How long will we have to endure this nonsense (and Tanner as well)?
I hear you, and have been stating this for the last 3 years. And here is what you get back. "But, but, but, he took us to the FF, he just needs more time"As I posted in another thread; if Martin were the CEO of a company the Board of Directors would have terminated him by now. One year in the BLACK isn't good enough.
Heck, I never wanted him hired in the first place after reading the KSU boards at the time. They had nothing good to say about him and attributed any success Frank had there to Underwood and another assistant coach who stayed. But Fogler's firm recommended him (as they did Horn).I hear you, and have been stating this for the last 3 years. And hear is what you get back. "But, but, but, he took us to the FF, he just needs more time"
fire FrankHow long will we have to endure this nonsense (and Tanner as well)?
How long will we have to endure this nonsense (and Tanner as well)?
But Marshall "really wanted this job" before we hired Frank. I thought that was all that mattered?Marshall always get brought up, and he did lead Wichita State to a Final 4, but there were a ton of other coaches we could've hired in the last 14 years.
Even Bobby Cremins, after agreeing to take the job, said “Whoa. What am I doing?” And went back to GT.many across the nation say its the worst coaching job in college. From back in the day where we gave Carlin power over the athletic department and he single handidly forced the decline of Frank McGuires basketball program. Then Holderman was hired just to back Carlin, shortly after they run Frank McGuire out of town, the national embarrassment of having no coach wanting this job and coach after coach telling us no.
Even Bobby Cremins, after agreeing to take the job, said “Whoa. What am I doing?” And went back to GT.
Then the Newton and Horn years after that.
It doesn't matter. Recruiting is the life blood of a program and kids don't care about our history of dysfunction. They play for a coach. Nobody wants to play for Frank Martin because he's Frank Martin. Giving too much power to Jim Carlen 45 years ago is irrelevant.your 100% right that was a major gut punch to gamecock basketball when Bobby did that to us for all the nation to see. But we have a lot of younger fans that need to do some research and fully understand how we got to this point.
Agree with this post. Frank Martin is the problem! In state talent has left the state in droves while Martin has been coach. The local star players obviously do not want to play for him. I have been to many games with him as coach and have been shocked by his on court demeanor. Some will argue that there are successful coaches who display similar antics as does Frank. But his displays, IMO, are far more violent and demonstrative than needed. Besides, the one word that separates those coaches from Frank is "successful".It doesn't matter. Recruiting is the life blood of a program and kids don't care about our history of dysfunction. They play for a coach. Nobody wants to play for Frank Martin because he's Frank Martin. Giving too much power to Jim Carlen 45 years ago is irrelevant.
Fogler, the then-current national coach of the year, was a great bounce-back by McGee, though. Bobby blew himself up by doing what he did. Things never were the same at Ga. Tech after that, either.I've never been more upset than when Bobby backed out on us after accepting the job. The optics of that decision killed us.
Fogler, the then-current national coach of the year, was a great bounce-back by McGee, though. Bobby blew himself up by doing what he did. Things never were the same at Ga. Tech after that, either.
This is all true. We kept compounding the errors and mistakes in the 70s and 80s.Disagree it's not Frank, it's what our program is and why many across the nation say it's the worst coaching job in college basketball. There are reasons going back the last 4-5 decades to why this program is where it's at today and these reasons just keep compounding.
From back in the day where we gave Carlin power over the athletic department, and he single handily forced the decline of Frank McGuires basketball program. Then Holderman was hired just to back Carlin and shortly after they run Frank McGuire out of town which we never overcame. Then as the years past we have the national embarrassment as no one was wanting this job and coach after coach telling us no after we fired Felton even with us going to the SEC then to even to our current relationships with former players is a disaster that continues to this day. But as these things continue to mount, we can't get out our own way. There are also other issues and embarrassments this program had that I didn't even touch on and I didn't even get into our failure with AAU basketball and its coaches. Alot has to change behind the scenes off the court, that are not coach and AD related or won't matter who coaches, the men's program as it will continue to stay like it has all these years...1-3 good seasons every 10 years.
Yes. It was a sad saga. When I heard Bobby was coming here to coach, it brought tears of joy to my eyes. The only other time that has happened to me was when Spurrier was announced. It was the worst letdown I ever remember in terms of coaching.I think it hurt Bobby too and he even resurfaced wanting another crack at our job during one of the openings as I recall. For once the folks in charge correctly decided that bridge was burned.
I agree with all that. I was hoping Dick Bestwick would be such a person, but it turned out he didn't have the chest for this place.This is all true. We kept compounding the errors and mistakes in the 70s and 80s.
Hiring Mike McGee as AD was a step away from that legacy as was hiring Eric Hyman. If we had replaced Hyman with an equally strong AD we might have been able to recover. Hiring Ray Tanner was a mistake and akin to King Dixon 2.0. Not quite as bad - but almost.
I played golf with him at Wachesaw not long after he was hired with some local boosters. He was not well then.I agree with all that. I was hoping Dick Bestwick would be such a person, but it turned out he didn't have the chest for this place.
It was obvious later that he already had something going on when he took the job - looking back at everything. This is no place for the encumbered or impaired.I played golf with him at Wachesaw not long after he was hired with some local boosters. He was not well then.
I agree with this. But McGee might have even mishandled that as well. When Cremins expressed interest a second time around, a number of his former teammates thought McGee strung him along publicly when he knew Cremins was never going to be seriously considered.I think it hurt Bobby too and he even resurfaced wanting another crack at our job during one of the openings as I recall. For once the folks in charge correctly decided that bridge was burned.
If you think what was set in motion 45 years ago isn't the foundation of where this program is currently your sadly mistaken. Of course, recruiting is the life of any program, that's not rocket science, but once again there are reasons, we that are deeper rooted to why this program has never been able to recruit well. Once again, it's not a secret that this program is considered one of the worst jobs among the coaching ranks and hardest jobs to recruit to in the country.It doesn't matter. Recruiting is the life blood of a program and kids don't care about our history of dysfunction. They play for a coach. Nobody wants to play for Frank Martin because he's Frank Martin. Giving too much power to Jim Carlen 45 years ago is irrelevant.
In what world was Hyman a "strong" AD. He bothced every basketball move he had. He did NOTHING for football (McGee got Spurrier). Texas A&M couldn't wait to fire him because they knew he wasn't made for a big-time program. No one picked him up since.This is all true. We kept compounding the errors and mistakes in the 70s and 80s.
We've had some strong ADs in the past. Bob Marcum, Mike McGee and Eric Hyman. If we had replaced Hyman with an equally strong AD we might have been able to recover. Hiring Ray Tanner was a mistake and akin to King Dixon 2.0. Not quite as bad - but almost.
(Yes, I know Marcum had issues, but he was still a very strong AD.)
You make a good point. But I believe you have to give greater weight to the original event than to the subsequent event. Without the first one, the second one doesn't happen. And bear in mind also that Cremins' cachet had faded during that intervening time.I agree with this. But McGee might have even mishandled that as well. When Cremins expressed interest a second time around, a number of his former teammates thought McGee strung him along publicly when he knew Cremins was never going to be seriously considered.
This made an already frosty relationship with the university and former players even frostier.
Oh, I agree. I was just pointing out that McGee could've handled it a little better, perception-wise. Part of me doesn't quite blame him for wanting a little payback though. Cremins's stunt definitely hurt us.You make a good point. But I believe you have to give greater wait to the original event than to the subsequent event. Without the first one, the second one doesn't happen. And bear in mind also that Cremins' cachet had faded during that intervening time.
I don't think it was about retribution. Cremins was diminished professionally the second time around.Oh, I agree. I was just pointing out that McGee could've handled it a little better, perception-wise. Part of me doesn't quite blame him for wanting a little payback though. Cremins's stunt definitely hurt us.
Eh, I don't know. My memory could be wrong, but it sure seemed like McGee was slow-playing it. Cremins's former teammates thought so. Again, it was the perception of the whole situation. The reality may have indeed been different though.I don't think it was about retribution. Cremins was diminished professionally the second time around.