I Assume If Susie Gardner

[hogman64]

Sorry -- I've made a mess of this one trying to parce hogman64's quote to insert comments.  Hope all can follow

Well my first question would be when were we winning?  Do you mean when we beat a 1-10 miss st.  team twice and got a miracle win over vandy?</quote>

Fair enough, but I would tell you that is as much a factor of what in my personal opinion is a flawed SEC system for women's basketball.  Let me repeat -- my opinion -- you get the two rotating east and west teams and it's a crap shoot.  Right now we're 3-of-4 against the rotation (two wins MSU, 1-1 Vandy) this year.  Last year we were 0-4 against the rotation (0-2 Tennessee, 0-2 Ole Miss).

<quote>
that is the only winning really that I know of we have accomplished under Susie</quote>

So, beating Auburn and Florida were not significant wins this year?

<quote>our team has been bad every year she has been here... and as for complaining I said ,and it was obvious ,when we were 4-1 that we would not win over 2 more games the rest of the year........looks now it is going to be 1 more..and I have heard  plenty of people complaining about her hire for quite some time now....by the way if you know her personally why dont you tell her it would be a great improvement if just occassionally she put a smile on her face and tried to shake the "Debbie Downer" personality...

My suggestion would be to get to one of the coach's luncheons.  There's video of some of those posted on the website.

Ok.. thanks for taking the time to address my post...I am definitly not a big time ladyback basketball supporter as I would say I am for hog mens football, basketball and baseball,  definition........it doesnt effect my day much if they lose..........I will say this I had started to get interested somewhat in Ladyback basketball before Blair left but Susie has seemed like a bad fit to me from day one.. I have never been impressed with her when hearing her speak, she creates no enthusiasm in me whatsoever for the women's program and I think  alot of hog fans impression of her is the same as mine..........kind of a dud so to speak..
you obviously know more about her and the ladyback situation than me so if you are saying you think she was a good hire.. i do hope your right.. would be nice to have a really good ladyback team...

[Anti-OtisII]

I don't think it's the coach's gender that's the issue as much as it's her competence and ability to recruit. Supposedly we had a bigtime JC transfer recruit (post player) on campus this weekend. Hope she didn't see this.

when gary blair was fired, bev stated(not in the paper, but to someone i know) that she wanted a female coach

Really -- can you pull that quote up?

Bill, nothing at the U of A is a secert and it's very well known that Bev had stated she wanted a women. We could have had Vic with Amber as the #1 assistant and that was rejected, along with the huge dollars to support the womens program. If it wasn't for Amber and Sarah, I could care less if they won a game.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.  Since I sat in the room as we interviewed two males, two females, at WBCA; then interviewed both Vic and Amber, I feel pretty confident about what went on.

Now, I won't dispute that numerous people have gone around and said that Bev wanted a woman.  And if you repeat it enough times, it becomes true.

Let me try to close off this line -- because I don't think I'm going to change many minds on this -- by point out that there is no correct answer here.  For every poster who thinks we went out and only looked at female coaches for this particular job, there will be as many who think that we should have only looked at females for the job because it's a women's team.  This is a constant nationwide.

Before we go any further, I want to say that I appreciate (and respect) your input into this discussion.  With that said, I would like to point out that sometimes you can actually be "too close" to the situation.  Like hogman64, I am at best a casual Ladybacks fan although I think I would care a little more (just like I did a few years ago) if the team appeared to actually have any chance of doing something.  I just don't get that excited anymore after the last 3 years under SG.  Now who's fault is that? 

It's probably just as much (if not more) my own fault than it is anyone else's (BL or SG) fault, but that doesn't change the fact that as a casual fan I just don't care anymore.  The team is lackluster, the coach is lackluster, the AD is lackluster, and I can't even get excited about rooting for some home grown talent because there are only 4 girls on the roster from Arkansas.  You know it's one thing to go out of state to sign the best players that you can so as to field a winning team that can compete in the WNCAAT, but when you don't even succeed at that and then get beat by ASU in the WNIT with several players from Arkansas then you're not exactly making much of an argument for yourself.

As for your argument that just because BL interviewed both men and women coaches for the head coaching vacancy then that somehow proves that she had no intention of only hiring a woman HC.  Well, that is just a bogus argument.  Under your reasoning, JFB had not eliminated Mike Anderson from consideration as a successor to Nolan Richardson because he actually interviewed him for the position.  Everyone (including you) knows that sometimes an AD interviews candidates that they have NO INTENTION of actually hiring, and I surely wouldn't expect her to necessarily let you in on her plans if that was her intentions.  This way, you can be honestly say that you thought it was an open and fair interview process with ALL candidates considered equally.     

With that said, I have no problem with BL hiring whomever she want AS LONG AS that coach is either successful or she's willing to admit her mistake and bring in someone else.  Now whether that happens after this year or she decides to stick to her guns and give it another year is purely her decision.  She is the one getting paid the big bucks.  My argument is that the Ladybacks basketball team is supposed to be the revenue sport that carries the entire Women's Athletic Dept.  Without looking up any statistics, I think it is safe to say that attendance is down dramatically from what it was 4 years ago.  How can that be in the best interest for all of the lady sports programs on campus?  Maybe you can provide some insight into some total annual attendance figures over the last 6-8 years for the Ladybacks?

Edit:  Sorry ConwayHog but you beat me to one of my points.  I shouldn't have taken so long to put this response together.

[DOGALUM]

Secondly, don't come on preaching to me about credibility newbie. 

Great response -- more name calling. Stick with what you know. But let me get this straight -- because you have posted more posts on here, regardless of their quality, that automatically gives you credibility? Right. I get it. Thanks.

Bill -- Thanks for your comments. I couldn't agree with you more about the lameness of the sexual innuendo. I was wondering about the hire, though -- were Gardner's limitations in the personality department (and their relation to recruiting) not obvious during the hiring process? Because, irrespective of the sexual innuendo, I do think it's fair to question how Gardner's lack of charisma and people skills relates to her failure to (perhaps until now) recruit blue chip athletes to the program. She comes across as a deer in headlights and/or wooden. And, from what I hear, her relationship with several of her players could best be described as frosty.

OK....look.....if this is the first time anybody has heard "women's basketball" and "lesbian" in the same sentence then you need to pull your heads out of wherever you've been sticking them.  That doesn't mean every womens basketball player is a lesbian....but lets not kid ourselves here. 

If it looks like a turd.....smells like a turd....and it came out of someone's arse.....then it's probably a turd.

But since there is nothing wrong, according to the laws of the land, with being a lesbian......what's the problem.  It would be just like speculating about a football player's girlfriend. 

I'm not saying she is or isnt'.....nor do I frikin care.....but to come on here and try to threaten someone for linking women's athletics and lesbianism is WAY too sensitive.  How about the posts about bombing the ragheads?  Just because they are ragheads doesn't mean they are terrorists right?.....right?    Lighten up!  It's all in good fun. 

I don't know for a fact if she is a lesbian or not.....but my jaw certainly wouldn't hit the floor if it turned out to be true.

By the way......if you really want to know how being a lesbian could hinder a women's coach, I'll tell you.