As long as we're doing post-mortems on former coaches, how many Sweet 16s has Iowa been to since Dr. Tom Davis was kicked to the curb?
Fred....
- Thread starter Devo8323
- Start date
But we have not ALWAYS sucked. The 21st century has not been good, and that's now into its 22nd (or 23rd, depending on how you count) year. But we were never a consistent last-place finisher, and through the Cipriano, Iba and Nee years, we were a top-division Big 8/XII program that nearly always finished above .500 and sent players to the NBA.
Collier's and Doc's inability to recruit set us down this road, and though Miles brought us a few more smiles in his seven years, the trajectory was not good.
Fred, however, is historically awful. The only comparison is his grandfather, but Bush's overall winning percent (.320) dwarfs Hoiberg's (.250).
We haven't ALWAYS been bad. That's a canard.
Hey, Cip and Iba also had good teams nearly every year. Cip's problem was the size of the NCAA Tournament (one Big 8 team in the '60s and early '70s — usually KU — made the dance). He and Moe would have had a few more chances to win a tournament game had there been a 64-team dance before 1986.
Fred’s Grandfather was here for 10 years to achieve .320…
When Cip took over only 22 teams made the tournament and like you said the conference champ made the tournament and his Nebraska team went 20-5 and split with KU during the season in 65-66..Remember watching games, they would have 2 conference games on local TV on Saturday’s…
From the 1965-66 season (Cip's third) through the 1998-99 season (Nee's next-to-last), Nebraska finished under .500 in conference play only eight of 34 seasons, and finished at .500 11 times. That's a pretty good program, especially at a football school in those days.
So in a 34-year span, conference records:
In the first three seasons of the Big XII, we finished fourth, sixth and seventh. Even the year that got Nee fired (1999-2000), we were eighth in the 12-team league.
To make any argument that Fred Hoiberg should be around for another year even after completely throwing this program in the gutter is ignoring what this program is capable of and has demonstrated in the past.
So in a 34-year span, conference records:
- Above .500 15 times
- At .500 11 times
- Below .500 8 times
- First — 0 (Screw KU)
- Second — 2 (And Mizzou)
- Third — 9
- Fourth — 8
- Fifth — 4
- Sixth — 2
- Seventh — 6
- Eighth — 0
In the first three seasons of the Big XII, we finished fourth, sixth and seventh. Even the year that got Nee fired (1999-2000), we were eighth in the 12-team league.
To make any argument that Fred Hoiberg should be around for another year even after completely throwing this program in the gutter is ignoring what this program is capable of and has demonstrated in the past.
Last edited:
And the CU games from Balch Fieldhouse continued to be in black-and-white even after the switch to color television because the lighting was so bad there. Balch is still a pit.
The difference between Bush and Hoiberg — feel-good upsets.
Fred beats only bad teams, but he doesn't always beat bad teams. He never beats mediocre teams and almost always gets blown out by any team with a pulse.
If Trev says he can handle losing as long as the team is competitive, then he needs to be a man of his word and get rid of this non-competitive regime. If nothing else in basketball, we've always been competitive — until the last three years.
Where did I stand up and gloat about Iowa basketball? In a thread today even said it's not a priority at Iowa. At least there's one school I know of, Nebraska, we've had lots more success than since Dr. Tom-- but that would be unfair comparing to something that's been that aweful.
It is kind of comical watching some on here actually trying to prove that Nebraska's basketball program really hasn't been all that bad over the decades. For sure, Fred has brought it to new lows and if he keeps it up he should be fired at some point. I would wait to fire him until we know more about the financial stability of the football side of things because Nebraska basketball really has been pretty damn bad most of the time anyway. All of the time? No. But we have never had a "really, really, good basketball team" in my lifetime. We have only had, now and then, some "good teams." And we have certainly never had a great team. Not ever. Not once. Are we the only P5 program without a win in the Big Dance? Probably. In the past 75 years how many conference titles and/or conference tournaments has our basketball team won? How many guys have gone on to have successful pro basketball careers?
Come on folks... I get that there is no need to inflate how historically sucky our basketball program has been. But we have sucked. A lot. For a long time.
Come on folks... I get that there is no need to inflate how historically sucky our basketball program has been. But we have sucked. A lot. For a long time.
We need a real program builder. The lack of continuity and camaraderie is killing us. Tim Miles was the wrong guy. No elite players wanted to come play for his goofy ***. Now we have an NBA guy that is brining in too many "me first" hero ball transfers, and it isnt working. Every season under Fred, the main scoring player on the team seems to be a new guy that bucks the system, and stunts any potential growth. Cam Mack, Teddy Allen, at time Alonzo Verge. For Fred to make this **** work, he needs an elite coaching staff that matches the ambitions. I am sorry, but Doc and Matt are not elite. I get it, Matt A is a used car salesman in the transfer market, but it is always guys that have zero leadership. Fred needs to make some good hires this offseason, or it will go this way again. Even if he brings in another round of promising transfers.
For 22 years, we've been mostly bad. But we weren't for most of my life. We were average to better than average, and as you noted, never great. Never. But finishing at .500 or better in conference for 26 of 34 years between 1965-1999 is not bad. It is good.
But if you choose to be humored by my posts — complete with data to prove my point — please consider me your clown.
Last edited:
Do you believe we sucked through all of these eras because of some unavoidable force that has followed us through time? Or is it more like we have never had a competent person hire a basketball coach with the intent on spending some coin to get this **** fixed? Fred is turning out to be more of a managerial mind than a player developer. It's hard to tell when there aren't any kids here that he was built up from a freshman. Our past failures are not the stumbling block.
Depends on your standards. I have only been paying attention to it since Sadler. We have spun our wheels since. We have joined a conference of killers since. We have built a palace for our program since. Time to raise expectations a little bit. We stepped up to the plate with Hoiberg and it isn't working. We dont need to win the damn tourney, but we are an easy win for everybody. That is unacceptable for any program here.
Agreed.
If your only frame of reference is this century, then by-and-large, we have almost always been below average to bad. Fred has made us horrible. He can't continue as head coach.
My frame goes back to the late 1960s, so I remember hard-nosed teams that usually finished in the upper-half of the Big 8. That ended with Collier.
But Cip, Moe and Danny all would punch you in the nose if you said Nebraska has always sucked in men's basketball. And most fans remember at least one of them, if not all.
Last edited:
I'm too young to speak on Cipriano, but while Iba and Nee both definitely had their shortcomings, you could at least pretty clearly zero in on what their strengths were as a coach. Most of the coaches since then its been a struggle to find consistent positives. I think it was Byrne who tried to woo Bill Self and offered a pretty big salary at the time. That could have been the watershed moment for NU hoops if he had bit.
I think that team of Cip's in 65-66 was probably the best Husker basketball team in the school's history. It was KU's team with JoJo White that barely edged them to win the Big 8 title and go to the tournament. That Husker team would have had a good chance of winning a NCAA Tournament game with the current field of 64-66. With players like Stu Lantz, Nate Branch, Willie Campbell, Tom Baack, etc. they were really fun to watch. And talented.
I guess I don't understand your gripe. We weren't always the worst? I mean, I guess. Having a hardnosed team in the 60's doesn't mean **** today. And I don't mean that in a snarky way. This basketball program hasn't been building rosters, let alone program tradition, or raising expectations for the last 25 years. That is what matters. We are seeing the effects of the last 20 some years, not drawing from the hardnosed tradition of the 60s. Those guys fielded good teams, but that was their ceiling. They couldn't get it done either.
I'm not phrasing it "we weren't always the worst." "We were usually average to above-average" is not the same as "we weren't always the worst."
Otherwise, you are correct.
The team that won the NIT was pretty damn good. I would consider that to be the best team in the history of Nebraska basketball.
No, Nee 1991 team that was a 3 seed has been the school’s best basketball team..
@Pennsyhusker is correct in that our peak success in basketball (1965-1999) was nowhere near as good as most other power programs, so we are historically bad in that respect.
But that 34-year stretch — which coincides with most of the first half of my life — was actually pretty decent considering that we usually finished at .500 or better in a very good conference.
Bottom line: we used to live in the main quarters; Collier and Doc moved us to the basement; Hoiberg has put us in a crawlspace. We need to find someone who can get us out of the crawlspace. Now.
But that 34-year stretch — which coincides with most of the first half of my life — was actually pretty decent considering that we usually finished at .500 or better in a very good conference.
Bottom line: we used to live in the main quarters; Collier and Doc moved us to the basement; Hoiberg has put us in a crawlspace. We need to find someone who can get us out of the crawlspace. Now.
Nick Saban is already 70.
Jim Boeheim will soon be 78.
Pitino has lots of gas in the tank yet.
Basketball has radically changed in the last 50 years. If you have to go back more than a couple decades in order to bolster your argument you're probably digging a hole.
Some mediocre Doc teams at least won games vs ranked opponents and were generally competitive all of the time. Had some big wins vs a Michael Beasley k state team and against a top 10 Texas team iirc.
That team was good too. However, I think the team that won the NIT had more individual talent. That team was loaded with talent.
Problem was, Doc's teams lost a lot of games to teams they had no business losing to.
The 91 team had size and length unlike anything I can remember at NU. They could roll out a front line of:
Dapreis Owens - 6'8
Tony Farmer - 6'9
Carl Hayes - 6'8
Rich King - 7'2
Beau Reid - 6'8
Bruce Chubick - 6'7
Now that was a line-up that could compete in the BG10. Clifford Scales was more than a capable PG and shot 46% from 3 pt range. Plus you had Piatkowski coming off the bench as a freshman to keep to help keep teams from collapsing. I know the '95 team had Strickland, Boone, Moore, Hamilton, and Lue, but I would take '91.
Tim was Miles better than Hoiberg. In 2017-18, we went 22-11 overall, 13-5 in conference (Tied for 4th place in Big Ten). It was not the only time under Miles that we finished 4th place in the conference. He did it twice in his 7 years here. I'd take being 10th-12th most years, with a 4th place finish here and there over this. Does anyone here reasonably think Hoiberg will finish anywhere but 14th (dead last) in the conference?
I think it's time to start the official Fire Fred Thread. On a side note, no to Pitino. He's a great coach and all, but it would all but guarantee his son would be our coach in like 3 to 5 years, and ask any Minnesota fan, you don't want that.
I think it's time to start the official Fire Fred Thread. On a side note, no to Pitino. He's a great coach and all, but it would all but guarantee his son would be our coach in like 3 to 5 years, and ask any Minnesota fan, you don't want that.
Where did I say he was? Even if he was interested (which he's not), that's a hard pass.