Letting a coach go, fresh off of 2 tourneys?... has that ever happened? (Heath)

[hobhog]

You mean Nolan, right? Just checking. OP forgets Heath being let go after 2 consecutive NCAA appearances.

Btw- if Nolan had lost to ASU in NIT after 2nd year I'm thinking Frank would have fired him. He won in OT.

[mckinneyhog5]

.515 winning %

Yeah, but if you remember he took UALR from a 4-24 record to 18-11 the next year and he did that by turning their defense from last to first in the Sun Belt. Also, if you haven't noticed he's in the Elite 8 this year. Not saying we need to hire him but don't think it's fair to throw his winning percentage up w/o some background. Someone will hire him this year, so we don't have to worry about him being our coach since MA will be back next year.

[hog.goblin]

Our 9 NCAATs in that time is the same as AU and Minn have had in their entire history

It's never good to have to use AU and MN to make our program look better.  But it's a fair point.  It reveals how far we have actually fallen, yet not near as far as it could have been.

[SONofHAM]

Interesting fact:  Oregon St basketball went to the NCAAT one time from 1991 through this season.  Dumb to be brought into this conversation but its part of the effort to kill expectations for Arkansas basketball.

You needed to tighten your question up as it opened the door for a list of coaches at traditionally average to crappy programs to be listed.

Has a coach at a program with at least or close to: 1 NC, 6 F4s, 32 NCAA appearances, 73 tourney games and 42 wins ever allowed a coach to go this long with close to the results of Mike Anderson?  In other words, programs which should be our peers. 

IU has more tradition than we do.  They gave Crean 9 seasons.  Through his first 7, he went to 3 NCAATs with 2 Sw 16s.   Again, not that we are IU but it is a closer recent comparison.  A power in the 70s, 80s and 90s who needed to be rebuilt. Crean took over a program in much worse shape than did Mike. 

Georgetown is a program with a similar tradition to ours: 30 NCAAT appearance, 5 F4s and 1 NC.  They gave Esherick 6 seasons.  He made the Sw 16 in his 3rd season.  4 NIT invites but declined one.  Fired after a 13-15 season.  JTIII got 13 seasons.  F4 in his 3rd season after a Sw16 in his second.  Never made it out of the first weekend again.  In his first 11 seasons, he did go to 8 NCAATs and 3 NITs.  Missed postseason in last 2 and was fired.   

Thanks...you went where I was headed.  These are much more comparable to our situation.

I really just wanted to know if there were comparable programs with high expectations that have had this much patience.

[steveaustin69]

Yeah, but if you remember he took UALR from a 4-24 record to 18-11 the next year and he did that by turning their defense from last to first in the Sun Belt. Also, if you haven't noticed he's in the Elite 8 this year. Not saying we need to hire him but don't think it's fair to throw his winning percentage up w/o some background. Someone will hire him this year, so we don't have to worry about him being our coach since MA will be back next year.

How can you make it to the Elite Eight before the Sweet Sixteen has been played?

Are you from the future?

[sickboy]

Our 9 NCAATs in that time is the same as AU and Minn have had in their entire history

Yeah, but we won a title in 94. Most people here are still living in 1984, so do the math when it comes to expectations.

[Jek Tono Porkins]

Based on what I witnessed that night, I agree.

I'll have to dig for it but I seem to remember an article that quoted Frank as giving Nolan an unrestricted two year pass when he was hired. Something about he knew Nolan's style was not going to transition well from Sutton's style and gave him a chance to get his own players in the picture.

Regardless, I don't think Broyles would put up with our current predicament. Heath was fired reportedly due to simple uninterest in the program from fans, at least what from what I remember. Mike has benefited from fan interest so far. I for one was super excited for the season, particularly after beating Minnesota and Tennessee.

But my enthusiasm faded as the season went on due to Mike's eternal problem: he continually loses to teams he has no business losing to, particularly on the road. The walloping at Houston. Losing at Miss. State when we're #22. Getting massacred by LSU at home and losing to them again on the road. His ceiling will remain stagnant as long as he loses to teams he shouldn't in conference play. It was the same thing last year. Lost to Mississippi State, a mediocre OSU team, and the worst failing of all, losing to Mizzou, the worst team in the conference. Even in the year with Portis and Qualls, he lost to a 16-16 Tennessee team and should have won games against Ole Miss and LSU.

Fans are getting tired of it. It's extremely likely that the team next year won't be near as good as the one this year. Mike has to figure out how to win on the road or fans are going to lose more interest.

[LR_Matt]

wasn't asked as a "gotcha" question. I was simply trying to remember a time when it has happened. Turns out ... it was us with Stan Heath. I hadn't even thought about that. Crazy. I do think that Stan would have taken us to a third straight tourney that next year, but thats beside the point.

any other programs get rid of a coach after 3 consecutive tourneys? I think its probably extremely rare, or hasn't happened at all, except maybe here. The point is, it seems as if a tournament bid is the definition of job security for a coach. As long as a coach can just "get there"... he is set.

Just getting there seems like a terribly low expectation in my eyes.

[mckinneyhog5]

How can you make it to the Elite Eight before the Sweet Sixteen has been played?

Are you from the future?

I predicted in my bracket them beating Nevada in the sweet 16 to make it to the elite 8. So, maybe I am from the future...

[Pig in the Pokey]

And Stan even had an elite eight appearance to his credit.

they both do

[HogBreath]

they both do

Stan has also won an outright conference championship.

[Cornfed Pig]

Because he was held to the Nolan standard.

But Nolan's protege oddly isn't held to that standard.

Look who nolan followed, and then who Mike followed

[East Clintwood]

I don't think so. I might be wrong but I can't remember Ole Miss in the sweet 16.

The coach before kennedy took them to the sweet 16.

They've only been to the tourney 8 times in their history.

[FineAsSwine]

I'd hold off on that NIT order. The last time the Hogs had a huge roster turnover they went 16-16 and missed all the post season tourneys.

The talent on that 16-16 roster was almost nonexistent except for about 3 or 4 guys. No way are you seriously comparing that team to what we have coming in next year, are you?

[zenchow]

The talent on that 16-16 roster was almost nonexistent except for about 3 or 4 guys. No way are you seriously comparing that team to what we have coming in next year, are you?

To be factual, the last team with turnover equal to this off season was the year that we added: Barford, Macon, Cook, Bailey, Jones, Hazen and Thomas (transfer). That team went to the NCAA 2nd round.
the team before that lost 2 grads, one transferred out, one was thrown off the team, one was suspended for the non-con, and the top recruit fail to meet eligibility. That's the 16-16 season. 

[FineAsSwine]

To be factual, the last team with turnover equal to this off season was the year that we added: Barford, Macon, Cook, Bailey, Jones, Hazen and Thomas (transfer). That team went to the NCAA 2nd round.
the team before that lost 2 grads, one transferred out, one was thrown off the team, one was suspended for the non-con, and the top recruit fail to meet eligibility. That's the 16-16 season.

Which season did you think I was talking about? Thought I was pretty clear on that.

[zenchow]

I was referring to the post you quoted...sorry for the misunderstanding

[FineAsSwine]

I was referring to the post you quoted...sorry for the misunderstanding

No harm, no foul. We're cool.

[Kevin McPherson]

We fired Stan Heath after 2 tournaments back-to-back.  Lost to Bucknell, lost to USC.

One thing that many fans don't remember when talking about Heath getting fired after back-to-back NCAATs is that his 1st NCAAT team was his only Arkansas team that had a winning SEC record under his watch, and was upset in the 1st round of the NCAAT by Bucknell ... his 2nd NCAAT team was 21-14, 7-9 in the SEC, and was the last at-large team picked by the NCAAT selection committee, which drew wide criticism at the time because most college hoops pundits felt like Arkansas was not worthy of an at-large bid. USC blew out those Hogs in the 1st round.

Factor in dwindling attendance, boring style of play, underachieving teams, and academic and other internal issues, and Heath earned his walking papers. 

[Atlhogfan1]

Heath was fired because a group thought they could deliver an upgrade.

Avg attendance in Heath's final season was 16,720 including 2 crowds over the official capacity.  Season before was 14,958.  Ticket sales weren't declining.  Anderson's this year is 16,181.  It had gone from 15,749 in 14-15 to 15,218 and 15,247.  Mike got an extension and raise after the decline.

The academic problems discovered after Altman's 24 hours weren't a part of the reason for the BCG pursuit.  Neither was attendance.

Fans did want their Hawg Ball back. 

[Kevin McPherson]

Heath was fired because a group thought they could deliver an upgrade.

Avg attendance in Heath's final season was 16,720 including 2 crowds over the official capacity.  Season before was 14,958.  Ticket sales weren't declining.  Anderson's this year is 16,181.  It had gone from 15,749 in 14-15 to 15,218 and 15,247.  Mike got an extension and raise after the decline.

The academic problems discovered after Altman's 24 hours weren't a part of the reason for the BCG pursuit.  Neither was attendance.

Fans did want their Hawg Ball back.

You're correct about ticket sales in that final Heath season, but ticket sales had been down in Heath's previous 4 seasons relative to the standard that Arkansas was used to before Nolan's decline, and the fact is Heath's teams were boring and did not typically do well in the SEC. His final year attendance saw a spike based on the previous season when his team had a winning SEC record and made the NCAAT, restoring some hope to a program not so far removed from Nolan's success. But his final team was a letdown -- 7-9 SEC, last team invited to NCAAT, fell hard and fast in the NCAAT -- and given all the other negatives off the court -- academics and other stuff, boosters and fans complaining about the style of play --  it was believed the program was faltering, not moving the needle up even though it had been to back-to-back NCAATs.

You're right that a group thought they could upgrade, but it was a set of factors that I described that led to the correct call to fire Heath.

And, you can't compare attendance in that era to what CMA or any other coach deals with now. Heath was at Arkansas before the economic crash of 2008, before TV/internet televised virtually every game live in one format or another, before the age of big-screen HD TVs, before the college game fully felt the decline of being watered down as the best players left for the NBA straight out of HS which eventually evolved into the 1-and-done era ... all of that has conspired to drive attendance down every where in college basketball compared to the 2000s.

[Paul]

Well there's a reason they are on the list. Hard to compare us to a UNC or Duke, they've been winning since our last NCAA Championship. Whether you want to admit it or not we aren't on Dukes level anymore. We aren't on Kansas level either. The best we are gonna get is to hopefully work our way into like a WVU mold where we are a top team with a chance at an elite 8 or final four at the very best. But Huggins has been there for 11 years and since he hit the final four stage, he's missed the NCAAT twice and went to the NIT once. I can't imagine the hell Mike would be getting if he went to the final four and then didn't make the tourney or made the NIT......wait yeah i do. At Arkansas he got fired and his name was Nolan Richardson.

if a coach gets to a Final Four he will get a pass for life unless he asks to be fired.

[Atlhogfan1]

You're correct about ticket sales in that final Heath season, but ticket sales had been down in Heath's previous 4 seasons relative to the standard that Arkansas was used to before Nolan's decline, and the fact is Heath's teams were boring and did not typically do well in the SEC. His final year attendance saw a spike based on the previous season when his team had a winning SEC record and made the NCAAT, restoring some hope to a program not so far removed from Nolan's success. But his final team was a letdown -- 7-9 SEC, last team invited to NCAAT, fell hard and fast in the NCAAT -- and given all the other negatives off the court -- academics and other stuff, boosters and fans complaining about the style of play --  it was believed the program was faltering, not moving the needle up even though it had been to back-to-back NCAATs.

You're right that a group thought they could upgrade, but it was a set of factors that I described that led to the correct call to fire Heath.

And, you can't compare attendance in that era to what CMA or any other coach deals with now. Heath was at Arkansas before the economic crash of 2008, before TV/internet televised virtually every game live in one format or another, before the age of big-screen HD TVs, before the college game fully felt the decline of being watered down as the best players left for the NBA straight out of HS which eventually evolved into the 1-and-done era ... all of that has conspired to drive attendance down every where in college basketball compared to the 2000s.

I agree attendance is different now for the reasons you gave.  But this comparison still illustrates a bit of hypocrisy with how Heath was treated and how Mike is.  Someone posted earlier that Heath was held to Nolan standards which was true.  Heath wasn't qualified for the job and should have been fired.  But the academics and attendance reasons were not the main part of why he was.  Heath wasn't showing signs he could get us back to 1977 to 1996 level and he wasn't playing something resembling Hawg Ball.  Now here we are with teams still not capable of playing Hawg Ball on any kind of consistent basis and as far as 1977 to 1996 level, we are told to not even expect it any longer. 

[Atlhogfan1]

if a coach gets to a Final Four he will get a pass for life unless he asks to be fired.

F4 coaches have been fired.  JTIII, Barnes, Howland are a few recent ones.

[Paul]

F4 coaches have been fired.  JTIII, Barnes, Howland are a few recent ones.

I was referring to Arkansas.

[systemroot]

How much of an upgrade would we really get from Mike Anderson?

[Atlhogfan1]

I was referring to Arkansas.

Sorry. Saw Huggins in conversation.

[widespreadsooie]

The objective was to get back to the tourney on a consistent basis when we hired Mike. Well here we are, we've made it 3 of the past 4 years. Now people want to fire him? Lol. I guess we'll go on and set the standard for the next coach as sweet 16 or bust and find ourselves after another coach's head in 3 or 4 more years. Mike took over a long term project and we're beginning to see positive results. Hiring a new coach would set us back, let the man work.   

[Atlhogfan1]

The objective was to get back to the tourney on a consistent basis when we hired Mike. Well here we are, we've made it 3 of the past 4 years. Now people want to fire him? Lol. I guess we'll go on and set the standard for the next coach as sweet 16 or bust and find ourselves after another coach's head in 3 or 4 more years. Mike took over a long term project and we're beginning to see positive results. Hiring a new coach would set us back, let the man work.

That was the low bar set?

[Kevin McPherson]

I agree attendance is different now for the reasons you gave.  But this comparison still illustrates a bit of hypocrisy with how Heath was treated and how Mike is.  Someone posted earlier that Heath was held to Nolan standards which was true.  Heath wasn't qualified for the job and should have been fired.  But the academics and attendance reasons were not the main part of why he was.  Heath wasn't showing signs he could get us back to 1977 to 1996 level and he wasn't playing something resembling Hawg Ball.  Now here we are with teams still not capable of playing Hawg Ball on any kind of consistent basis and as far as 1977 to 1996 level, we are told to not even expect it any longer.

Both of those were factors in the big picture. There were 2 attendance spikes under Heath -- the first was when he signed the class with all the big men to go with Modica and Brewer coming back as upperclassmen, yet that team underachieved, was held out of the NIT, and ticket sales fell down the following year, which happened to be the season that the team finally had a winning SEC record and made the NCAAT, which in turn helped set up an attendance spike in Heath's final season, which turned out to be another letdown. You combine unsatisfactory results, boring play, subsequent booster and fan complaints in large numbers, off-the-court issues as big as academics and some other unsavory stuff, and attendance that overall was underachieving relative to what was expected, and it ALL factored into Heath's firing.

[widespreadsooie]

That was the low bar set?

Initially, yes. You have to start somewhere. We had made the tournament 3/10 seasons previously and now we've made 3 of the last 4. That is progress. The next step would be to crack the Sweet 16. The program was in shambles when Mike took over. That's the context of the program's situation regarding MA. You run the risk of ending Mike's progression and possibly digressing by firing him for what I believe most realistic fans have hoped for at his point. 

[Atlhogfan1]

Unsavory stuff?  Like counterfeit money and assaults and failing drug tests and physical altercations.   

Would we have fired Heath when we did had we not thought we had BCG locked up?

[widespreadsooie]

Unsavory stuff?  Like counterfeit money and assaults and failing drug tests and physical altercations.   

Would we have fired Heath when we did had we not thought we had BCG locked up?

So you are upset that some college kids got in trouble? That's why you want to fire Mike? You may be more interested in cheering on BYU if so. Our program was in shambles from a competitive standpoint.

[steveaustin69]

Initially, yes. You have to start somewhere. We had made the tournament 3/10 seasons previously and now we've made 3 of the last 4. That is progress. The next step would be to crack the Sweet 16. The program was in shambles when Mike took over. That's the context of the program's situation regarding MA. You run the risk of ending Mike's progression and possibly digressing by firing him for what I believe most realistic fans have hoped for at his point.

Progression to what? More bad defense? More roster turnover?

[Mjs84]

We fired Stan Heath after 2 tournaments back-to-back.  Lost to Bucknell, lost to USC.

Some of these people are morons

[Mjs84]

wasn't asked as a "gotcha" question. I was simply trying to remember a time when it has happened. Turns out ... it was us with Stan Heath. I hadn't even thought about that. Crazy. I do think that Stan would have taken us to a third straight tourney that next year, but thats beside the point.

any other programs get rid of a coach after 3 consecutive tourneys? I think its probably extremely rare, or hasn't happened at all, except maybe here. The point is, it seems as if a tournament bid is the definition of job security for a coach. As long as a coach can just "get there"... he is set.

It was a full on "gotcha question" go have a seat at the Anderson apologist table.   The fresh koolaid will be served shortly.

[widespreadsooie]

Progression to what? More bad defense? More roster turnover?

I can't help you interpret numbers, maybe your math teachers couldn't either. Mike took over a program that had been to the tournament in 3 of the past 10 seasons. We have made the tournament in 3 of the past 4. Mike gets no credit for this? Nobody on this site can't present a reason other than losing to Butler or not making the Sweet 16 for firing Mike. That's a knee jerk reaction and a lack of context and patience.

[Mjs84]

I'd hold off on that NIT order. The last time the Hogs had a huge roster turnover they went 16-16 and missed all the post season tourneys.

Ya don't buy the tickets yet.

[Atlhogfan1]

So you are upset that some college kids got in trouble? That's why you want to fire Mike? You may be more interested in cheering on BYU if so. Our program was in shambles from a competitive standpoint.

Stupid reply. The conversation is about the hypocrisy. Not firing Mike.

[HogBreath]

Our program was in shambles from a competitive standpoint.

Interesting...Pel's last team had a better record than Mike's year one and year five teams did...glad we've came so far with Mike.

And Pel's first team had a better record than all but two of Mike's years, I'll give Mike an advantage, but there's not really that much of a difference.

[widespreadsooie]

Stupid reply. The conversation is about the hypocrisy. Not firing Mike.

Calling a reply stupid instead of defending your position. Now that, dare I say it, is a stupid reply. I know my post is relevant to the topic at hand, hiring and firing our basketball coach.

[widespreadsooie]

Interesting...Pel's last team had a better record than Mike's year one and year five teams did...glad we've came so far with Mike.

And Pel's first team had a better record than all but two of Mike's years, I'll give Mike an advantage, but there's not really that much of a difference.

You know what's interesting? Pel was 46-47 over his last three seasons, only coached here four. Mike is 65-37 over his last three seasons. You guys pick a standard and stick with it. What clip will our next coach have to hit to keep you satisfied?

[Atlhogfan1]

Calling a reply stupid instead of defending your position. Now that, dare I say it, is a stupid reply. I know my post is relevant to the topic at hand, hiring and firing our basketball coach.

You obviously don't know my position.  I haven't said fire him.  You are arguing something I'm not involved in.

I am only pointing out Teflon Mike. 

[HogBreath]

You know what's interesting? Pel was 46-47 over his last three seasons, only coached here four. Mike is 65-37 over his last three seasons. You guys pick a standard and stick with it. What clip will our next coach have to hit to keep you satisfied?

Competitive shambles as you called it,  Pel almost equaling Mike's NCAA wins in half the time.

As I said, I'd take Mike's record over Pels, but Mike going 9-9 in the SEC isn't a competitive shambles better than Pel's 7-9 record, it's a little better, but not by much.

But hey, yuck it up and enjoy your precious fast forty hawgball, if that's what you like.

[niels_boar]

Stan has also won an outright conference championship.

In his one year at Kent State, Heath inherited a team that was 24 - 10 (13- 5) and had advanced to the round of 32 the year before. The entire starting lineup was returning, and he lucked into adding freak athlete Antonio Gates.  Yeah, that Antonio Gates, who was available because Saban wouldn't let him play two sports at Michigan State and because he had flunked out of Eastern Michigan.  Gates knew Heath from Michigan State.

His paper thin resume was the reason Heath wasn't given much rope here.  His first NCAA tournament team here was an #8-seed that lost to Bucknell.  His second was a #12-seed that had Vitale screaming that we didn't belong in the tourney and who got blown out by a good USC team in the first round.

Heath's records in the SEC were 4-12, 4-12, 6-10, 10-6, 7-9.  That's 31-49 (39%).  That's why Heath got fired.  He had his fourth losing SEC record in five years at Arkansas.

Anderson built a SS team at UAB and an elite eight team at Mizzou. Anderson at Arkansas has had a #5-seed, a #7-seed, and a #8-seed with two losses to UNC in the second round.

His SEC records at Arkansas are 6-10, 10-8, 10-8, 13-5, 9-9, 12- 6, 10-8. That's 70 - 54 (56%)

Whether Anderson has net your expectations or not, he clearly has a lot more on the positive side of the ledger than Heath ever had.

[widespreadsooie]

Competitive shambles as you called it,  Pel almost equaling Mike's NCAA wins in half the time.

As I said, I'd take Mike's record over Pels, but Mike going 9-9 in the SEC isn't a competitive shambles better than Pel's 7-9 record, it's a little better, but not by much.

But hey, yuck it up and enjoy your precious fast forty hawgball, if that's what you like.

Competitive shambles as you called it,  Pel almost equaling Mike's NCAA wins in half the time.

As I said, I'd take Mike's record over Pels, but Mike going 9-9 in the SEC isn't a competitive shambles better than Pel's 7-9 record, it's a little better, but not by much.

But hey, yuck it up and enjoy your precious fast forty hawgball, if that's what you like.

Pel's last three seasons is competitive shambles. The conference was much weaker when he was here too. Mike actually bagged some quality non con wins this past season. I'm honestly just on the hunt for legitimate reasons as to why we're having these types of discussions as a board and fan base. Trust me, I want to do better but I'm not discontent as I try to look at the big picture. I would be for firing MA if I truly thought that's what needed to happen to do better. 

[HogBreath]

In his one year at Kent State, Heath inherited a team that was 24 - 10 (13- 5) and had advanced to the round of 32 the year before. The entire starting lineup was returning, and he lucked into adding freak athlete Antonio Gates.  Yeah, that Antonio Gates, who was available because Saban wouldn't let him play two sports at Michigan State and because he had flunked out of Eastern Michigan.  Gates knew Heath from Michigan State.

His paper thin resume was the reason Heath wasn't given much rope here.  His first NCAA tournament team here was an #8-seed that lost to Bucknell.  His second was a #12-seed that had Vitale screaming that we didn't belong in the tourney and who got blown out by a good USC team in the first round.

Heath's records in the SEC were 4-12, 4-12, 6-10, 10-6, 7-9.  That's 31-49 (39%).  That's why Heath got fired.  He had his fourth losing SEC record in five years at Arkansas.

Anderson built a SS team at UAB and an elite eight team at Mizzou. Anderson at Arkansas has had a #5-seed, a #7-seed, and a #8-seed with two losses to UNC in the second round.

His SEC records at Arkansas are 6-10, 10-8, 10-8, 13-5, 9-9, 12- 6, 10-8. That's 70 - 54 (56%)

Whether Anderson has net your expectations or not, he clearly has a lot more on the positive side of the ledger than Heath ever had.

Not arguing any of that, just merely pointing out Heath has an outright championship to his credit.

Not all coaches can say that, you know.

[niels_boar]

Not arguing any of that, just merely pointing out Heath has an outright championship to his credit.

Not all coaches can say that, you know.

Yeah, he has a MAC championship on a team that was favored to win the MAC before he even stepped on campus.

[HogBreath]

Yeah, he has a MAC championship on a team that was favored to win the MAC before he even stepped on campus.

Did they put an asterisk by his championship in the record book?

[Mike Irwin]

We fired Stan Heath after 2 tournaments back-to-back.  Lost to Bucknell, lost to USC.

Stan Heath was fired because Billy Clyde Gillispie was a hot property at the time and he dropped several hints to the right people that he would leave A&M for Arkansas. John White, who had pretty much forced Frank to hire Heath instead of Bill Self, said no to Gillispie at first. It was only when Frank lined up support from BOT members that could fire White that  he relented and allowed Heath to be fired. As soon as that happened Gillispie got an offer from Kentucky and he would not even return Frank's phone call.

The point is, that was an unusual situation. Heath would have never been fired if Frank had not believed that he could get Gillispie.

After all that Gillispie turned out to be a drunk. Pelphrey was a goober but Gillispie would have been worse.