Shut Up Sipple! - Why Fred Should have at least 5 years

[NUdiehard]

Those who listen to Sipple on the radio will understand that even though I disagree with Sipple (and most on this board apparently) my title is made in good fun. I reference Sipple because he has been critical of Fred and many believe Sipple is the mouthpiece of the AD.  I hope that is not the case this time, but if it is, then I disagree with Trev and most of this board regarding what should be Hoiberg's future status with this program.  Fred took over this moribund program and should have at least 5 years to try and turn it around.  Period.

 

Have the past 3 years been pathetic.  Absolutely.  Has this season been almost unbearable/unwatchable  Yes.  Is it 100% guaranteed next year and the year after will be significantly improved?  No.  But Fred has proven himself.  He has won big time in a big time conference.  Something no other coach in Nebraska history has done.  So he deserves the chance to prove he can do it here as well, and that means he must have at least 5 years.  The reason I say 5 years is because it is only in the 5th year of a coaches career that the coach has all his players including 4 and 5 year seniors on the roster.  I would say the same for most any coach, and definitely for a proven commodity like Hoiberg.

 

It is clear this board and most fans have completely soured on Fred.  For those who have been on this board for many, many years, you will know that I can be quite critical of coaches and I made it clear when I thought Collier should go and when Doc should go, and I was sometimes in the minority in those positions because many wanted to retain them longer and see if they could turn it around.  I was ambivalent about Miles.  I did not think Miles would ever get it done here, but this program is so pathetic I questioned whether Moos could get anyone better so I was ambivalent (although leaning towards firing him and taking a shot with someone else).  Had I known they could get Fred as a replacement it would have not been a question at all.

 

I believe the fundamental difference between my thinking most on this board is that I think the main issue facing the Huskers is talent.  More correctly, it is experience (in the Husker program) and talent, as opposed to coaching.  Are there coaching issues I take umbrage with?  Yes, and I have voiced some on this board.  But the MUCH, MUCH bigger issue is experienced talent.  And if talent is the issue, then I believe in Fred more than any other two-bit mid-major coach we might hire to bring in that talent over the next few years.  In fact, I think we are already seeing that with the recruits coming in next year.  Look at who Fred beat out to land Ramel Lloyd-Neither Collier, nor Doc nor Miles ever beat out a who's who for a high school recruit like that.  This doesn't even count McGowens (which I know is another issue, but I will address later).  Tack on Keita (who appears to be a legit big man), and the others, and it is a very solid class (I believe ranked in the top 25).  Will they all pan out?  Probably not.  Will it actually be a top 25 class in talent on the court?  I don't know.  But it has as much chance as any IMO.

 

As for Bryce, I know Norm is so fed up he says he never wants any more 5 stars and just wants gutsy, hard working 3 stars who stay in the program and develop.  Fine.  Isn't that exactly what Fred it doing?  How many 5 stars has he recruited in his 3 years here?  Oh ya, just one.  Unless I am mistaken, the Husker roster currently has SEVEN freshman (all 3 or 4 star players) on the roster.  This includes Dawson, (who is already on campus) but does not include the other 3 players in next years class (2 will be freshman and one will be a sophomore).  One silver lining is Wilhelm should get a medical redshirt this year and he is a perfect type of 5 year player who can develop into an impact player but is not good enough to go pro early.   If everyone stays (and yes, I know that will not happen). next year's roster could have 6 freshman (Wilhelm, McPherson, Dawson, Lloyd, Lawrence and Oleg) and potentially 4 sophomores (Andre, Wilhelm, Edwards and Keita).  Some may not return, but there spots may be filled with more freshman or sophomores. 

 

Based on how things are going, it is possible (admittedly not likely) that Bryce and /orTrey return.   Has Bryce been perfect this year?  Clearly not.  Does he need to get bigger, tougher and more focused on defense?  Absolutely?  Would it be good to get another year of development from him?  I certainly think so.  But even if he doesn't return, as shown above, Fred has a lot of youth on this roster.   

 

Andre has his warts.  He is very raw and makes mistakes.  But he didn't start playing basketball until he was 15 years old.  And because of the Covid year, he is still just a freshman.  He is the perfect type of 5 year development big man along with Wilhelm, and then throw in Keita as just a sophomore next year.  Wilcher is athletically limited, but he can be a very good 3 point shooter which his important in today's game.  Again, another development guy.  

 

Now, on the pressing question.  Why do I think most of this year's issues are players/talent and not coaching.  Well, first, it just is apparent to me every game that we are outclassed in size and athleticism.  Would anyone argue with that?   The other deficiencies are toughness, focus and discipline.  Now, you say these are all coaching issues right?  Well, maybe.  But let's dig deeper.  I argue that toughness and grit/dog are as much a skill that some have more difficulty learning than others.  For instance, Wilhelm played with grit and hustle every second he was on the floor.  Yet he was just a freshman.  Then there are guys like Bryce who don't even think about diving on the floor or getting physical on defense.  Both freshman, both in the program the same amount of time, but different outcomes (and I have even made the comparison of Bryce to his own brother who plays with grit by nature).  Same nurture, different nature.  Not all humans have that "dog" in them, and sometimes all the coaching in the world has trouble bringing this out.  Another example--Fred said that Dawson in just his first few days of practice dove on the floor more than other players all year.  Fred was obviously applauding this effort, so clearly he encourages it in his players.  But here we have a true freshman who didn't need any coaching, he just does it because it is his nature.  We heard similar things about McPherson.  And I'm guessing Keita has plenty of "dog" in him.  

 

Last year Nebraska had a top 40 defense when adjusted for tempo.  This year's defense is horrendous.  Is Fred different?  Or have the players changed (including the loss of Trey who is the by far the best defender on the team).  To use this year as justification for an argument that Fred can never have a good defense is ludicrous when he did just last year.  

 

The Big Ten has been absolutely brutal from top to bottom for each year Fred has been here.  Is it the reality he must overcome?  Absolutely.  But is it fair to compare Fred's record to Doc's when he coached in the Big 12?  Or even each of Miles seasons.  Please show me a season in Doc's, Collier's or MIles career where every other team in the conference was ranked in top 100-EVERY SINGLE ONE.  Those coaches always had a couple teams that were terrible to clip a few easy wins.  

 

I posted on this board in February of last year that I did not think Nebraska would be good this year because Fred did not have sufficient talent to win this year.  Many argued with this, but it was apparent to me.  Not a coaching issue.  A talent issue.  Now, I did acknowledge that guys like Andre and Wilhelm and Keisei could maybe develop into solid players, but not THIS YEAR.  Fred later added a few more recruits like Wilcher and Verge, but once again Wilcher is a freshman (who needs more development) and Verge is, well, Verge.  I also posted last February that because of this, Fred needed to evaluate his staff and not be so reliant on Matt A.  Again, I took crap for this at the time, but it seemed pretty apparent at the time.  

 

Regarding Matt A., he is taking a lot of crap on this board lately.  Some justified.  But some are saying he must go.  Not sure I understand.  Can he be, should he be, the sole recruiter?  Absolutely not (again, I said this last February).  But this doesn't mean he has to be fired.  First, Fred has to be more involved in evaluating, recruiting, etc.  And then I believe he needs to get one or two more recruiting assistants to compliment Matt A, not necessarily replace Matt A.  With that said, this assumes there are not other issues that justify firing Matt A.  If he has blatantly gone out of bounds on other issues, then that is a different matter, I am just addressing the recruiting issue.  

 

I'm guessing those who pull out the "NBA" quotes/issues probably never watch the NBA.  Those who follow the NBA closely know that there are soooo many issues beyond coaching.  Roster issues, team construction, rebuilding, etc. far outweigh coaching acument.  Heck, many NBA coaches today are instructed to lose so they get good draft picks.  And quoting Jimmy Butler, please?  That guy was a malcontent on Minnesota and Sixers and pretty much every team he has been on except maybe the Heat. 

 

Last, if you fire Fred, who are you going to get?  Please spare me the latest hot and up-and-coming coach.  Whoever that is, he ain't coming here.  It was a miracle we got Fred.  Fire him after 3 or 4 years and the already small pool shrinks even further.  

 

So shut up Sipple!  You have been kissing Frost's *ss for 4 years now.  Give Fred time.  Give him his 5 years and let's see where we are then. 

  

 

[Handy Johnson]

I forgot more about Sports than Steve Sipple knows…

[cornfed24-7]

Hoiberg ain't getting it done. This year. Next year. The year after. 

[49r]

51 minutes ago, NUdiehard said:

The reason I say 5 years is because it is only in the 5th year of a coaches career that the coach has all his players including 4 and 5 year seniors on the roster.

 

This is where I stopped reading.  And the reason is because Fred can't keep guys around long enough to get to year 3 let alone 4 or 5.

[HuskerFever]

9 minutes ago, cornfed24-7 said:

Hoiberg ain't getting it done. This year. Next year. The year after. 

 

He'll still be with us during this time whether or not he gets it done. He clearly had a good lawyer.

[tcp]

i'm not sure I understand hovv you *really* feel, OP. 

 

Are you sure you're not leaving anything out? 

 

 

[HB]

No.  Just no to that edition of war and peace.   And I’m not sure how bashing a sportswriter helps make your case for Fred.  
 

Time will show that you are way overrating  the incoming recruits.  
 

You defend Matt and want him to stay, yet you claim our talent is bad and the reason for another last  place team?  So keep the guy responsible for the bad talent?   Wtf?  

 

After that novel, I gotta go.  

 

 

[hskr4life]

So there is a lot to unpack with the OP, but I'm just going to pick out a few.  Before I do though, I certainly see the line of thinking that we have to keep Fred around longer.  However, l believe that decision is based on money and money alone.   I guess I could see maybe giving him a fourth year, but there is no way that-- should the outcome of that 4th year be like the previous 3 years-- you'd hold him around for a 5th "just because".  We made a splash hire and it hasn't worked out.  If money is the issue, then maybe.  If it's that he's "done it before" or "who else are we going to get" then I think we need to rethink our line of thinking.  With that....

 

1.  "Regarding Matt A., he is taking a lot of crap on this board lately.  Some justified.  But some are saying he must go.  Not sure I understand."

This one is pretty simple and you kind of answered it yourself.  If Matt is the only one in charge of recruiting, then why would we keep around the guy who has only gotten us... according to you... 1 talented guy (Bryce)?  Something isn't working behind the scenes.  Either we've recruited the right pieces and haven't coached them well enough, or we've not recruited the right pieces for us to coach.  Because Matt is mostly involved with recruiting and Fred is pretty hands off (that we know of) this is an easy decision if the answer is keep Fred because he's a good coach.

 

2.  "But Fred has proven himself.  He has won big time in a big time conference."

So the only thing that I wanted to say here was that, a lot of people on this board have mentioned Fred not having success outside of a certain assistant coach that he had there.  It was also mentioned that Fred's methods of hitting transfers hard worked back then when he was one of the only ones doing it.  However, since leaving ISU, he hasn't had success at his two stops.  So yes, he has won in a big time conference, but what was the reason for that success and why the lack of success since he left?

 

3.  "I believe the fundamental difference between my thinking most on this board is that I think the main issue facing the Huskers is talent."

I'd be really interested in your thoughts on Tim Miles teams that finished 4th in the Big 10 and didn't make the dance... that made the dance... and his last team here that maybe makes the dance if Cope remains healthy.  Were those teams "talented" or was it the right mix of talent and coaching.  Personally, I think you can take a little less talented players and, if coached right, can create something that does really well.  If your answer to this question is "yes, those teams of Tim's were very talented" then my next question goes back to my 1st point-- we have to do something different in our ability to recruit talent.  If the answer is "it was the right mix of talent and coaching" then where are we going wrong on the coaching side of things right now?

 

4. "Last, if you fire Fred, who are you going to get?"

You're right, if Fred can't get it done here, where do we turn?  But on the flip side of that, is it tough to think there isn't a coach out there that could win more than 20 games in 3 years?  Some on this board think we might go 0-20 in the Big 10 this year.  We might, we might not.  If we do, Fred's 3 year win total (19) wouldn't even be enough to guarantee us a spot in the Big Dance.  3 years... and if we combine the wins in all three of those years, we STILL wouldn't have enough wins to dance?  It's tough to say "who are you going to get" when the results have been what they have been.  If Fred was even having seasons = to Miles few years where he won some games, we wouldn't be having these conversations.

[49r]

There will be a line out the damn door for coaches to take a $3 million salary to coach at Nebraska, and they won't give a crap about how difficult the job is.  Or how fickle the fans are, none of that.  A guaranteed 12-15 million dollars will make a person's life very comfortable.

[GoBigRed]

14 hours ago, NUdiehard said:

So he deserves the chance to prove he can do it here as well, and that means he must have at least 5 years.  The reason I say 5 years is because it is only in the 5th year of a coaches career that the coach has all his players including 4 and 5 year seniors on the roster.  I would say the same for most any coach, and definitely for a proven commodity like Hoiberg. 

 

 

Every player on this roster was brought here by Fred (brought here by Matt A. I mean). So "getting his own players" excuse is ridiculous. 

 

And although they haven't spent 4 or 5 years in the program under Fred.....Alonzo Verge, Kobe Webster, Trey McGowens, Lat Mayen and Derrick Walker are all more than experienced enough Division I college basketball players. Fred has plenty to work with, but the team is a joke. What is two more years going to go? I'm pretty confident all those players above will be gone after this year, along with Bryce. Maybe Lat comes back, but that would hurt us more than help us. He's awful.

 

So we start over next year with the experience of Keisei Tominaga (Jr.), CJ Wilcher (So.), Keon Edwards (So.), Wilhelm Breidenbach (So. coming off a knee injury) and Eduardo Andre (So.). And then a bunch more newcomers who you can use the excuse of "just gotta give them some time, then it will work." That group of potential returning players...I have a hard time believing any one of them would be in the rotation on a top-half Big Ten team next year.  

 

I have no idea why people are hellbent on just giving more time to develop these players when so far all the players we've had in 3 years Fred has developed into a 5-42 Big Ten team. So you think that magically they're going to develop Keisei, CJ, Keon, Wilhelm and Eduardo into a top half Big Ten team? 

[GoBigRed]

14 hours ago, NUdiehard said:

Last, if you fire Fred, who are you going to get?  Please spare me the latest hot and up-and-coming coach.  Whoever that is, he ain't coming here.  It was a miracle we got Fred.  Fire him after 3 or 4 years and the already small pool shrinks even further.    

 

 

I hate this line of thinking so so much. And yet Husker fans just love to say it over and over and over no matter the sport. 

 

The most successful coach we've had this century was a little known guy from Colorado State. The most well known coach we've had this century is quite possibly the worst head coach in Nebraska basketball history. 

 

So who are you going to get? Anybody who wants a large paycheck? How will they fare? Who the hell knows, but one thing I do know, I think you could close your eyes and throw a dart at any NCAA Division I mid-major school and take their head coach and that person would certainly at least have us at 0-8 in the Big Ten this season and more than likely would be better than 5-42 in 3 seasons. 

 

Shoot, Trev could just go ask Derrin Hansen up at UNO to come coach here and we would be better than we are right now. I am not kidding. 

 

The "who else are you going to get" argument is so pointless when your current head coach is coaching the worst team in a Power 5 conference. 

Edited January 20, 2022 by GoBigFred

[Chuck Taylor]

14 minutes ago, GoBigFred said:

 

I hate this line of thinking so so much. And yet Husker fans just love to say it over and over and over no matter the sport. 

 

The most successful coach we've had this century was a little known guy from Colorado State. The most well known coach we've had this century is quite possibly the worst head coach in Nebraska basketball history. 

 

So who are you going to get? Anybody who wants a large paycheck? How will they fare? Who the hell knows, but one thing I do know, I think you could close your eyes and throw a dart at any NCAA Division I mid-major school and take their head coach and that person would certainly at least have us at 0-8 in the Big Ten this season and more than likely would be better than 5-42 in 3 seasons. 

 

Shoot, Trev could just go ask Derrin Hansen up at UNO to come coach here and we would be better than we are right now. I am not kidding. 

 

The "who else are you going to get" argument is so pointless when your current head coach is coaching the worst team in a Power 5 conference. 

I'm with you completely except for Hansen. He's terrible, doesn't coach defense and doesn't run a structured offense. He's cheap to keep, though, and they have a lot of financial issues.

[hhcmatt]

Firing Fred is a $$ issues.  If his buyout was less than $5mil we'd already have a replacement coach thread up.

 

[Bugeaters1]

3 minutes ago, Chuck Taylor said:

I'm with you completely except for Hansen. He's terrible, doesn't coach defense and doesn't run a structured offense. He's cheap to keep, though, and they have a lot of financial issues.

So basically what we have now. only at a higher pay.

 

[cornfed24-7]

6 minutes ago, Chuck Taylor said:

He's terrible, doesn't coach defense and doesn't run a structured offense.

So he's a cheaper Hoiberg  

[cornfed24-7]

2 minutes ago, Bugeaters1 said:

So basically what we have now. only at a higher pay.

 

Same thought!

[hhcmatt]

Sort of amazing to read these type of hard yet amorphous takes where a large portion is scoreboard keeping of disagreements with previous kitchen wall takes from specific months and years.  I don't know what I had for lunch yesterday.

[HuskerFever]

44 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

Firing Fred is a $$ issues.  If his buyout was less than $5mil we'd already have a replacement coach thread up.

 

Exactly this.

 

And for that, I'm going to have to live with this for a few years, regardless of the performance on the court. I might as well try to find meaning in the team and staff we have rather than dwell on decisions that aren't likely for 2+ years.

[thrasher31]

Lots to unpack in your post OP and some may hold some weight. But the bottom line for me is regardless of what has happened to this point, year 3 was supposed to be when this thing took off. We shouldn't be winless in conference in year 3. I do think there's some games they win in conference, but you can't start off 0-8. Would we be in a different situation if Banton stayed or they were informed earlier on his decision so they could get someone other than Verge? Possibly. I would've really liked this team with him, but alas here we are.  

 

No one on the team is shooting above 30% from 3 outside of Kobe, Keisei, and CJ. Now, I do think those are our best 3 shooters on the team, but some of the 3s we shoot as a team are bad shots. From Verge to Bryce to Lat across the board. It's not been consistent. A lot of that is generating good looks from sets (whether it be running a set lazily or someone going solo. I point out Keisei having to shoot off 1 foot from 3 last game as an example as a set ran lazily and Keisei had to improvise) or bad shot selection, it's gross. 

 

Fred hasn't gotten it done in year 3 for what's supposed to be his best team to date. Like I said, I do think some things break our way here soon (more out of basketball gods just being kind to us for once). The reason the team is the way it is starts at the top. I believe Fred being "unemotional" is a bit overstated however. I've been to every game this year but 1, and he isn't animated like Underwood, but he has command of the sideline from where I'm sitting.  Issue is, from some effing reason, his team can't figure it out late in games. We can point to a few reasons, but it's 3 years into his tenure. He will inevitably get one and maybe 2 more years, but it has more to do with the financial aspect. 

[hhcmatt]

1 hour ago, HuskerFever said:

 

Exactly this.

 

And for that, I'm going to have to live with this for a few years, regardless of the performance on the court. I might as well try to find meaning in the team and staff we have rather than dwell on decisions that aren't likely for 2+ years.

 

And the thing is no one wants to fire him now or then; he still the almost universally liked person who happens to be running a basketball program that is markedly worse than Minnesota in year one of the Ben Johnson era.

 

[GoBigRed]

3 hours ago, Chuck Taylor said:

I'm with you completely except for Hansen. He's terrible, doesn't coach defense and doesn't run a structured offense. He's cheap to keep, though, and they have a lot of financial issues.

 

For the record, I wouldn't want Hansen. My point is, if he were head coach of this team, do I think they would have more than 6 wins and more than 0 Big Ten wins? Yes. Yes I do.

[aphilso1]

3 hours ago, GoBigFred said:

 

I hate this line of thinking so so much. And yet Husker fans just love to say it over and over and over no matter the sport. 

 

The most successful coach we've had this century was a little known guy from Colorado State. The most well known coach we've had this century is quite possibly the worst head coach in Nebraska basketball history. 

 

So who are you going to get? Anybody who wants a large paycheck? How will they fare? Who the hell knows, but one thing I do know, I think you could close your eyes and throw a dart at any NCAA Division I mid-major school and take their head coach and that person would certainly at least have us at 0-8 in the Big Ten this season and more than likely would be better than 5-42 in 3 seasons. 

 

Shoot, Trev could just go ask Derrin Hansen up at UNO to come coach here and we would be better than we are right now. I am not kidding. 

 

The "who else are you going to get" argument is so pointless when your current head coach is coaching the worst team in a Power 5 conference. 

 

The "who are we going to get?" argument is valid in specific situations.  Namely, when you have a good program that has stagnated.  It's worth considering replacement candidates prior to firing the coach, because you want to know whether making the change is more likely to raise the program to "great" or lower the program to "meh."  See Frank Solich firing for example.  Or Bo.  Or for a non-Husker reference, Gus Malzahn.  Those were all situations were you should only make the change if you think you'll land a coach that's a clear upgrade.  As for this current Nebrasketball situation though?  You are 100% correct.  Throwing a dart at any successful mid-major coach should lead to better results.  

[NUdiehard]

40 minutes ago, aphilso1 said:

 

The "who are we going to get?" argument is valid in specific situations.  Namely, when you have a good program that has stagnated.  It's worth considering replacement candidates prior to firing the coach, because you want to know whether making the change is more likely to raise the program to "great" or lower the program to "meh."  See Frank Solich firing for example.  Or Bo.  Or for a non-Husker reference, Gus Malzahn.  Those were all situations were you should only make the change if you think you'll land a coach that's a clear upgrade.  As for this current Nebrasketball situation though?  You are 100% correct.  Throwing a dart at any successful mid-major coach should lead to better results.  

 

For me, this is the wrong standard to assess.  The question is not can a different coach win 4 games in the BIG rather than 2 (or 0 or whatever).  The question is can the coach take this program to a point that it is a semi-regular contender for the NCAA tourney and occasionally wins a game or two in the tourney.  That is the standard that any coach should be measured by.   I will happily trade these 3 crappy, crappy seasons if in years 5 and 6 Fred has a NCAA tourney level team and therefore a foundation to keep that rolling into the future.  Heck, I will even sacrifice next year again if we can reach that point in year 5.  Maybe its because I have been doing this for 45 years now that whether its 2 conference wins or 7 conference wins if its not ever resulting in the NCAA or at least high level NIT then what's really the difference?   Sure, watching a 7 win team is better than a 4 win team, but either way NU is playing day 1 in the B1G tourney and not even sniffing NCAA tourney.  

 

The past 3 years are now a sunk cost.  Keeping or firing Fred will not change that.  The question is what/who gives NU the best chance of being a tourney level team by year 2024.  I will roll the dice on Fred because he has proven he can do it while coaching in a power 5 conference.  He may need to make some adjustments to his staff, recruiting philosophy, scheme, etc., to adjust to Nebraska and the B1G.  Fine.  Give him time and see what he does.  If NU is still at the bottom of the B1G after year 5 then he is a goner and we can play this charade all over again with some no-name mid-major coach.

 

The logic of many is confusing IMO.  Here are the facts:

 

1.  Fred Hoiberg -  coached a power 5 school for 5 years (prior to NU) and went to the NCAA tourney 4 of those 5 years and the sweet 16 in one of those years.

 

2. Nebraska basketball program - Has only been to 1 NCAA tourney in the last 20 years (despite 4 different coaches) and has NEVER won a single game in the NCAA tourney.

 

3. CONCLUSION of the masses - the problem clearly lies with Fred and not the Nebraska program. 

 

Uh, OK. 

Edited January 20, 2022 by NUdiehard

[Dead Dog Alley]

4 hours ago, GoBigFred said:

 

The most successful coach we've had this century was a little known guy from Colorado State.

 

 

And after the Nebraska stint ruined that guy's career, the next little known guy will definitely think twice before taking the job.

[BannedAccount]

I can vibe on both sides of the argument to keep or get rid of.  This though I will never agree with....

 

Last, if you fire Fred, who are you going to get?  Please spare me the latest hot and up-and-coming coach.  Whoever that is, he ain't coming here.  It was a miracle we got Fred.  Fire him after 3 or 4 years and the already small pool shrinks even further.  

 

That take is defeatist and a loser memtality.  As I've said before this program has money, fan support, facilities, and others to attract a coach.  You never know who you can get if you dont ask.  No one thought we were going to get FH or thought he would come.  There will always be someone who is willing to take what is offered and as a competitor prove they can win here.