A Simple, Straightforward Question

[GuvHog]

This is complete bull. UAB was horrible when he took over. Missouri was horrible when he took over and he turned both programs around. But keep going, we're starting to expose the ones that are full of it...

As usual you are wrong. Do some research. In Mike's 3rd year at UAB (his last one), there were still a number of players on that team that were recruited by the previous HC. The same goes for his 3rd year at Missouri which was his best year there. In his last year at Missouri, all of the players were his recruits and that team won only 1 conference road game against what was then a horrible Iowa State team and did not deserve the NCAA Tournament Invitation they received. Mike has not shown that he can build a winning program.

[Youngsta71701]

As usual you are wrong. Do some research. In Mike's 3rd year at UAB (his last one), there were still a number of players on that team that were recruited by the previous HC. The same goes for his 3rd year at Missouri which was his best year there. In his last year at Missouri, all of the players were his recruits and that team won only 1 conference road game against what was then a horrible Iowa State team and did not deserve the NCAA Tournament Invitation they received. Mike has not shown that he can build a winning program.

It don't give a rats ass what players were there and who's players they were. Both programs were losers before he got there plain & simple. Look at their records before him then look at their records while he was their. They both sucked before he got there and they both were good when he was there. It's as simple as that. It's simple math. It's not rocket science.

[Sivad]

What about Notes? Lol!

Some would think that's just great.

[GuvHog]

It don't give a rats ass what players were there and who's players they were. Both programs were losers before he got there plain & simple. Look at their records before him then look at their records while he was their. They both sucked before he got there and they both were good when he was there. It's as simple as that. It's simple math. It's not rocket science.

You've been proven wrong so just accept it and move on. The fact is Mike had his best years with the previous coach's players, he did not build a winning program.

[Dominicanhog]

You've been proven wrong so just accept it and move on. The fact is Mike had his best years with the previous coach's players, he did not build a winning program.

where was he proven wrong.. everything he said is true.. no debate.. losers then winners.. its math and not some subjective nuance you want to give it.. your the one that's wrong, according to the math...

[GuvHog]

where was he proven wrong.. everything he said is true.. no debate.. losers then winners.. its math and not some subjective nuance you want to give it.. your the one that's wrong, according to the math...

No, I'm quite correct. Mike didn't build those programs, he had success with the previous coach's players. That's not even debatable.

[majp51]

He went to the Sweet 16 at UAB. He went to the Elite 8 at Missouri. What are you talking about? Some of you people need to do some research and know your history before you start typing.

Sweet 16 is not the height of UAB  History. Elite 8 at Missouri means he is tied with Quinn Snyder.

You talk about CMA's accomplishments like they are extraordinary, yet they are not. They are the Sign of a decent coach, but not a great one, not unless they are repeatable and sustainable.
CMA hasn't successfully built a single program.

[majp51]

It don't give a rats ass what players were there and who's players they were. Both programs were losers before he got there plain & simple. Look at their records before him then look at their records while he was their. They both sucked before he got there and they both were good when he was there. It's as simple as that. It's simple math. It's not rocket science.

Actually you are wrong that point. It had been less than 5 years since Quinn Snyder had taken Missouri to an Elite 8, but he left the University in disgrace because of NCAA Sanctions. The School talent wise was good.

I guess you are too young, or too blindly loyal to CMA to have looked deeper?

[forrest city joe]

Actually you are wrong that point. It had been less than 5 years since Quinn Snyder had taken Missouri to an Elite 8, but he left the University in disgrace because of NCAA Sanctions. The School talent wise was good.

I guess you are too young, or too blindly loyal to CMA to have looked deeper?

No he is right in what he posted. you just refuse to admit it.

[majp51]

where was he proven wrong.. everything he said is true.. no debate.. losers then winners.. its math and not some subjective nuance you want to give it.. your the one that's wrong, according to the math...

Except none of them were truly losers.
I suppos UAB comes closest, but here are the last 3 years before CMA


1998–1999   Murry Bartow   20–12   10–6   1st (National)   NCAA 1st Round
1999–2000   Murry Bartow   14–14   7–9   T–3rd (National)   
2000–2001   Murry Bartow   17–14   8–8   4th (National)   
2001–2002   Murry Bartow   13–17   6–10   T–4th (National)   

Only one losing season, but recruiting was pretty decent and Murry insisted he had the team turned around.

Given that teams with Murry's Recruits but CMA's coaching accomplished the most for UABsince Gene Bartow in the early 80's should be key. Though I would say that CMA's coaching style is likely to be more successfully in any team conference that has less athletic players. Honestly I believe if he went to the Sun Belt, he would instantly start looking like a World Beater again.

Missouri is a bit different, Quin Snyder had gotten an Elite 8 with them already and in the middle of a rebuild, the NCAA went after him for helping out a Kid on the team. It was absolutely an NCAA violation, but the NCAA and the Media went after Quin like they should have gone after Pitino's stripper recruiting program. Quin resigned in the middle of the season and so instead of 1 bad season, they had 2 bad seasons in a row.

The point being, if you weren't a blind loyalist to CMA, you would see that both UAB and Missouri were ideal situations for CMA too walk into. Programs just needing wins, with teams that were far more talented than the previous season indicated.

[Wild Bill Hog]

It don't give a rats ass what players were there and who's players they were. Both programs were losers before he got there plain & simple. Look at their records before him then look at their records while he was their. They both sucked before he got there and they both were good when he was there. It's as simple as that. It's simple math. It's not rocket science.

where was he proven wrong.. everything he said is true.. no debate.. losers then winners.. its math and not some subjective nuance you want to give it.. your the one that's wrong, according to the math...

No he is right in what he posted. you just refuse to admit it.

Why hasn't he done it here then?

[majp51]

No he is right in what he posted. you just refuse to admit it.

At best this is a pot meet kettle. The only way your way can be true is to for you to state that both UAB and Missouri have better overalll programs than Arkansas. And that despite the Big 12 supposedly being a better conference, that it is significantly easier to win there.


But the only blind person refusing to admit it is you Joe. I've always had my doubts about CMA. If he could make the program good again I wouldn't have a problem. Thing is, he's screwed the pooch for 5 of his 6 years here, and you still won't admit that there is even a problem.

It is clear you are not a Fan of the University but instead worship the Man the Myth tCMA.

[The OTR]

Here is another question that may be more relevant:

Is there a coach that we could realistically hire that we believe has a better than 50% chance of replicating the success of Sweaty Eddie or Nolan without breaking recruiting rules and running a clean program?

I can't think of one. Give me Mike Anderson, boys.  Give me the guy I know that is going to run a clean program and do things the right way.  He's getting there. Things have changed and he hasn't been as quick as some to sell out.  He is going to evolve but he is going to do it and improve while maintaining integrity.

I'll take that over all these hotshots whose names are being bandied about. 

[Dominicanhog]

Except none of them were truly losers.
I suppos UAB comes closest, but here are the last 3 years before CMA


1998–1999   Murry Bartow   20–12   10–6   1st (National)   NCAA 1st Round
1999–2000   Murry Bartow   14–14   7–9   T–3rd (National)   
2000–2001   Murry Bartow   17–14   8–8   4th (National)   
2001–2002   Murry Bartow   13–17   6–10   T–4th (National)   

Only one losing season, but recruiting was pretty decent and Murry insisted he had the team turned around.

Given that teams with Murry's Recruits but CMA's coaching accomplished the most for UABsince Gene Bartow in the early 80's should be key. Though I would say that CMA's coaching style is likely to be more successfully in any team conference that has less athletic players. Honestly I believe if he went to the Sun Belt, he would instantly start looking like a World Beater again.

Missouri is a bit different, Quin Snyder had gotten an Elite 8 with them already and in the middle of a rebuild, the NCAA went after him for helping out a Kid on the team. It was absolutely an NCAA violation, but the NCAA and the Media went after Quin like they should have gone after Pitino's stripper recruiting program. Quin resigned in the middle of the season and so instead of 1 bad season, they had 2 bad seasons in a row.

The point being, if you weren't a blind loyalist to CMA, you would see that both UAB and Missouri were ideal situations for CMA too walk into. Programs just needing wins, with teams that were far more talented than the previous season indicated.

so here is the problem.. UAB 13-17 in the last year, 30-31 last 2 years and 44-45 last 3 years and not a single winning year in conference, for the 3 preceding years before CMA's arrival, is not a losing record...

[Biggus Piggus]

You don't know this. These recruits might come to Arkansas if there is another coach and then might not.

I am sure you will type a 500 word essay attempting to prove I am wrong. But I will say it again. Firing Mike is not NECESSARILY going to make us lose whoever these recruits are. And frankly, who cares if they don't come if Mike gets fired. Keep Mike and then we will not see the maximization of their alleged talent. Mike is just not a very good coach. I am tired of not saying this.
Get another coach and the same recruits could very well still come and play.

What the hell does it matter. He could not land Allen nor Monk and maybe a few others. So you get these studs in there and they still play mediocre. Then what?

You are arguing the wrong points with me. I have concluded that MA is lost as a coach. The game has passed him by. My concern is that a coaching change could be managed poorly enough to leave the Hogs bereft of talent when in-state talent is at a high point.

[PonderinHog]

You are arguing the wrong points with me. I have concluded that MA is lost as a coach. The game has passed him by. My concern is that a coaching change could be managed poorly enough to leave the Hogs bereft of talent when in-state talent is at a high point.

So, when you're walking on eggshells, don't hop

[hogman99]

You are arguing the wrong points with me. I have concluded that MA is lost as a coach. The game has passed him by. My concern is that a coaching change could be managed poorly enough to leave the Hogs bereft of talent when in-state talent is at a high point.

But he will still coach them the bad habits (no block out, switching on screens with no hedging, weak press, stand around offense, puzzled look on faces, low minutes per game). I will take my chances with the next coach, CMA is not changing.

[Biggus Piggus]

But he will still coach them the bad habits (no block out, switching on screens with no hedging, weak press, stand around offense, puzzled look on faces, low minutes per game). I will take my chances with the next coach, CMA is not changing.

That is the approach we took that ended up with Pelphrey.

[elksnort]

You are arguing the wrong points with me. I have concluded that MA is lost as a coach. The game has passed him by. My concern is that a coaching change could be managed poorly enough to leave the Hogs bereft of talent when in-state talent is at a high point.
[/quote}Sorry, must have misunderstood your point(s). I feel that he is lost as a coach also and I would be willing to risk losing the recruits for a longer term solution.

[hogman99]

That is the approach we took that ended up with Pelphrey.

We can agree to disagree.

I will leave you with this, a good coach will make average players good. A bad coach will make good players average.

[elksnort]

But he will still coach them the bad habits (no block out, switching on screens with no hedging, weak press, stand around offense, puzzled look on faces, low minutes per game). I will take my chances with the next coach, CMA is not changing.

Thank you. You said it more efficiently than I tried to do. I will root for the team as usual and I like Mike. But he has been punkin' me for 5+ years.

[Pig Worshipper]

That is the approach we took that ended up with Pelphrey.

All you had to do was just look at Pelphrey, The Walking Apology, and know he wasn't a leader. Broyles, or whoever, made a terrible hire. Will Jeff Long make a better hire? Who knows?
Waiting around for years because of decent recruiting classes doesn't sound like a winning strategy to me. It just reminds me of how Long stuck with Pelphrey way too long.

[hulk hog]

That is the approach we took that ended up with Pelphrey.

Actually we ended up with Altman, which would have been a great hire... then we ended up with Pelphrey.

[Dominicanhog]

We can agree to disagree.

I will leave you with this, a good coach will make average players good. A bad coach will make good players average.

and idiots continue to make stupid post.. 

[hogsanity]

and idiots continue to make stupid post.. 

and the Mike Anderson sycophants prove that every day.

[Dominicanhog]

and the Mike Anderson sycophants prove that every day.

I bet you feel better now...