The CardBoard
DAWKINS WATCH - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: DAWKINS WATCH (/thread-4944.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

DAWKINS WATCH - washingtonismoney - 03-13-2013

1) Should he get fired?
2) Does he get fired?
3) If so, when?

(yes; I have no idea; I have no idea)

But I'd be very disappointed if he were back for another year.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - FarmBoy - 03-13-2013

Yes. Probably not.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - needle - 03-13-2013

Yes. Yes. After NIT loss.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - Farm93 - 03-13-2013

(03-13-2013, 02:44 PM)needle link Wrote:Yes. Yes. After NIT loss.
NIT?!!?
18-14 in the Pac-12 is not going to get into the NIT.  Think CBI.

FWIW - I really don't care if Dawkins goes at this point.  Out of sight, out of mind.
But I will go with Yes & not this year.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - Roberton3 - 03-13-2013

Yes.  Eventually.  Not this year.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - yvonne - 03-13-2013

Yes. Not this year.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - Cadet84 - 03-13-2013

Yes.
Yes.
next week? (a guy can hope...)

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - Bruce Wang - 03-13-2013

Cardinal Blow It

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - 97fan - 03-13-2013

I know that BobK posted here awhile ago that Dawkins will likely be back. I assume he knows what's talking about.

But...WHY is Dawkins likely to be back?

Possible factors:
Muir hasn't been on the job long enough to pull the trigger?
Stanford doesn't fire basketball coaches?
Financial reasons?

I can't believe that Muir has reached the conclusion that Dawkins just needs more time. That would be at odds with the assessment of just about everyone who follows the program. And I say this as someone who wrongly gave Dawkins the benefit of the doubt until this season.


My guess - jacketree - 03-13-2013

Rolex.

He's paid well and Rolex seems like a jock thing.  Maybe Tag Heuer.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - pincemob - 03-13-2013

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has been a coach in 30 years who survived 6 years without ever finishing above 5th place in the Pac 10.  I googled every bad coach I could think of and not one survived that long, let alone turned it around afterwards either there or anywhere else.    We have gone 39-51 in probably the weakest Pac 10 since the mid 80s.  The overall records have been padded by creampuffs.  Our ending RPIs of 95, 160, 151, 69, and probably around 70 this year bear this out.  Just as disappointing to me have been the Pac 10 tourney performances.  It is a smaller sample, but each year we went in with maximum motivation/incentive to win, and yet never managed more than 1 win. 

I have heard some nice things about Dawkins and I don't think he's the entire problem here.  I think the players & fans are also responsible for a winning culture/environment and those groups have not done their part.  If he had a top-10 recruiting class coming in (landing Jabari Parker for instance), I might have a different view but as things stand today it seems like a good transition time.  I'll trust Muir to make the call but I would be very interested in what basis he feels there is to keep Dawkins.  Are there any historical examples of coaches who had so little success at age 50 who built great programs later on?  I think a safer bet for the future would be an up-and-coming mid-major coach with a good record over several years.   



Re: DAWKINS WATCH - BobK - 03-13-2013

Well John Wooden won his first NCAA title at 54.  But discounting Wooden I can't think of 50 year old coaches who suddenly were successful. 

Sorry someone thinks fans share in the blame  wow. 

3 years to go on his contract is brobdingnagian.  Some who know more than me think he won't be fired.      I think 5 years with his record warrants dismissal. 

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - pincemob - 03-13-2013

Don't get me wrong -- I am not talking about winning a title at 50, I am talking about challenging for a league title either regular season or tourney.  Wooden had a hard time with Newell's teams but UCLA was still competing every year.    We have been an utter non-factor. 

As for the fans, I am not blaming the fans who go to games, follow the team, etc.  We just don't have a great home court environment any more.  Blame is shared to be sure (ticket prices), but there were some games the past few years where a home-court advantage really would have helped.  Brevin Knight has talked about that and I agree with him.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - 81alum - 03-13-2013

Is Madsen ready to be a head coach? 

I wonder if basketball needs to do what football did with Shaw--hire a charismatic former Stanford player.  Get the commitment to the Stanford ideal, plus professional experience and a willingness to stay for as long as we will have him.  But I know he is pretty new at coaching.

How about some other former Stanford players?  How many of them are currently successful coaches at one level or another?

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - 76lsjumb - 03-13-2013

(03-13-2013, 05:55 PM)garvin link Wrote:Keeping him around next year will be a disaster that will keep rippling through the program for years. There are at least four scholarships at the end of next season: Aaron Bright, Josh Huestis, Dwight Powell, and John Gage. If Andy Brown leaves, make that five; if Robbie Lemons has been converted from a walk-on to a scholarship player sometime along the way (I don't know), make that six.

Dawkins will have trouble filling that class if he's having a poor season and there's a widespread expectation that he'll be gone at the end of the season. And to the extent that he can recruit a good class, how many of those guys will ask out of their LOIs if he gets fired? Yeah, we can be hard-asses and say a deal's a deal, but that will essentially make the next coach a prison warden, presiding over a bunch of guys who don't want to be here.

Muir should fire Dawkins now and give the new coach a chance to make something of the huuge next class. But I don't think it will happen.

garvin knows how much it hurts me to say this, but he gets a +1 and an "absolutely correct" from me for this post. 

The way I figure it, if we get a new [and good, of course] coach for next season, we will get the "fresh air" bounce [for lack of a better term] that often comes when a group of reasonably talented players that has underperformed in an increasingly oppressive/downbeat environment finally gets to try something new.  So next year is a pleasant surprise, despite the fact that we know it's a "one-and-done" scenario given all of the graduations.  The following year [2014-15] is almost certainly worse, just because there is virtually no way for a brand new coach to get great people in the fall signing period of his first year [especially when he has to fill up as many spots as we will have to fill].  However, on the basis of the predicted reasonably successful 2013-14 season, he may very well be able to line up some good recruits for the following season, so we pick up again starting in 2015-16 and the future looks good.  Sure it's speculation, but it's not crazy.

The alternative?  Just as garvin says, we once again tank next year; everyone good doesn't want to sign with us in the early period because they're pretty sure we're going to tank again and they KNOW that means Dawkins will go.  Then, assuming Dawkins is finally gone, we get a new coach [probably not as good as we could get this year, since he knows he will not have all of next year's seniors] who will have the world's thinnest roster in 2014-15.  At best, he does as badly as predicted in the previous scenario AND he's a year behind in recruiting already.  So, without those recruits, there goes 2015-16.  If he somehow manages to turn things around, we may get some decent recruits and there's a chance that 2016-17 begins to look up.  More likely though, we're not looking at reasonable success until 2017-2018.

No way I'm paying for seat licenses [excuse me, hitting the necessary $$$ Buck Club level] the next few years to see that happen...

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - washingtonismoney - 03-14-2013

(03-14-2013, 04:06 AM)garvin link Wrote:Some cryptic comments by Muir in this story:

http://www.mercurynews.com/stanford-cardinal/ci_22782946/pac-12-tournament-stanford-loses-overtime

Cryptic is good. If Dawkins were coming back, you'd think Muir would just get it over with and end any suspense.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - Class_of_75 - 03-14-2013

Our favorite reporter thinks Muir will bring back Dawkins for another year.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2013/03/14/actionreaction-san-jose-state-fires-nessman-stanford-flames-out-and-cals-depth-chart/

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - FarmBoy - 03-14-2013

His reasoning that the empty seats in Maples is a sign of the lack of fan passion is a bit odd. As an AD, wouldn't you look at those empty seats and realize there's a problem? Hopefully they keep "real" attendance records so Bernard can see that once upon a time, Maples was rocking during men's basketball games.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - Farm93 - 03-14-2013

Not too long ago there was a waitlist for basketball season tickets and only the away game visitors could buy single game tickets.  So this is not like 80s & 90s Stanford Stadium with 85,500+ seats and no hope of getting more than 30,000 season ticket holders.  It is possible to fill our little house for basketball.  And the house was reasonably passionate even back in the late 80s when Stanford was a pretty reliable 18-11 type program.

Why, it is possible to fill our little house for Women's basketball and Women's Volleyball, so the potential is definitely there.  If the product is decent.

But JD's teams really do not reflect the spirit of Stanford or the AD at this point.  I would be OK if JD's 18-14 team featured scrappy kids that were clearly not as athletic but were creative, well coached, found ways to win games because of their superior teamwork, and always finished games and seasons strong.  Instead, JD's teams are generally more athletic than their opponents, but seem to find ways to lose games because of their lack of teamwork and coaching.  Worse yet, they consistently get weaker and weaker as games and seasons progress.

I am even willing to concede that JD might lead Duke to a national championship before 2030, but his formula is not working here on the West Coast with Stanford.  And I have got to believe that Muir can find a coach that can make it work.

Re: DAWKINS WATCH - yvonne - 03-14-2013

Here's a Daily column: http://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/03/13/fisher-is-this-the-end-of-the-road-for-dawkins/

Right now, there are 13 comments, including replies. Only one of them wants Dawkins to stay. As for the crowds, people are voting with their feet and pocketbooks.