While I agree with most of your points, outside of 2 seasons (I give him a pass on the 00-01 season because of the injuries) Alford's time was a decidedly worse stretch than the Davis years.
17 yrs after Bowlsby decided to take Iowa basketball to the next level
- Thread starter starbrown
- Start date
that has to be one of the greatest fan paradigm shifts regarding sports coaches in history. complete 180.
Well, Tom Davis (early years) had Iowa ranked #1 at one point and took them to an Elite 8 finish. Tom Davis (latter years) had Iowa consistently finishing in the top half of the Big Ten and in his last season had a Sweet 16 finish.
I'm guessing the OP's question is rhetorical, but the next level would be a regular season conference title and an Elite 8/Final 4 appearance.
Sooooooo, the short answer is no.
However, given the train wreck that was Iowa basketball under Lickliter and where Fran has the program going now, I think it's safe to say the direction Iowa basketball is trending is a positive one.
I'm guessing the OP's question is rhetorical, but the next level would be a regular season conference title and an Elite 8/Final 4 appearance.
Sooooooo, the short answer is no.
However, given the train wreck that was Iowa basketball under Lickliter and where Fran has the program going now, I think it's safe to say the direction Iowa basketball is trending is a positive one.
I was a big fan of Lute's, but I wasn't surprised when he left. There were two types of fans that Lute had difficulty dealing with: (1) The fans who loved him too much and basically wouldn't allow him to have a private life. He and Bobbie couldn't go out in public without being constantly accosted by adoring fans, and (2) the know it all fans who would second guess every decision and every loss. Lute, like most coaches, had a king size ego and didn't take criticism well, from fans or from the media (Ron Maly, in particular, feuded with Lute). All of this, coupled with Bobbie's desire to return to the West coast where they had relatives and, of course, warmer weather, made the Arizona job particularly appealing to Lute when the job was offered to him, even though the program was in horrible shape back then.
I like Tom Davis but thought his firing was about as poorly handled as it could have been. I was never a fan of Alford's, although I could understand why some thought he was the right man for the job. Unfortunately, he quickly proved that the "next level" under his tutelage was not returning to the NCAA on an annual basis and performing poorly in the post season when we did make it.
The Lickliter debacle speaks for itself.
I like Tom Davis but thought his firing was about as poorly handled as it could have been. I was never a fan of Alford's, although I could understand why some thought he was the right man for the job. Unfortunately, he quickly proved that the "next level" under his tutelage was not returning to the NCAA on an annual basis and performing poorly in the post season when we did make it.
The Lickliter debacle speaks for itself.
Last edited:
Biggest issue with the letting go of Tom Davis was how they did it. We lost a year in recruiting in the lame duck year.
Who cares? The AD has changed, and the coach has changed 3 times. Really, the better question is whether IA is improving under the current staff. That answer has to be YES. Steadily improving records/post-season opportunities, and players have been developing. Iowa has 3 players who will contribute significantly next year who will have a year in the system without losing the year of eligibility. All 3 are very athletic and talented. When is the last time that happened? Iowa might also have the best walk-on in the history of the program - pretty significant if you consider the days of Dr. Tom and some of his walk-ons.
Keep in mind that Davis inherited the best group of players that collectively congregated at Iowa. When those players graduated they were at the top of practically every career statistical category at Iowa. He had somewhere around 9 players on his first roster that went on to have some NBA experience. However, each successive year Davis had more loses and less wins with those players. He never properly replaced the guys who were graduating. Contrast that to the lame duck season when Davis coached his final season and did no recruiting and we even lost Rucker because Davis failed to keep him eligible because of administrative errors. People like to say that Alford inherited a Sweet Sixteen team and that was a lie. That was Davis's last Iowa team and the team that Alford inherited had no resemblance to that team. The hole that Iowa basketball found itself in after Davis left was Davis's and Sally Mason's fault. Bowlesby fired Davis and wanted to replace him in the normal flow of business and Mason wouldn't let him because Davis wanted to ''fulfill'' the rest of his contract minus the recruiting that is.
This sounds credible. Bowlsby wanted Davis to leave. Unlike 99.9 percent of humanity, Davis refused to take the honorable way out, and refused to resign.
While I agree that George left Dr. Tom a great group, Steve was left much more then he left Lick with. As I recall it the team Steve was left beat U conn ( ranked #1) in his first game. In spite of not recruiting Dr. Tom didn't try to take players when he left or poisen the program with you can't win at Iowa talk. Just saying
BS. Collison was probably headed to Iowa until Dr. Tom was made a lame duck coach. I don't think ISU was ever on Collisons radar. Hinrich was going to ISU but Floyd left for the Bulls job. If Collison goes to Iowa I think Hinrick follows. LaFrentz grew up a Kansas fan and his dad didn't like Iowa or ISU. Unfortunately he strung Iowa along even tho, from what I understand from close ties to the program, he never intended to go there. A .500 winning percentage at a time when the Big 10 was maybe at its strongest wasn't bad, and if Chris Street doesn't have his tragic end we had a great chance for a final four appearance with Dr, Tom recruits. If you don't want to count particular seasons then take away what would have been Streets senior season. That was there only real bad season under Dr. Tom. Went to the tourney 9 times in 13 seasons and probably should have gone 2 more times but for "NCAA politics". Oh yeah, never lost a first round game and if not seeded so poorly probably would have made a few more sweet sixteens.
I agree except Kirk would have gone to ISU if Floyd stayed and, if the Dr. is not lame duck, may have followed Collison to Iowa after Floyd left. But I had always heard he was a big Iowa fan and liked Dr. Tom. He may have even come to Iowa if they had changed coaches, but not knowing who was coming in left him no choice but to go elsewhere.
I don't know why we're digging up things from almost 20 years ago. But since we are.
1) I supported the idea of a new coach, but not the way it was handled leaving Dr. Tom a year of coaching when everyone knew he was gone.
2) The main reason I supported it is because as someone mentioned, 89-87 in the Big Ten in his last ten years (keep in mind his Sweet Sixteen final season wasn't even in the equation when Davis was put on notice.) I will not accept .500 ball in ten years. No amount of measure against the strength of the Big Ten will change my mind on that. Not after a coach comes in with the greatest gift of players he could ever hope for and a solid winning tradition including a Big Ten Championship and Final Four within the previous ten seasons! And as to how strong the Big Ten was? Measure during Olson's time and one finds a much tougher conference then!
3) There were a bunch of other reasons. Player retention, academic issues. Comments Davis made like "Fans shouldn't expect to win the Big Ten." And I concur with those who were tired of the same press game in and game out with no regard to our talent level or who we played.
4) BUT. In the view of history I have already said many years ago that it turns out I was wrong to support replacing Dr. Tom. It didn't work. We got worse. It turns out we'd have likely been better off letting Davis end his days as Iowa's coach and then pursue improvement. Can't argue with the results. Right?
5) So why would I support the same decision under the very same circumstances? Because sometimes sitting around worrying about what could go wrong is the worst thing to do. We get caught up in "wrong" so often but forget the option isn't "right" but in truth is doing nothing!
Conclusion. A .500 coach in ten years in the Big Ten? We were right to replace him. We did it wrong. It turned out that it didn't work.
1) I supported the idea of a new coach, but not the way it was handled leaving Dr. Tom a year of coaching when everyone knew he was gone.
2) The main reason I supported it is because as someone mentioned, 89-87 in the Big Ten in his last ten years (keep in mind his Sweet Sixteen final season wasn't even in the equation when Davis was put on notice.) I will not accept .500 ball in ten years. No amount of measure against the strength of the Big Ten will change my mind on that. Not after a coach comes in with the greatest gift of players he could ever hope for and a solid winning tradition including a Big Ten Championship and Final Four within the previous ten seasons! And as to how strong the Big Ten was? Measure during Olson's time and one finds a much tougher conference then!
3) There were a bunch of other reasons. Player retention, academic issues. Comments Davis made like "Fans shouldn't expect to win the Big Ten." And I concur with those who were tired of the same press game in and game out with no regard to our talent level or who we played.
4) BUT. In the view of history I have already said many years ago that it turns out I was wrong to support replacing Dr. Tom. It didn't work. We got worse. It turns out we'd have likely been better off letting Davis end his days as Iowa's coach and then pursue improvement. Can't argue with the results. Right?
5) So why would I support the same decision under the very same circumstances? Because sometimes sitting around worrying about what could go wrong is the worst thing to do. We get caught up in "wrong" so often but forget the option isn't "right" but in truth is doing nothing!
Conclusion. A .500 coach in ten years in the Big Ten? We were right to replace him. We did it wrong. It turned out that it didn't work.
Sorry, I got the two confused, but I am truly surprised that you question the fact that Davis went over Bowleby's head to the University of Iowa's President and made a case that he should be allowed to finish his contract which was approved against the wishes of Bowlesby. The Bowlesby haters/Davis supporters have always blamed Bowlesby for the complete screw up that the lame duck season created when it was Davis and the University President who created the mess.
That was there only real bad season under Dr. Tom. Went to the tourney 9 times in 13 seasons and probably should have gone 2 more times but for "NCAA politics". Oh yeah, never lost a first round game and if not seeded so poorly probably would have made a few more sweet sixteens.[/QUOTE]
Actually, Tom had 2 bad seasons 89-90 and 93-94. He primary problem with Bowlesby was that Davis refused Bowleby's directive to improve Iowa's strength of schedule and that was what cost Iowa one of the exclusions that you called ''NCAA politics''. Bowlesby fired Davis because Davis was an insubordinate lazy coach who wanted a cupcake schedule and was satisfied with a .500 conference records.
Yea, now I'll hear about how we played Kansas and North Carolina and a couple of others during Davis's tenure and I'll remind you that Davis never scheduled any of those games.
And, regarding the statement that he never lost a first round game, it should also be noted that he never ever beat one team who was a higher seed and every team that he beat was a lower seed.
Actually, Tom had 2 bad seasons 89-90 and 93-94. He primary problem with Bowlesby was that Davis refused Bowleby's directive to improve Iowa's strength of schedule and that was what cost Iowa one of the exclusions that you called ''NCAA politics''. Bowlesby fired Davis because Davis was an insubordinate lazy coach who wanted a cupcake schedule and was satisfied with a .500 conference records.
Yea, now I'll hear about how we played Kansas and North Carolina and a couple of others during Davis's tenure and I'll remind you that Davis never scheduled any of those games.
And, regarding the statement that he never lost a first round game, it should also be noted that he never ever beat one team who was a higher seed and every team that he beat was a lower seed.
I'm not questioning it, just can't confirm it. Hey, with the way Iowa was in the 1980's, it wouldn't surprise me.
People probably forget this, but SA actually was the guy who taught KF how to negotiate contracts. For those who were there SA did a phenomenal renegotiation of his contract after yr 2. He was the golden God and Kirk was getting stung with criticism in that same time frame. Kirk bided his time, but he was an A student and would prove to be smarter and more able than Alford. Kirk was especially astute at recognizing how the absence of the word "classy" from SA message board biographers could sway public opinion. That simple adjective can do wonders for a coach at Iowa. At Nebraska it's an epithet. As in "Riley sure is a classy loser."
