The CardBoard
A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - 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: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question (/thread-2953.html)


A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - Redrum - 02-10-2012

My only standard of comparison is Bowlsby and the unlamented Wlat.  In that case he acted decisively.  I don't know basketball so I can only look at W/L.  But it seems,  at least, that the trend is not upward.  Maybe Bowlsby is less able to can his own pick.  The comments I read here seem to indicate an OK recruiter and a (insert descriptive word here) game coach either in getting the most out of his personnel, preparing the team or making adjustments during a game.

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - washingtonismoney - 02-10-2012

The trouble is that a lot of candidates who would be attractive this time declined it the last time around. I'm thinking primarily of Randy Bennett.

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - Farm93 - 02-10-2012

Dawkins is probably an OK recruiter, though any recruit he wants is probably a reject from Duke.  That is a recruiting ceiling that already makes the job tougher than it needs to be.

Dawkins seems to struggle with team development and adjustments.  The team normally is relatively stronger at the start of the season than in the second half.  The team is usually weakest, relative to others in the conference, in the last few weeks of the season.  That's a bad trend line.  Amazingly, it is often repeated in games too.  The team is stronger in the first half than the second half.  The team's worst 5 minutes are probably the last 5 minutes of the game.  I am sure the stats wizards could refute this perception with stats, but in big games it seems like Stanford is always just trying to hold on or stay close. 

So all of that is tough endure, but for me the biggest problem is the style of basketball is sloppy and boring.  Honestly, I did not watch most of last night's game.  It was just too hard to watch.  If Stanford basketball can't keep me watching a game vs UCLA on TV, then there is a problem on The Farm. 

Though in fairness I should note that UCLA is not exactly problem free because there were a lot of empty seats down there for a conference game in February.

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - stanfan - 02-10-2012

He gets one more year.  His guys will then be juniors.  If we don't get to the Big Dance next year, I think we'll be getting another coach.  And, to follow up on a post in an earlier thread, I concur that the team isn't strong/tough enough.  Does Shannon Turley work with the basketball team, or is he just football? 

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - JeffInCorvallis - 02-10-2012

I thought perhaps after the 4OT win over OSU on the road the team had turned a corner.  We were tied for 1st place, had shown some grit, and were looking to make some noise in the conference (admittedly a depleted one this year).  Alas, since that time the wheels have come off and we appear to be headed for a bottom-half finish and, barring a miracle, no NCAA tournament appearance.  Again.  This team is regressing, and it's not the first Dawkons team to do so.  Bowlsby needs to not be afraid of looking silly and pull the plug, although I have my doubts that he will.  Too bad, because Stanford is going to look like a less desirable job than it did just a couple of years ago.

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - Spiny_Norman - 02-10-2012

The team has lost 5 of the last 6, all by double digits.  Definitely regressing and seeming to lack some grit at the end of games.  Close games with 5 minutes remaining have become blowouts.  Steve Physioc repeatedly mentioned Dawkins' miserable conference road record at Stanford.  I think he said something like 7 wins and 26 losses.

Now on to USC where Stanford has 0 wins since 2006.

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - Farm93 - 02-10-2012

(02-10-2012, 12:29 PM)stanfan link Wrote:He gets one more year.  His guys will then be juniors.  If we don't get to the Big Dance next year, I think we'll be getting another coach.  And, to follow up on a post in an earlier thread, I concur that the team isn't strong/tough enough.  Does Shannon Turley work with the basketball team, or is he just football?
Another whole year?!!?  Wow!  I feel like we are watching Ben Braun style teams.  The recruits seem amazing with each class carrying more potential than the class before.  The collective talent should be more than capable of finishing in the top 2 or 3 in the conference, and yet at the end of each season....well, we know how that went for bearbackers.  I always chuckled and thought Braun was a gift that kept giving.  My guess is people in the conference view Dawkins in the same way.  :(

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - 76lsjumb - 02-10-2012

Boy, it's tough, because he really does seem like a nice guy who's trying hard, runs a clean program, cares about all of his players, etc., but, if he sticks around one more year with the same results, it could take us a whole lot longer to get out of the hole into which we're descending. 

Assuming this sophomore class really is as talented as their press clippings suggest, and the right coach could turn that talent into a consistently winning team [that gets better, not worse, as the season progresses], the prospects of having that group for TWO years should make Stanford an inviting opportunity for a new coach [and, presumably, MORE of an inviting opportunity than just having them for one year, if pulling the plug is delayed for yet one more season].

While letting Dawkins go now will mean that we had one coach [Trent Johnson] for only four years, followed by another for only three -- which doesn't exactly scream "long-term stability and chance for success" -- there is recent precedent that, even with such quick turnover, you can still find the right guy and have success:  T.Bud.dy was here for only three years, followed by W.lat for just two, before we had a modicum of success with the guy that came in next...  Of course, as painful as it was at the time, W.lat probably did us all a big favor by going 1-11, rather than, say, 5-7 or 4-8 in his second year -- no one really questions letting a 1-11 coach go, no matter how quickly it's done.  This year in basketball, we're likely to have at least a .500 season, not a .083 one, so the case against Dawkins isn't quite so clear on its face.  And, of course, Dawkins is Bowlsby's guy, while W.lat wasn't.

Really tough decision, but, for the program's sake, I think it's time. 

And one thing is for sure, if there isn't a change, they will have to start selling lower bowl seats by the six-pack to get anyone to show up next year...



Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - fullmetal - 02-10-2012

Who should Bowlsby be looking at?

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - JeffInCorvallis - 02-10-2012

(02-10-2012, 05:12 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Who should Bowlsby be looking at?

Are there any more Harbaugh brothers?

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - 82lsju - 02-10-2012

(02-10-2012, 09:20 PM)JeffInCorvallis link Wrote:[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=5553.msg40584#msg40584 date=1328919163]
Who should Bowlsby be looking at?

Are there any more Harbaugh brothers?
[/quote]

there is his brother-in-law at Indiana.......

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - pefloresjr - 02-11-2012

I was excited to see the team playing so well early in the season and in the early 12 Pac games.  It gave me hope that there would be continuing improvement and hope for a tourney team this year and a solid tourney team going forward.  The current skid is very disappointing.  I expected this team to have a few bad losses and they've had those, but right now, they are also not showing their potential upside.  I'm at a bit of a loss about what should be done.  I don't expect Bowlsby to replace him this year and I used to think that 5 years is ok to give a coach who seems to have a clue and who is showing improved play and recruiting.  It would take a strong finish for Dawkins to meet that in my mind.  I would wait until the end of the year and re-visit the issue.  If the skid continues, I would dump him. 

Cheers,
Pete F. 

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - Card Fan in OR - 02-12-2012

I voted "No, if he makes the tournament," which I presume means "Yes, if he and the team do not make the (NCAA) Tournament." Don't mean to be overly harsh, and I haven't even seen the team play this year, but, to me, the kiss of death is underachievement. It really seems this year's team has enough talent that they should contend for the league title this year. Nice guy or not, underachievement--chronic underachievement, means it is time to go in another direction.

MM want to come back?? One thing about his teams. They almost never failed to reach full potential, and most of the time seemed to exceed it.

Reserve the right to edit my vote if we manage to lose to the miserable Condoms tonight.

Re: A non-basketball fan asks an obvious question - 76lsjumb - 02-13-2012

(02-11-2012, 10:16 AM)garvin link Wrote:
Quote:While letting Dawkins go now will mean that we had one coach [Trent Johnson] for only four years, followed by another for only three....

This is Dawkins' fourth season as coach.

My bad.  You are, of course, correct.  Given how memorable each of the Dawkins' seasons has been, I just can't fathom how I could have forgotten one entirely...  ::)