How was he successful at Gardner Webb because he was 10 games under .500 there.
Butler vs Xavier
- Thread starter trailrunner
- Start date
Because they were the absolute doormat of the Big South when he took over.
Look...Butler fans are totally okay with you guys not interviewing him. Believe me.
I'm not sure I'm getting the Lickliter point that is being made. Since the days of "Season on the Brink" and George Raveling, IU leads Iowa in McD's All-Americans 21-3.
I think SuperHoosier is saying that he would expect any coach with a pulse to land Burger Boys at IU... and I agree. That just is not the case at Iowa. The Hawks had a flicker of popularity for a brief minute after Lute took them to the Final Four, but that has been gone for a long time.
IU, on the other hand, continues to haul in their usual modest share of Burger Boys regardless of level of success on the court or skill level of the coach. Coaches are set up to succeed at IU and lookout world if they have any coaching chops.
BJ Armstrong played with 3 of those McDonald's All-Americans that came to Iowa City to play for Raveling. Since that 86-87 season, the highest Iowa has been seeded to the NCAA Tournament was the #3 seed in 2005-06. Tom Davis had two #4 seeds after the 86-87 team, but his best team by far was with Raveling's players.
I'm not anti-Holtmann....just showing he has flaws just like everyone else.
I think people are taking it for granted that any coach will be able to just walk into IU and start recruiting at a high level, and that's my biggest concern with Holtmann.
Davis and Crean both struggled to land enough talent while at at IU. Major holes in the roster killed Crean from year to year and neither could lock down the state.
I would put both A Miller and Mack before Holtmann and Collins.
Last edited:
Here's something else that's interesting about Iowa. They have had 6 teams receive a Top 4 seed into the NCAA Tournament. Lute Olsen had a #3 and #4, each losing their first NCAA Tournament game (to Toledo and Wichita St. respectively). Dr. Tom had two #4 seeds which both lost in the second round. Davis also coached the #2 seeded 87 team that advanced to the Elite Eight. Then, of course, you have Alford's #3 seeded team which was dispatched in the opening round.
So, of Iowa's 6 teams to receive a protected seed in the NCAA Tournament, the only one to reach the Sweet 16 was the one with 3 McDonald's All-Americans. The only coach to be mocked for the early exits by Hoosier fans is the one who is an Indiana legend.
Knight had a stellar class within two years, one that woudl have been ranked top 5.. Davis signed a top 15 class in year 2 and followed it with a top 5. Sampson had a top 15 class and would have followed it with a top 5, if he weren't fired. Crean had a top 15 in year two and again in year four. So, yes, it seems almost anyone can walk into IU and sign top classes. IU comes with an inherent recruiting base. The trick for a coach is to not screw it up. Which both Crean and Davis did.
Alford has been to 9 NCAA and 3 Sweet 16s in 21 years...and one of those years was with Howland recruits that included 4 future NBA players.
While at Iowa for 8 years, Alford missed the NCAA 5 times and won one NCAA tourney game.
Lute Olson made the NCAA 5 times in a row and made a Sweet 16 and Final 4, Tom Davis made the NCAA 9 times in 13 years and made the Elite 8 and 2 Sweet 16s, and Fran MaCaffery has made the NCAA 3 times in a row.
Steve Alford is to UCLA what Tom Crean is to Indiana.
I'm about as likely to find quality info regarding hip-hop music in the writings of Ben Franklin as I am to find quality info regarding basketball coaching on this message board.
Please, please, please.......give a reason Steve Alford should be coach as IU besides the fact he is a former player.
Use Kenpom, tempo, anything.....
If Steve did not play here no one would want him here just based on his resume
I'm glad someone picked up on that.
Now, just to clarify, I believe that to be true at least early in a tenure. New coach enthusiasm and all that. Whether or not it could be sustained is another story.
First of all, I don't want Alford here either, but not for the same reasons as most of you. Since I started following his teams, I've enjoyed having a fall-back team to root for if IU has a rough season. It works for me and has added a little more fun to my basketball season, so I enjoy things just the way they are.
My quarrel has always been the "Please not Alford" mantra that pops up every couple of years. To put it as kindly as I possibly can... it is ignorant. Ignorance isn't a bad thing. We're all ignorant to some degree about almost everything.
I'm less ignorant than most of this board with regard to Alford's coaching, because I have followed them closely since he left Iowa. I really liked his 2006 Hawkeye team, but he was already a dead man walking by then, so their message boards were no fun.
I lurked on the reg at the Lobo Lair and listened to most of UNM's games on the internet during his time there. The Lobo's played great basketball and were fun to watch when they occasionally played on TV.
I was disappointed that Alford took the UCLA job, because I knew that winning is secondary to "showtime" in Westwood. I didn't think Alford would be able to deliver a winner that also played a style that UCLA fans would approve.
The first year he delivered. He took a team that, even though they had won the Pac 12 the year prior, Bruin fans hated to watch play. Alford turned them into a much better team that was fun to watch. You'll argue that he didn't make them much better, but I can prove it easily with team statistics from the 2 seasons. I won't bore you with them unless you want to see the proof.
Year 2 was tough, but the team improved steadily as the season went on, and was actually playing very well at the end of the season. What looked like a bad season, after 5 key players exited, ended in a not so awful Sweet 16.
Year 3 was a disaster, but the recruiting worm had turned and it was painfully obvious that UCLA could be a contender this year. The ignorant never see it coming though, so they ran banners across the sky for the firing of a coach that they were itching to fire from day 1.
Those fans are being made fun of more and more on the UCLA message boards today, as well they should. It won't take much to turn the heat back up in LA though, because they love the drama more than the sport. It's a soap opera or WWE mentality that has infested sports in general.
Anyway, I don't like watching bad basketball. Alford coaches good basketball. Anyone that says otherwise, I know for certain either hasn't paid much attention or doesn't know the difference.
It's your opinion and I respect that.
I watch UCLA when I can. Almost went to the OSU game. I just don't stay up late enough to catch the majority of them.
For me, Alford's UCLA teams play much like Crean's at IU. High powered offense with not a whole lot on the defensive end.
Ball is Yogi last year. A highly skilled point guard that takes both Crean's and Alford's offense to a new level.
There are many peoole that think Alford runs the same thing Knight did and that's it's "Indiana Basketball", it's not. That's my beef.
not saying UCLA plays bad basketball, just that it's not anything like Knight.
