see some success.  Then the talent will come based on success and what you have built.  Then you can have more "stars"  that dont leave after one year cause you've shown development and success. I think Doc tried that but never got enough players to sustain that success.  Miles flopped after tourney year and then had too many losing seasons to show the trajectory was on the way up.

Edited by coughunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Handy Johnson said:

Both were obviously seen as Home Run hires at the time, but Fred’s job was always more daunting. Scott has achieved something no other Football Coach here has done, make winning six games seem like climbing to the summit of a Mountain. Based on nothing but a hunch I’ll say Fred’s still here after Scott has left the building.

 

I really don't want to defend Frost, but turning around a football program is much harder unless the previous coach was a great recruiter that simply couldn't coach it properly.  That was the situation inherited by Frost at UCF, where he inherited a team with loads of talent that culturally fell apart for a single year before he arrived.  But what he inherited at Nebraska was a completely bare cupboard.  Hoiberg inherited an even more baren cupboard, but the size of a basketball roster and ability for freshman to be impact players makes a basketball flip inherently easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, huskerbill85 said:

What's his buyout?

 

That all depends on whether he's fired, whether he resigns, whether he is hired by another college basketball team, or whether he's hired by a pro team.  Whatever that number is likely dictates what happens next. If it boils down to having to pay $12 mil, I'd assume we're going to see how year 4 works out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

That all depends on whether he's fired, whether he resigns, whether he is hired by another college basketball team, or whether he's hired by a pro team.  Whatever that number is likely dictates what happens next. If it boils down to having to pay $12 mil, I'd assume we're going to see how year 4 works out.

The question will be does he want to be here?  This season he looks defeated and uninterested in coaching.  Body language says a lot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2021 at 11:24 PM, Ron Mexico said:

Except for this one liiitttllle difference. In basketball we are not even remotely competitive. We were extremely competitive against every team we played in football including these 3 teams, tOSU, Mich, OU, who were all at various points in the titel contention, one of whom is playing in the National Championship Playoff. This of course doesn't even factor in that it takes a lot longer in football. It can't be fixed with one or 2 players.

 

Other than that they are the exact same thing. 🙄🙄🙄🙄

Reading comprehension not a big strength of yours?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/21/2021 at 9:22 AM, uneblinstu said:

For NU, it was a breakout year. It was literally the second best conference record in modern program history. The only one better was 65-66. I don't care that the conference was down. If the conference would have been better, they still would have won a lot of games. They were a really good team that year. 

We also should have been in the dance comfortably.  Conference had a rough go in the non conference.  With all the power rankings and computer stuff, you cannot make it up.  It completely ignores that the Big 10 arguably has the best coaches in the land.  I would argue quite comfortably.  The teams in the league improved more than the average league.  But it is an equal sum game in league play, so that improvement does not show in the computer stuff.   We were victim of a lot of bad circumstances for sure that season.  When don't we I guess?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 49r said:

 

Our depth was paper thin that year.  We literally couldn't have anyone get injured and even then it was probably going to end poorly for us because the guys' legs were jelly by February.

 

This was and always had been the most damning legacy of Miles tenure at Nebraska.  He would have 4 to 6 Big Ten caliber players and then pretty much dogmeat after that.  He had quite a bit of pretty decent depth transfer out.

Totally. Recruiting misses and some development issues played a big role in that. They needed another couple of players to be able to get over the hump. They were essentially a 4 player team once Cope went down and then just 3 were left when Thomas Allen got banged up. That's not going to cut it. A couple more capable players and that could have been a truly special team. Looking back at that schedule, there's several games that a couple more players would have helped flip this whole thing on it's head.

 

I think that's one of the things he would love to have a do-over with. Who knows, maybe Miles leaves on his own after that given the fractured nature of the Miles/Moos relationship.

Edited by uneblinstu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, coughunter said:

The question will be does he want to be here?  This season he looks defeated and uninterested in coaching.  Body language says a lot. 


I think that is who he is.  He isn’t that fiery guy, he is chill and explains what needs to be done.  I don’t know if he has always coached that way, but I think it has to do with his personality and heart problems.  Just my thoughts…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, royalfan said:

We also should have been in the dance comfortably.  Conference had a rough go in the non conference.  With all the power rankings and computer stuff, you cannot make it up.  It completely ignores that the Big 10 arguably has the best coaches in the land.  I would argue quite comfortably.  The teams in the league improved more than the average league.  But it is an equal sum game in league play, so that improvement does not show in the computer stuff.   We were victim of a lot of bad circumstances for sure that season.  When don't we I guess?

Yep. The Kansas game was obviously a killer, but losing to Central Florida in the invitational game was, too. That would have given us a game vs. West Virginia and either Mizzou or a revenge game vs. St. John's. Instead we got Marist and LBST. Two wins, but not two helpful ones. That was the most detrimental weekend for their NCAA tourney hopes. The OT loss at Penn St. didn't help either...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Silverbacked1 said:


I think that is who he is.  He isn’t that fiery guy, he is chill and explains what needs to be done.  I don’t know if he has always coached that way, but I think it has to do with his personality and heart problems.  Just my thoughts…

That was one of the critiques of him with the Bulls, wasn't it? Not sure about at ISU, but I think he's always been an even-keel guy. Which can work if you get the right mix of guys, but it sure hasn't worked here. Body language is not always a good indicator of how competitive or motivated someone is.

Edited by uneblinstu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

Agreed.

 

Recruiting generally sells either a) proven success or b) the hope of improvement.  When Fred got here, he could sell both based on his track record at ISU/NBA and the natural hopefulness that occurs with a coaching change.  Fast forward three years, and his past coaching successes seem like ancient history to 17 year olds.  And he can't really sell the hope for improvement, when the product on the floor gets more embarrassing each year despite "talent upgrades."

 

For those reasons, I expect we have hit the peak in terms of recruiting and we will now see a steady decline in the talent he signs moving forward.  And if he can't get the job done with a supposedly talented roster, then what hope do we have that he can succeed with a less talented one?

 

Don't underestimate the power of getting guys into the NBA as a huge recruiting pitch.  He got Banton there when pretty much all of us though there was no chance and it looks like he will have one for sure, maybe two, get there after this season.

 

We get Bryce and Verge drafted this year and that would be a pretty amazing pitch to recruits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

Don't underestimate the power of getting guys into the NBA as a huge recruiting pitch.  He got Banton there when pretty much all of us though there was no chance and it looks like he will have one for sure, maybe two, get there after this season.

 

We get Bryce and Verge drafted this year and that would be a pretty amazing pitch to recruits.

 

That is reasonable counterpoint.  I still think most kids with NBA asperations would prefer to go somewhere that wins, but perhaps we will be postured well for some recruits with an NBA or Bust mindset.  I guess the follow on question would be whether we will have any team success if we have a roster of NBA or Bust players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

That is reasonable counterpoint.  I still think most kids with NBA asperations would prefer to go somewhere that wins, but perhaps we will be postured well for some recruits with an NBA or Bust mindset.  I guess the follow on question would be whether we will have any team success if we have a roster of NBA or Bust players.

 

I think so if we can maintain a certain amount of roster continuity.  It's the ingredient we are probably currently missing most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, uneblinstu said:

That was one of the critiques of him with the Bulls, wasn't it? Not sure about at ISU, but I think he's always been an even-keel guy. Which can work if you get the right mix of guys, but it sure hasn't worked here. Body language is not always a good indicator of how competitive or motivated someone is.

 

This is one of these deals where the personality is seen through the prism of results.  We're winning and people are gushing over Fred's cool demeanor.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chuck Taylor said:

All I want for Christmas is a big win, so this thread takes a rest until next week. Or maybe turn it into a Hot Treat thread so everyone can list their favorite baked holiday goodies.

 

I'm not sure anything we do against Kennesaw State will change that unfortunately.

 

Also, I'm terrified what will happen if we lose tonight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, coughunter said:

Ok bro...sorry blaming refs on something 5 years ago is pretty ridiculous.  But hey classy response.

 

You made a claim about the season 5 years ago without context. Someone else offered some details about that season to provide context to what YOU claimed.

 

It's not like they just, out of the blue, started complaining about officiating in games that occurred 5 years ago.

 

IF that's what had happened, then I could understand your response. But that's not what happened. What happened is that YOU brought it up, and their response was germane to what you said.

 

Edited to add: By the way, this is an example of what they call "gaslighting." 

 

Person A: Makes claim about past event, missing pertinent context.

 

Person B: Participates in conversation about past event by sharing additional context.

 

Person A: "Wow, you sure are obsessed about (topic that I brought up.)"

Edited by Norm Peterson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...