Does Fran struggle at developing talent?
- Thread starter Auger
- Start date
Listen to these!"Takes some shine off the 12-6", "Are you satisfied with 12-6", "You are settling for 12-6".
Last time we enjoyed this kind of success in back to back years? To be lenient, 95/96 and 96/97. Nineteen years ago and three coaches ago!!!
Now the switch gears is, What about the poor finish? Yeah!?!? So how does that fit in with the lack of development theory? How did lack of development lead to being in the top 10 in the country for weeks before we fell to Earth?
12-6 was no illusion and in fact I did talk about 12-6 as it relates to Iowa, Wisconsin and even Michigan State! The truth is, the Hawkeyesuccessphobics can't bring themselves to accept that things are getting better. They've got to present stupid (yes, in my opinion stupid) theories about lack of development among the players when the opposite is staring them right in the face!
I laugh, LAUGH at the notion that we've got serious problems. Is everything peachy? Not always. And reasonable criticism is one thing...but this thread is just complete HawkeyeHyperAnxiety, to the point of looking to tear down intentionally, imo. No wonder the word Troll came up.
Wow
Yep resulting to name calling because you have nothing else. Not surprised
to answer the question how team A finished in post season play vs team B the answer is really simple
A finished 12-6 and 1-1 in the tourney
B finished 12-6 and 1-1 in the tourney
so neither team did any better than the other, also the 2015 team lost to PSU in the BTT
THE 2016 team lost to Illinois.
A finished 12-6 and 1-1 in the tourney
B finished 12-6 and 1-1 in the tourney
so neither team did any better than the other, also the 2015 team lost to PSU in the BTT
THE 2016 team lost to Illinois.
Three consecutive years with a first team all Big Ten player, all three different. Three years with a second player down ballot on the 2nd or 3rd team. That doesn't sound like a lack of player development.
Listen to these!
Last time we enjoyed this kind of success in back to back years? To be lenient, 95/96 and 96/97. Nineteen years ago and three coaches ago!!!
Now the switch gears is, What about the poor finish? Yeah!?!? So how does that fit in with the lack of development theory? How did lack of development lead to being in the top 10 in the country for weeks before we fell to Earth?
12-6 was no illusion and in fact I did talk about 12-6 as it relates to Iowa, Wisconsin and even Michigan State! The truth is, the Hawkeyesuccessphobics can't bring themselves to accept that things are getting better. They've got to present stupid (yes, in my opinion stupid) theories about lack of development among the players when the opposite is staring them right in the face!
I laugh, LAUGH at the notion that we've got serious problems. Is everything peachy? Not always. And reasonable criticism is one thing...but this thread is just complete HawkeyeHyperAnxiety, to the point of looking to tear down intentionally, imo. No wonder the word Troll came up.
You go DanL.
Fran has brought the program back to, what is essentially, the pinnacle in the last 50 years of Iowa basketball. All that's missing is a one-year ride to excellence like the 1970, 1980 or 1986 Hawks. Iowa has NEVER had the consistent excellence that some fans have come to expect.
Now, is Fran the man to bring Iowa, finally, to the level we want? I don't know, but I'm willing to watch the next few years to see if it develops. To suggest that Fran is without weaknesses is foolish. To suggest that Fran has proven that he can't elevate the program is, IMO, also foolish.
I wish we had a basketball Hayden Fry to lift the Hawks out of the dumpster. I don't know if Fran is the guy, but I am not personally willing to roll the dice to find one in the market.
We have an actual basketball program again. Players stay in the program (of course, not all players). It's nice to have seniors with lots of experience again.
Thank god you aren't on the tourney committee because I would question every pick you make given how little info you want to incorporate into decisions. But you know what? I will bite, I love speculating and debating. Though I wouldn't mind having more info on the two teams but you don't seem to care about the details so here we go..,
The team that finishes 6-0 down the stretch would have the best chance at a successful postseason. Why? Winning 6 games in a row has probably elevated that teams ranking, not to mention their confidence heading into a conference tourney. Chances are they win more games than the other team in said conference tourney so their ranking/seed continues to climb going into the NCAA tourney, giving an easier road to success.
Your turn...
Each coach did NOT have more success out of Iowa. Davis had relatively the same success at BC if you are right that he made both an elite 8 and a sweet 16 there. At Drake he never achieved anything greater than what he did at Iowa.
already did you just ignore it again just for you
12-6 team that finished 6-0 lost to PSU in the 1st round and went 1-1 in postseason pla
12-6 team that finished 1-5 lost to Illinois in the BTT and went 1-1 in post season play,
so neither team better or worse than the other.
It isn't just a number, it means you won twice as many games as you lost. Other than that though I agree with everything else, to close the season like they did was disappointing for sure.
You do realize those two scenarios are how Iowa's last two years turned out right? And guess what, they both lost the first game in the B10 tournament, both got a 7 seen, they both won the first round and lost in the second.
Exactly. The way some people post on here make me question if they've followed Iowa basketbal at all.
Just listening to local sports talk here in Arkansas on the way back from the store,Gary Parrish was the guest, I found this actually something some in Iowa can relate to. He was talking about the Pitt job and Jamie Dixon, Saying basically he had worn out his welcome at Pitt. He pointed out that before Dixon was hired Pitt had gone to the NCAA tourney 15 times total. Under Dixon they went 11 out of his 13 years. Parrish felt that if you told Pitt fans that they would go to the NCAA tourney 11 out of the next 13 years if they hired Dixon that they would have been thrilled, At the end they felt he wasn't good enough. Parrish said he believes that Kevin Stallings will not come close to reaching the level at Pitt that Dixon did. Bottom line, Many fans are just never satisfied and when you make changes you don't always move in the right direction.
Fran has moved Iowa in the right direction, Yet it seems some are truly unhappy with the program, I find it a bit perplexing to say the least. Especially after what happened to the program in the past few coaching tenures.
Fran has moved Iowa in the right direction, Yet it seems some are truly unhappy with the program, I find it a bit perplexing to say the least. Especially after what happened to the program in the past few coaching tenures.
Last edited:
you can only get out of players what they themselves put into to improving. you can take a horse to the water but you can't make him drink it.
as I pointed out in a thread I started there was a huge difference in the talent between the 2014-15 team that went 12-6 and the 2015-16 team that finished 12-6 and it has nothing to do with developing players, Olaseni @ 6'10 took 4 years to be the player he was,
in my opinion these played out of position this season
Uthoff is a 3 not a 4 as he is more of a outside player that avoided contact and very rarely went inside,
Jok is a SG not a SF, he was a SG when the 14-15 team went 12-6
Clemmons is/was not a SG and is strictly a PG none of these stepped up to change the lineup.
RSFR Elligson was given take the SG position from SR Clemmons and didn't do it
SO Uhl proved to be a very good 6th man as he was 6th in minutes, 6th in scoring, 3rd in rebounding and led the team in 3 point shooting %, but did not do enough so that Fran could move Jok back to the SG position and move Clemmon back to the backup PG position.
FR Williams was a player that Fran wanted to RS but Williams wanted to play. William was just not ready to playphysically.
as I pointed out in a thread I started there was a huge difference in the talent between the 2014-15 team that went 12-6 and the 2015-16 team that finished 12-6 and it has nothing to do with developing players, Olaseni @ 6'10 took 4 years to be the player he was,
in my opinion these played out of position this season
Uthoff is a 3 not a 4 as he is more of a outside player that avoided contact and very rarely went inside,
Jok is a SG not a SF, he was a SG when the 14-15 team went 12-6
Clemmons is/was not a SG and is strictly a PG none of these stepped up to change the lineup.
RSFR Elligson was given take the SG position from SR Clemmons and didn't do it
SO Uhl proved to be a very good 6th man as he was 6th in minutes, 6th in scoring, 3rd in rebounding and led the team in 3 point shooting %, but did not do enough so that Fran could move Jok back to the SG position and move Clemmon back to the backup PG position.
FR Williams was a player that Fran wanted to RS but Williams wanted to play. William was just not ready to playphysically.
Lol. Cool. If I remember correctly you asked which of the two teams would have greater success based on how their conference season went. Not what teams are these and how did they actually do. But again, details seem to befuddle you. If this makes you feel like you won the argument good on you.
If you are satisfied with how this season ultimately played out, that going 12-6 in conference is more important than flaming out in the big ten tourney and barely showing up in the big dance then have at it. I will continue to hope for bigger and better things for my school.
since they are unpaid student Athletes and not paid professionals and no a scholarship is not getting paid as they have to pay for the books and classes with that money, and at 25,000 dollars a year even Walmart employees make more than that,
people are confused by believing they deserve better, most on this board don't even go to the games and trash the players at will. when the IA players start making $800,000 + each year and some of you actually OWN a piece of the team then you can EXPECT MORE and run off as many players and coaches as you want, until then live with it keep it to yourself, even the D League players get paid more.
people are confused by believing they deserve better, most on this board don't even go to the games and trash the players at will. when the IA players start making $800,000 + each year and some of you actually OWN a piece of the team then you can EXPECT MORE and run off as many players and coaches as you want, until then live with it keep it to yourself, even the D League players get paid more.
So because my opinion doesn't jive with yours then I should just shut my mouth eh? Cool beans. Not going to happen. I appreciate the passive aggression as well. Not that I should have to defend my opinion to you keyboard warriors out there but I have had season tix since I graduated from the University of Iowa, where during my time there I didn't miss a single game. That being said I am never one to "trash" any player. I stick to the analytical side of things. I work with numbers when I make my argument. I look at what a player has done on the court and then question how or why the numbers are what they are.
Don't give me your rah rah bulls%#! how players aren't paid. Not leaving school with $30,000+ in debt is plenty of payment when the majority of players won't go on to professional careers in basketball. And the fact that I paid $30,000+ to the university gives me the right to want better than how this season unfolded. Is there something wrong with wanting your team to excel? To be disappointed when they reach uncharted territories only to fall faster and harder back to earth. I have never called for Fran to be fired or wished he quit. He is a passionate coach and that has been missing for as long as I can remember. You can trash my opinion all you want, and I am sure you will, but it won't change. Fran can do better and I believe he will. If that doesn't jive with you, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.
What details am I missing? You said the team that finished with a stronger would do better and have a higher seed. It actually played out with two opposite finishes the last two years, something you don't seem to remember, that ended with the same exact result. You're wrong, might as well quit while you're behind.
LMMFAO!! Good on you for finding ONE example to support your claim. Doesn't make me wrong. I am sure there are even plenty more examples out there that would support your claim. Trouble is, I would bet the farm that in the annals of college basketball there are substantially more examples that would support my claim. And I still stand by my answer to your original question. You didn't ask to be specific about what teams were Team A and Team B, you asked broadly which team did I think would do better based on how their conference season went. A cryptic question only muddles up your argument. We can back and forth until the end of time arguing this but since I have better things to do and other threads I want to peruse and engage in I will leave you with this. Give me a team going into the NCAA tourney that is playing well down the stretch and into their respective conference tournament any day over a team that has fallen flat on their face the last month to six weeks of the tournament. No need to respond.
The fact that you didn't recognize which teams those were right away tells me all I need to know about you. You were trying to troll and failed miserably with a lack of logic that I easily exposed. How about our last sweet sixteen team, started 14-1, then lost 8 of 13 down the stretch including in the first round of the BTT, then had the most successful NCAA tournament in pretty much the last 30 years of Iowa basketball.
