Scholarship table
He didn't throw Burton under the bus. Burton transferred as stated repeatedly due to family issues. John Dawson was clearly not a high major player. He had one quality high major game, against Georgetown. The G League is full of bit players like Dawson that were not high major quality.
Guru-You are schooling no one. I wouldn't say you're being schooled either, just that you and TAMU have different opinions.I understand you don't like Wojo. But you seem to be on a crusade to convert everyone to your opinion. As if your opinion is some sort of irrefutable fact. In doing so, you come across as an arrogant jerk. And you wonder why people don't like you.
The average G League roster is predominately good high major players. Here is the team Dawson played on:https://greensboro.gleague.nba.com/roster/
5 of the 12 players on the roster are mid or low majors. That's over 40%. Thanks for confirming my case.
7 of the 12 are from Ohio State, Xavier, Texas Tech, Syracuse, Louisville , Virginia and Arkanas. It is that way with every team in the league. The other players were all very significant players on their college teams. It is not easy to make the G League. Lazar for example cant get back in it.
Was NOT schooled by TAMU(he wishes). TAMU was using what he THOUGHT Tower was saying...because that's the only way it fit his argument. This is exactly what tower said....." But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".He did NOT say the last 4 years specifically...he said averages 21 wins a season FOR 4 years. So TAMU somehow, wants to say Tower SAID Wojo's last 4 years...he NEVER said that. TAMU made an assumption(perhaps logically). However, that disregards Wojo's first year, which was absolute trash. Factor that in, and Wojo has NOT averaged 21 years over 4 years. So that's disingenuous. I got accused of "disregarding" Deane's last year. Well apparently Tower "threw out" Wojo's first year...so we must be "disregarding" both Coaches worst season's to date, and getting our averages that way, right?? But, let's cherry pick to fit our argument however we want. So let's use Wojo's FIRST four years instead...no one liked me NOT including Deane's last year(I used his first 4)...so let's do APPLES to APPLES...Shall we?? Mike Deane: 86 wins his first 4 years..Hmmm that averages 21.5 wins per year. Let's go back to what Tower said EXACTLY shall we?? But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".Wojo had: 73 wins his first four years...that averages 18.25 wins per year. Now the cries are going to be "totally unfair to dismiss Wojo's season last year, it was his best year". Remember..Tower never said specifically the LAST 4 years.But it fits the Pro Wojo crowd to say the last 4 years, because this trendline thing that they take as freaking gospel. Mike Deane was 100-55(.645) in his 5 yearsWojo is 97-69(.584) in his 5 years.Everyone wants to "disregard" Wojo's first year because he had to "rebuild". The season happened, you can't just ignore it when it's convenient. 4 years is 4 years. Numbers are numbers..Guy averages 21 wins over a 4 year span, he averages 21 wins over a 4 year span...throwing out a year, middle years, last four, first 4, it doesn't matter...it's all the same #'s. Unless of course you want to make excuse, THEN it matters.School will continue to be in session for anyone that's interested in attending...free of charge. Just sign up here, and we can get started. Tower's EXACT quote again...But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".Except Marquette did just that. I'd bet anyone MASSIVE amounts of coin if Cords were still the AD, Wojo would be on VERY thin ice, if not gone. Cords had stones.
Ners has documented all this in great depth in case you need more detail.
People attack me like my OPINIONS are irrelevant, and that their beliefs are the correct way things are supposed to be done. That's what irritates me about it. They have opinions, I have opinions, no one knows who is right or wrong.
Here's what I think the Wojo supporters fail to get...Both Crean and Buzz had better first 5 years than Wojo has...yet, no one seems to care about that(or they say it's irrelevant for some reason). Wojo doesn't seem to be held to that same standard.
Was NOT schooled by TAMU(he wishes). TAMU was using what he THOUGHT Tower was saying...because that's the only way it fit his argument. This is exactly what tower said....." But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".
I will leave this here...in another thread, Tower said people don't fire Coaches that have won 84 games in 4 years like Wojo has...
He did NOT say the last 4 years specifically...he said averages 21 wins a season FOR 4 years. So TAMU somehow, wants to say Tower SAID Wojo's last 4 years...he NEVER said that. TAMU made an assumption(perhaps logically). However, that disregards Wojo's first year, which was absolute trash. Factor that in, and Wojo has NOT averaged 21 years over 4 years. So that's disingenuous. I got accused of "disregarding" Deane's last year. Well apparently Tower "threw out" Wojo's first year...so we must be "disregarding" both Coaches worst season's to date, and getting our averages that way, right??
But, let's cherry pick to fit our argument however we want. So let's use Wojo's FIRST four years instead...no one liked me NOT including Deane's last year(I used his first 4)...so let's do APPLES to APPLES...Shall we?? Mike Deane: 86 wins his first 4 years..Hmmm that averages 21.5 wins per year. Let's go back to what Tower said EXACTLY shall we?? But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".Wojo had: 73 wins his first four years...that averages 18.25 wins per year. Now the cries are going to be "totally unfair to dismiss Wojo's season last year, it was his best year". Remember..Tower never said specifically the LAST 4 years.But it fits the Pro Wojo crowd to say the last 4 years, because this trendline thing that they take as freaking gospel.
Everyone wants to "disregard" Wojo's first year because he had to "rebuild". The season happened, you can't just ignore it when it's convenient. 4 years is 4 years. Numbers are numbers..Guy averages 21 wins over a 4 year span, he averages 21 wins over a 4 year span...throwing out a year, middle years, last four, first 4, it doesn't matter...it's all the same #'s. Unless of course you want to make excuse, THEN it matters.
School will continue to be in session for anyone that's interested in attending...free of charge. Just sign up here, and we can get started.
Tower's EXACT quote again...But there aren't many programs that fire coaches averaging 21 wins a season for four years".
Except Marquette did just that. I'd bet anyone MASSIVE amounts of coin if Cords were still the AD, Wojo would be on VERY thin ice, if not gone. Cords had stones.
Okay, for all of you "you must be patient" people..Let's say Wojo is here another 5 years, and produces relatively the same results as the first 5...now it's been 10 years, and where has it gotten you?? What I'm saying is..regardless of HIS or anyone's trend line(which so many use as gospel here), that doesn't guarantee you squat about how the future will play out with him. That's why I find it ironic, that the people that say patience is the way to go, yet point to his trend line like that is some "magical" future telling device. It's not.
Sometimes, you just have to go with your gut, don't you?? Either this guy is going to take us where we ultimately want to go, or he isn't. That can be done after 3 years, 4 years 5 years etc. You have to just "feel" it. What if this is Wojo's ceiling, and he still gets another 3-4 years(minimum). Then what?/ You have essentially wasted at least those last 3-4 years, hoping you'd find a unicorn, when if you would have acted sooner, you would have been able to recover quicker.Now of course, it also matters what the expectations of the people running the show REALLY are(not what they say in public). You can see SOME indications, this is fine with them.
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
Wojo had no rebuilding to do in year one. He threw Deonte Burton, who played in the NBA this year under the bus. John Dawson who has played in the G League was part of the collateral damage as well. All self inflicted wounds. Ners has documented all this in great depth in case you need more detail.
I've asked you, Ners, and others this before and have yet to get an answer so I'll ask again.What was the last team that missed the NIT, lost their coach, lost 6/7 of their top players in minutes played, lost 3/4 members of their incoming recruiting class (and the one you kept was the 2nd highest ranked and had the 3rd best career out of all four), that made the NCAA the following year? NIT? Bonus points if you can find a team where the one returning player from that top 7 was as bad as Derrick Wilson.If someone can actually answer that question successfully, I might be more inclined to believe that Wojo didn't need to rebuild. If not, you can say Wojo didn't need to rebuild all you want, but it means you were asking him to do something that had never been done before.
Don't you think the word "chose to" is more appropriate. I certainly do.
We agree on this, and I'm pretty sure most other Scoopers do, too.I believe he will be held to that higher standard when he faces similar circumstances, and I believe that time is approaching. Or at least I hope it is.
Have you seen any one say Wojo is better than Crean or Buzz? I think it's unquestionable that both Crean and Buzz did better than Wojo in their first 5 years. Neither Buzz nor Crean got fired so I'm not sure why this is relevant.No. This is the quote in question:There is only one four year period in which Wojo won 84 games, the last four years, not the first four years. I didn't think that's what Tower said, I knew that's what Tower said. I don't know if you were genuinely confused on what Tower was talking about or if you intentionally misinterpreted him because it would fit your argument better. Either way, it was a mistake on your part.Also, in a conversation about whether or not a coach should/should've been fired, I don't know why anyone would think the first four years of a coach's career are more relevant than the last 4 years.Not being disingenuous at all. If you think the last five years are relevant, then compare Wojo's last five years with Deane's last five years. I just don't understand an argument where you would only look at the first four years and ignore the most recent year when deciding when to fire a coach.Actually the trendline argument is stronger when you factor in Wojo's first year. It makes the improvement look even better.And trendline isn't gospel. Just because a coach has been improving every year doesn't mean he'll keep improving and vice versa. But I do think most people would rather have a coach that has been improving (Wojo/Jim Calhoun) vs one that has been regressing (Deane/Kevin Ollie).Yes, Mike Deane averaged 21 wins over his first four years. And he wasn't fired, just like Wojo wasn't fired after this past year. Then, he went another year and his four year average dropped and he was fired. Unless the argument you think Tower was making was that if a coach averages 21 wins over a 4 year period at any point in his career it makes him immune from being fired ever. That would be a dumb argument and if that's what Tower meant than I disagree. I suspect you suspect that Tower wasn't making that argument.Yes, please school me on the following subjects:1. How winning in the Great Midwest/CUSA is equal to winning in the Big East?2. Why was Kevin Ollie fired and Jim Calhoun retained when Ollie's first years were so much better than Calhoun's? Did UConn make a mistake?3. How is a recruiting class of Krunti Hester a sign that Deane's recruiting was trending up?Again, here is the exact quote that started this conversation:Tower has also said what you said as well but since you wanted that exact quote I wanted to point it out.I can promise you that you would lose that bet. Cords is still around and is nowhere near the fire Wojo camp.Has anyone guaranteed success if we are patient? Maybe someone has but I can't remember anyone saying anything like that. I think some are optimistic but nothing's a guarantee. We could be patient and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and things could get worse. We could fire Wojo and hire Coach K with Tony Bennett, Jay Wright, and Mark Few as assistant coaches and things could get worse. I've seen enough from Wojo that I'm not ready to roll the dice with a new hire yet. You are ready. That's fine, we can disagree.This is great. This is an irrefutable opinion. You have watched Wojo the past five years, you haven't been impressed, and you have a gut feeling that it won't get any better. That's a completely reasonable opinion to have. I have a different opinion which is fine.Honestly, Guru, I can't speak for everyone on this site but I don't believe I've ever attacked you for one of your opinions. You don't think Wojo is the guy and I respect that. Comparing Wojo's results to Deane's results is not an opinion. It's an argument. Not accepting your arguments on face value and challenging what you say is not an attack. It's a discussion, it's what sports forums are for so nerds like us can debate a sport/team that we love.
What do you mean when you say similar circumstances? Crean had it far worse than Wojo when he got here in terms of just about everything. As far as overall state of the program, Crean got the keys to a beat up Corolla, Wojo a shiny new Lexus.
A Lexus?
Game. Set. Match.
I don’t know, I’m not a big car guy. A Mercedes, then?My point was, Crean had sh!t to work with as far as resources when he got here, and Wojo had champagne.