A curt coach in the postgame

[DodgerHawki]

After watching the whole interview I have to say the questions asked by the reporters were pretty inane and with obvious answers. All of the questions led to answers that neither the Coach, nor the players would ever want to give: We played like crap.

Sure the fans are going to want to know why Iowa got beat so bad by Michigan. It was a s___show the last half of the 2nd half. The reporters know it. The coaching staff knows it. The players know it. This was a game that just did not go Iowa's way from the beginning. It was the most disappointing game of the year for us on a whole lot of levels. Why pile on with stupid questions in the postgame?

I am not blaming the officials. But the play stoppage multiple times in the beginning had an impact on the flow that Garza would normally have. It made him a little more tentative on Offense and the whole team seemed to be back on their heels a bit.

Then the Nunge injury. Not only do we lose Jack for this game -- it could be much longer. Have to be a concern in the back of your mind the rest of the game.

Michigan stayed right in front of our perimeter players which effectively shut down JW. Unlike Wagner who put his head down and just went to the rim, our perimeter guys did not go all in with their drives (except Jbo) which made them ineffective on offense.

Then Connor goes down. It was just another hit to a team that did not need another hit. Btw, all of these things just helped to build Michigan's confidence.

Iowa's shots were not falling.

Fran then sat his wings and put in reserves. The reserves turned the ball over, tried to do things not in the regular flow of the offense and the rout began.

Why not start the questions with:

Coach, this was obviously a very frustrating game on many levels -- what do you need to do to recover from this?

Or

Now having played Michigan what is your assessment of their team?

Or

We have not been as effective with our offensive rebounding recently, how do you coach offensive rebounding and what do we need to do to improve in this area to get second chance opportunities?

Or

How do we get open and better shots on the perimeter when the other team is crowding us like Michigan?

In my opinion, the reporters should have enough sense to assume that the Iowa representatives in the postgame presser are going to be dejected, frustrated and very unhappy after the performance yesterday so why just beat them up more by asking them to explain why they were so terrible. Let's just assume that it was terrible, they are feeling terrible and then ask questions about how to go forward.

First it's not the media's job to protect the feelings of Fran. He's getting paid millions of dollars a year to coach basketball. One of the descriptions of the job is to answer questions. If he disagrees with the premise of a question (and the "dysfunction" question was probably unfair) he can say so and just answer it like he wants to answer it.

The reason Iowa got beat by Michigan was that Michigan has better players, and the team is well coached. And Michigan was ready to play. Iowa also has good players and is well coached. But Iowa's talent is not as good as Michigan's. When you are playing an opponent who is better than you, and that opponent is locked in/ready to go, your chances of winning are not great. Yes, the interruptions early were disruptive. But Garza was never in rhythm against Dicksinson. If Garza is not drafted, this game will be somewhat telling. Dicksinson is big, but not overly athletic. And Garza couldn't really do anything against him. In the NBA, there are guys just as tall as Dicksinson and way more athletic.

Michigan made it their mission to not give anything easy. They were in Iowa's space the entire game. And driving/going to the basket sounds nice, but is very difficult to do when the guy defending you is taller and quicker than you. When teams play Iowa like this, Garza has been the relief valve. Throw it in the post and let him go score. But Michigan could take that away with single coverage so Iowa was stuck.

 

[SotaHawk87]

I still feel like it has something to do with a gripe with Iowa media. Maybe the stuff where they got pissed Iowa was giving Garza national interviews and not local ones.

 

[nu2u]

He can't think of a better question than something to which we already know the answer?
That is why people tire of "journalists"

Sorry, journalists can ask a questions from insulting to flattering and everything in between. It is ALWAYS about how the person being interviewed handles the question no matter how ignorant, offensive, or trivial the question may be.

 

[fezzador]

The B1G is the biggest and toughest conference in all of college hoops. If Fran can't handle the toughness (tough opponents, tough media questions, tough fanbases), then maybe he needs to go back to a small-time program in a small-time conference where the spotlight is smaller and fewer people care. I'm sure he'd do just fine at an Oral Roberts.

 

[keosauquahawk]

If I remember correctly, before we hired Fran we knew about his press conferences that at times were bad. I remember they said he defends his players. The clips I saw reminded me of Bobby Knight. We knew what we were getting and I have enjoyed watching Hawkeye basketball much more than I have with the previous 2 coaches. I guess I am saying most people have some bad to go with their good. I remember that Alford was a pretty poor game manager but I think Craig Neal helped him and he got better. Maybe what we need is a different assistant or two that can give Fran some better advise as to what we need to do during the game. I don't know if Fran would listen but maybe the current assistance have given up on offering opinions or are afraid of his temper. Whatever happens I have been a Hawk for over 60 years and I will always have their back!

 

[LarryMullenJr.]

First it's not the media's job to protect the feelings of Fran. He's getting paid millions of dollars a year to coach basketball. One of the descriptions of the job is to answer questions. If he disagrees with the premise of a question (and the "dysfunction" question was probably unfair) he can say so and just answer it like he wants to answer it.

The reason Iowa got beat by Michigan was that Michigan has better players, and the team is well coached. And Michigan was ready to play. Iowa also has good players and is well coached. But Iowa's talent is not as good as Michigan's. When you are playing an opponent who is better than you, and that opponent is locked in/ready to go, your chances of winning are not great. Yes, the interruptions early were disruptive. But Garza was never in rhythm against Dicksinson. If Garza is not drafted, this game will be somewhat telling. Dicksinson is big, but not overly athletic. And Garza couldn't really do anything against him. In the NBA, there are guys just as tall as Dicksinson and way more athletic.

Michigan made it their mission to not give anything easy. They were in Iowa's space the entire game. And driving/going to the basket sounds nice, but is very difficult to do when the guy defending you is taller and quicker than you. When teams play Iowa like this, Garza has been the relief valve. Throw it in the post and let him go score. But Michigan could take that away with single coverage so Iowa was stuck.

Well said on all fronts.
This type of team is the type of team Fran will likely very rarely beat because of what he brings in. Michigan plays very good defense, that for the most part, is pretty clean--especially by B1G standards. Our guys--again, for the most part--couldn't get around anyone, nor could they get clear for open shots on cuts/movement.
Indiana and Illinois play a similar style of defense, but are allowed to get away with WAAAY more grabbing/checking/bumping and thus aren't as good as Michigan. Sure, Michigan does some of that too, but IMO far, far less of it and just play defense the way you'd love to see your favorite team play it. Fran's teams just don't have the make-up to be able to deal with what UM does and how they do it. We've seen 11 years of what Fran teaches and recruits and athletic, staunch defense will always give his teams massive fits.

 

[Rudolph]

Not really in defense of Fran, but sort of in respectful criticism of the reporter asking the "dysfunction" question… I only watched the second half, so forgive me if the first half is an entirely different case, but I didn't see an offense in dysfunction. I saw an offense that got shots relatively similar to every other game, though, as the empty trips compounded, those shots felt more and more "stressed" or sped up a little. Michigan is super-long, super-athletic, and really active and pretty damn unified and well-coached defensively. Their ball pressure, their close-outs, and the way they finish possessions on D could win them a NC this year. Wagner and Livers are legit long-term NBA significant contributors. Iowa's offense (at least what I saw) wasn't that bad. It just couldn't get the ball to go in. I do think Michigan sped them up a bit, and then guys looked like they started pressing a bit, but without an NBA-caliber PG who can break a D down on his own and either get a shot for himself or create open, rhythm shots for others, there isn't a whole helluva lot a coach can do.

This is where Fran's loyalty to Bohannon—which I can certainly understand—I think has negatively impacted the team. Toussaint was playing really well at the end of last year, arguably in large part to his playing starter minutes. That needed to progress, not regress. He was very disruptive on D last year, his playing time earning some benefit of the doubt with officials. Now, he comes in and tries so hard to make an immediate impact, it's a mess. Refs freak out, it seems, by the contrast from Jordan to him. Despite that he's doing nothing all that different than opposing super-quick guards in terms of how he handles the ball or how physical he plays defensively, everything is a violation or a foul. Hell, my GF, who is hardly a basketball aficionado, was like, "isn't #12 carrying the ball pretty much every dribble?" Anyways, I went into this season with super-high hopes in large part because I thought Toussaint would take a step forward, building off of a pretty damn impressive last third of the season last year.

Another insightful comment last night from the GF: "It seems like every team Iowa plays is more aggressive and just plays harder on defense than Iowa."

One more by her: "That announcer guy is really annoying. He never even talks about the game."

 

[LarryMullenJr.]

One more by her: "That announcer guy is really annoying. He never even talks about the game."

Rather than do the "pic" comment, I'll just say based on this comment alone you should marry this woman!

 

[goodbyebobby]

Sorry, journalists can ask a questions from insulting to flattering and everything in between. It is ALWAYS about how the person being interviewed handles the question no matter how ignorant, offensive, or trivial the question may be.

I disagree.
Any time I hear any press conference, for anything, I hear stupid questions that didn't need asked as anyone with a brain knew the answer.

 

[unoHawkeye]

One more by her: "That announcer guy is really annoying. He never even talks about the game."

When he started singing Michigan’s fight song after Livers’ dunk I almost put a hole in my TV, not ashamed to say

 

[Rudolph]

Rather than do the "pic" comment, I'll just say based on this comment alone you should marry this woman!

I fully expected someone would say this.

 

[nu2u]

I disagree.
Any time I hear any press conference, for anything, I hear stupid questions that didn't need asked as anyone with a brain knew the answer.

So what. The person interviewed can handle stupid questions how he sees fit. We can judge the person interviewed on how he/she answers "stupid", "silly", "confrontational", "delusional", "confrontational" "dumb" or any other possible classification of questions - which, BTW, is in the eye of the beholder and will often be different than your characterization. You are not the sole judge of what is or isn't a stupid question.

That is not to say that a reporter should not be held accountable for his/her work. Journalists represent media organizations who have a duty to supervise and regulate their work and behavior. If a journalist engages in a persistent pattern of behavior that most find offensive or unprofessional then the reporter and the organization will lose respect and, eventually, access.

 

[Ihawkhoops]

It's on Fran. His teams year after year cannot get separation or contain dribble drive. This was Wagner not some elite 1st round NBA draft pick. The defensive issue is compounded on the offensive side when Iowa has no player capable of doing what Wagner did. If Fran doesn't see the correlation between his recruiting and the recurring issues this team has, then there is no hope for the future.

I am not sure what other word to use than dysfunctional to describe the second half. It looked like a 16 vs. 1 match up in the tournament.

 

[Rifler]

This was Wagner not some elite 1st round NBA draft pick.

Wagner probably isn't "elite",.. But he will play in the NBA and I really wouldn't be shocked to see him go in the first round...

 

[goodbyebobby]

So what. The person interviewed can handle stupid questions how he sees fit. We can judge the person interviewed on how he/she answers "stupid", "silly", "confrontational", "delusional", "confrontational" "dumb" or any other possible classification of questions - which, BTW, is in the eye of the beholder and will often be different than your characterization. You are not the sole judge of what is or isn't a stupid question.

That is not to say that a reporter should not be held accountable for his/her work. Journalists represent media organizations who have a duty to supervise and regulate their work and behavior. If a journalist engages in a persistent pattern of behavior that most find offensive or unprofessional then the reporter and the organization will lose respect and, eventually, access.

Those questions are why "journalists" are looking for other avenues of work. People find those questions useless, a waste of time, and don't want to pay to read such drivel.

 

[innercircle287]

Fran could take lessons from Tom Brands interviews. Answer the questions like a man. Accept when the other team was better and move on. Quit acting like a spoiled baby because the game didn't go your way. Fran is Kirk Ferentz 2.0 with his game management and pouting if a reporter doesn't lob softballs.

 

[kceasthawk]

Fran is too emotionally invested in the team and his players to be able to treat this game like the business that it's actually become,.. Watching these post loss interviews it's obvious that he takes all of this very personally,.. perhaps too personally for his own good.

One of the issues with having two sons on the team.........

 

[icwesthawk]

Fran seems to make things personal. Ref makes a bad call, he's pointing at him, yelling at him as if it against Fran personally. Offensively dysfunctional, is a direct criticism of him, his coaching style and his inability to adjust. He has a tough job and to have to come and talk about tough losses right after they happen, very difficult. Most times he does interviews after games pretty well, this year there have been a couple that he has struggled with

 

[DewHawk]

He can't think of a better question than something to which we already know the answer?
That is why people tire of "journalists"

So-called journalist always have their own agenda and try to trap people into saying something that will ake the headlines. Sick bunch IMO!

 

[Rifler]

One of the issues with having two sons on the team.........

Fran's always been like this,.. but I suspect having two sons on the team dials it up a notch..

 

[Clownhater]

I understand the complaints about the TV announcers, but I listened to the first part of the game on the radio. The TV announcers seemed to want to talk about anything but the game. But try listening on the radio, how in the hell is Gary Dolphin still announcing? He is fine for football, but my god he cannot keep up with a basketball game anymore.

 

[denmar81]

Frans a competitor. After watching the video I don’t see anything that was discourteous or disrespectful. You all should go back and watch some Bobby Knight interviews.

Knight didn’t usually hold anything back. If the officiating was bad he let it be known. He was one stubborn SOB

 

[cruhawk]

Sometimes I think Fran gets a little testy and short. No doubt.

But in all fairness the reporter intentionally and transparently poked him by saying "disfunction". What a f*** stick. I'm sure Fran was pissed after that. I would have been too.

This is why I have such disdain for "journalists"... too many of them try too hard to be cute. Just do your f***ing job well and stop trying to make it about you.

"Journalist", as a definition, has become a very funny animal in the last 20 years. Objectivity is a relic from another time; activists with their own agenda & preconceived notions pose as journalists now.

 

[cruhawk]

Well said on all fronts.
This type of team is the type of team Fran will likely very rarely beat because of what he brings in. Michigan plays very good defense, that for the most part, is pretty clean--especially by B1G standards. Our guys--again, for the most part--couldn't get around anyone, nor could they get clear for open shots on cuts/movement.
Indiana and Illinois play a similar style of defense, but are allowed to get away with WAAAY more grabbing/checking/bumping and thus aren't as good as Michigan. Sure, Michigan does some of that too, but IMO far, far less of it and just play defense the way you'd love to see your favorite team play it. Fran's teams just don't have the make-up to be able to deal with what UM does and how they do it. We've seen 11 years of what Fran teaches and recruits and athletic, staunch defense will always give his teams massive fits.

That's all a matter of opinion. Iowa could make necessary adjustments (to their game plan and individually, as well as to their rotation), and turn the tables on UM in the B1G tournament.

 

[24 so far]

First it's not the media's job to protect the feelings of Fran. He's getting paid millions of dollars a year to coach basketball. One of the descriptions of the job is to answer questions. If he disagrees with the premise of a question (and the "dysfunction" question was probably unfair) he can say so and just answer it like he wants to answer it.

The reason Iowa got beat by Michigan was that Michigan has better players, and the team is well coached. And Michigan was ready to play. Iowa also has good players and is well coached. But Iowa's talent is not as good as Michigan's. When you are playing an opponent who is better than you, and that opponent is locked in/ready to go, your chances of winning are not great. Yes, the interruptions early were disruptive. But Garza was never in rhythm against Dicksinson. If Garza is not drafted, this game will be somewhat telling. Dicksinson is big, but not overly athletic. And Garza couldn't really do anything against him. In the NBA, there are guys just as tall as Dicksinson and way more athletic.

Michigan made it their mission to not give anything easy. They were in Iowa's space the entire game. And driving/going to the basket sounds nice, but is very difficult to do when the guy defending you is taller and quicker than you. When teams play Iowa like this, Garza has been the relief valve. Throw it in the post and let him go score. But Michigan could take that away with single coverage so Iowa was stuck.

Agreed with what you're saying for the most part relative to Garza and Dickinson, but it's only one game. Luka struggled in this one against the backup too.

He could play Michigan again and light up Dickinson for 30 and no one should be surprised. He's forcing too many shots lately for me, but in this game in particular they weren't going in regardless. He didn't rebound either but his defense was OK I thought, but he's just not real quick around the basket. But if Luka gets his hands on it, it's usually a done deal. Wasn't his night for sure.

 

[NevadaHawk]

They've entered the "what they have in common with a Catfish" threshold. Right up there with Politicians, that's bad.

And most Coaches have some "journalists" I'm sure they don't like, and maybe for good reason (see Catfish). But if everything has to be asked just so the Coach isn't an ass, that's not good either.

But Belichick has been getting away with it for 2 decades so there's that.

Bobby Knight got away with it for years too and some of his antics crossed the line. But, when your winning on a national level you can act as badly as you want.

 

[HawkIDrummer]

"Journalist", as a definition, has become a very funny animal in the last 20 years. Objectivity is a relic from another time; activists with their own agenda & preconceived notions pose as journalists now.

taking this thread further into the weeds...

I recall an article written in the early 2000s by a tenured prof from a prominent journalism school. (Mizzou I believe). Every Fall the incoming class in the school of journalism took a survey. One of the broader questions was "why did you choose this major or career path?"

He noted that in the 70s & 80s...the most common answers were things like "I want to get to the truth" or "People have a right to be informed" or "Journalism is an important check and balance on our Government". Somewhere in the 90s, the answer to that question started shifting to things like "I want to change the world" or "I want shape opinion" or "I want to make a difference".

In short... personal bias and activism began to supplant objectivity and professional integrity. Fast forward to today and you see it in full bloom

 

[cruhawk]

taking this thread further into the weeds...

I recall an article written in the early 2000s by a tenured prof from a prominent journalism school. (Mizzou I believe). Every Fall the incoming class in the school of journalism took a survey. One of the broader questions was "why did you choose this major or career path?"

He noted that in the 70s & 80s...the most common answers were things like "I want to get to the truth" or "People have a right to be informed" or "Journalism is an important check and balance on our Government". Somewhere in the 90s, the answer to that question started shifting to things like "I want to change the world" or "I want shape opinion" or "I want to make a difference".

In short... personal bias and activism began to supplant objectivity and professional integrity. Fast forward to today and you see it in full bloom

That is about as spot-on an assessment as one can give. Bravo 👏

 

[HawkIDrummer]

That is about as spot-on an assessment as one can give. Bravo 👏

I wish I had saved the original piece. It was illuminating and written by an expert who clearly had a front row seat for his observations.

 

[Hans81]

First it's not the media's job to protect the feelings of Fran. He's getting paid millions of dollars a year to coach basketball. One of the descriptions of the job is to answer questions. If he disagrees with the premise of a question (and the "dysfunction" question was probably unfair) he can say so and just answer it like he wants to answer it.

The reason Iowa got beat by Michigan was that Michigan has better players, and the team is well coached. And Michigan was ready to play. Iowa also has good players and is well coached. But Iowa's talent is not as good as Michigan's. When you are playing an opponent who is better than you, and that opponent is locked in/ready to go, your chances of winning are not great. Yes, the interruptions early were disruptive. But Garza was never in rhythm against Dicksinson. If Garza is not drafted, this game will be somewhat telling. Dicksinson is big, but not overly athletic. And Garza couldn't really do anything against him. In the NBA, there are guys just as tall as Dicksinson and way more athletic.

Michigan made it their mission to not give anything easy. They were in Iowa's space the entire game. And driving/going to the basket sounds nice, but is very difficult to do when the guy defending you is taller and quicker than you. When teams play Iowa like this, Garza has been the relief valve. Throw it in the post and let him go score. But Michigan could take that away with single coverage so Iowa was stuck.

However, that doesn’t really explain the first half when Iowa essentially played even with Michigan and absent a few bunnies that rimmed out, Iowa could have easily been in the lead at halftime. I don’t disagree with your premise that overall Michigan has more talent then Iowa, but it’s not unreasonable for Iowa to beat Michigan in a re-match if the Hawks shoot like they did vs MSU.

 

[BBHawk]

geez I read all the posts before watching the interview.... was expecting much worse based on the comments.... most the over reacting is on this board.... Frans a firey competitor.... surprise he’s pissed after a loss... unimaginable....Was it just me or does Howard work the officials as much as Izzo?

This. That was a hard fought game but losing 2 key players and nothing falling for a while doomed the team. Iy had to be very frustrating for the whole team and staff. Unlike some coaches, you did NOT hear McC blaming the refs or throwing anyone under the bus. But I guess that isn't good enough for some fans.

 

[Ronman]

Seems to me that after a tough loss, McCaffery acts a lot like a number of posters on this board who take every loss personally.

 

[youflog1hawk]

Sorry, journalists can ask a questions from insulting to flattering and everything in between. It is ALWAYS about how the person being interviewed handles the question no matter how ignorant, offensive, or trivial the question may be.

So your saying journalists can’t be critiqued or questioned? Bull$$it! That thinking is why they think they are untouchable and can’t be questioned. They have no more right than the person being questioned.😡

 

[1inamillion]

Journalists have every right to ask the tough questions and for some even dumb ones. I’d prefer questions like Chad’s not be asked. How important is Nunge as a backup? Really, everyone already knew the fvcking answer. If Fran wants to go ballistic on a ref fine, but being stubborn and an ass towards a reporter that asks a question he don’t like is beyond pathetic.

Reporters that try to provoke , get what they deserve. Ask a stupid question get a stupid answer.

 

[Whinny]

When he started singing Michigan’s fight song after Livers’ dunk I almost put a hole in my TV, not ashamed to say

That was the point when I muted the sound on my TV and watched the rest of the game in blessed silence. I don't know how Mrs. Vitale tolerates him. Just sayin'.