I've changed my mind about

[Unimane]

Lmao so now we discredit Martin's tourney win because of the team he drew? Are you shi**ing me?

So let me guess, if Mercer beats Duke and we beat UMASS and Mercer to make the sweet 16, you'll discredit that too?

I'll be happy as a fan, but I sure as hell won't pretend that it's more than what it really is as you have. You've spent the whole year carrying water for a coach who's coached down a Sweet 16 level talented crew with the idea that simply making the tournament is some kind of accomplishment.

Still, making it to the Sweet 16 under those circumstances still doesn't change the basic deficiencies of Martin. It isn't like I'm wavering in the wind like most on this site who can't form an opinion based upon anything more than the last two to three games. The fact that Martin struggles in some basic game management components is not a new criticism from me.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

It sounded a little more grandiose in your previous post. I know he got the $50,000 for making the tourney. That's not very much money in the grand scheme of things.

I think if he gets past UMass, certainly if he were to get past Duke, he might get a substantial extension. As it stands, 2 years...is that what you are thinking?

I think the raise depends largely on how far he gets and if their are other suitors or complications...if you know what I mean.

The size of the raise and length of the extension obviously depends on how the rest of the season plays out. However, I think at a minimum you see a 2 year extension and probably minimum $300k raise.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I'll be happy as a fan, but I sure as hell won't pretend that it's more than what it really is as you have. You've spent the whole year carrying water for a coach who's coached down a Sweet 16 level talented crew with the idea that simply making the tournament is some kind of accomplishment.

Still, making it to the Sweet 16 under those circumstances still doesn't change the basic deficiencies of Martin. It isn't like I'm wavering in the wind like most on this site who can't form an opinion based upon anything more than the last two to three games. The fact that Martin struggles in some basic game management components is not a new criticism from me.

I mean kudos to sticking to your guns, I just think it's foolish. All I heard was how good a coach Fran is and how he would likely coach circles around Zo, what happened?

If he makes the Sweet 16 he's doing something right, I don't think you just luck into a sweet 16.

 

[Unimane]

It sounded a little more grandiose in your previous post. I know he got the $50,000 for making the tourney. That's not very much money in the grand scheme of things.

I think if he gets past UMass, certainly if he were to get past Duke, he might get a substantial extension. As it stands, 2 years...is that what you are thinking?

I think the raise depends largely on how far he gets and if their are other suitors or complications...if you know what I mean.

If he gets past Duke, even I will be fine with an extra three years, even knowing they won't be anything special. Beating Duke would be that satisfying.

 

[vol66]

The size of the raise and length of the extension obviously depends on how the rest of the season plays out. However, I think at a minimum you see a 2 year extension and probably minimum $300k raise.

That's in line with what I was thinking.

 

[vol66]

If he gets past Duke, even I will be fine with an extra three years, even knowing they won't be anything special. Beating Duke would be that satisfying.

I can respect that.

 

[Unimane]

I mean kudos to sticking to your guns, I just think it's foolish. All I heard was how good a coach Fran is and how he would likely coach circles around Zo, what happened?

If he makes the Sweet 16 he's doing something right, I don't think you just luck into a sweet 16.

And, I think you're position is naïve and I have much more ammo on my side. And, yes, you can get a very fortunate draw to reach the Sweet 16. Happens every year. If we get Mercer instead of Duke, then, yes, that's very lucky.

And, I never claimed anything about Fran. In fact, I had UT in the second round losing to Duke in my own brackets. Iowa stunk to high heaven down the stretch.

 

[zjcvols]

I'd rather be 100% sure on what a coach'a ceiling is before I make a huge commitment (I don't find two years added on while making 700K extra a year to be a big commitment) or I fire him.

Do I think Martin's the answer? No. If Hart fired him I completely get it. However, I am not 100% confident in my assessment in that. I'm about 75% sure.

I'd rather give Martin one more year to be 100% sure I know what I got, especially since he's at least decent enough to get you a winning record and a decent recruiting class at the minimum, plus the fact he's not getting huge bucks.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

And, I think you're position is naïve and I have much more ammo on my side. And, yes, you can get a very fortunate draw to reach the Sweet 16. Happens every year. If we get Mercer instead of Duke, then, yes, that's very lucky.

And, I never claimed anything about Fran. In fact, I had UT in the second round losing to Duke in my own brackets. Iowa stunk to high heaven down the stretch.

I wasn't saying you specifically, was just talking about what people were saying on this board.

 

[zjcvols]

And, I think you're position is naïve and I have much more ammo on my side. And, yes, you can get a very fortunate draw to reach the Sweet 16. Happens every year. If we get Mercer instead of Duke, then, yes, that's very lucky.

And, I never claimed anything about Fran. In fact, I had UT in the second round losing to Duke in my own brackets. Iowa stunk to high heaven down the stretch.

I don't completely disagree with your assessment but that was UT's game the last 35 minutes.

That game doesn't change my overall assessment in Martin but what I saw yesterday was a little encouraging. When it was 16-4, I thought there was almost no chance. They were resilient, Martin called a good game, and UT fought back.

 

[lostsheep]

Gene Keady preferred to get the ball into his best players hand and let him play basketball. That's where Martin gets it from. Purdue fans would kill Keady when he wouldn't call a time out, but I think calling or letting a team play is probably a push in terms of results. Think of it this way, with MacRae holding the ball and going 1 on 1, the worse thing that could happen is O.T. Calling the T.O. and having to inbounds the ball could have caused an issue.

Last night you had the ball in the right guys hands. If you call a T.O. you can't guarantee he's going to get it back. I'm not sure you're going to get much better than MacRae going 1 on 1 and attacking from the top of the key. He just didn't hit the shot.

Don't know about Keady's teams, but Freak is right about CBP also doing the same thing in similar situations.

Obviously I'm not a coach, and those guys have forgotten more basketball than I'll ever know. It just makes sense to me to call timeout in that situation and draw up a play for either McRae or Stokes, rather than dribble out the clock and then going one-on-one. Obviously, one could argue both sides effectively.

Either way...I'm hoping if we were down one last night in that situation, rather than tied, that we would've had something better drawn up. This place would be in full-blown meltdown mode if that possession would've led to a loss, instead of OT.

 

[Unimane]

I wasn't saying you specifically, was just talking about what people were saying on this board.

Fair enough.

 

[drewtigeralum]

Don't know about Keady's teams, but Freak is right about CBP also doing the same thing in similar situations.

Obviously I'm not a coach, and those guys have forgotten more basketball than I'll ever know. It just makes sense to me to call timeout in that situation and draw up a play for either McRae or Stokes, rather than dribble out the clock and then going one-on-one. Obviously, one could argue both sides effectively.

Either way...I'm hoping if we were down one last night in that situation, rather than tied, that we would've had something better drawn up. This place would be in full-blown meltdown mode if that possession would've led to a loss, instead of OT.

I think if you get the ball into your senior play makers hands, you shouldn't call a time out. If they hadn't been able to get it to MacRae, he would have probably called one.
Any drawn up play was going to go to MacRae anyway, so why worry about having to get the ball in bounds. If U.T. called a T.O. at that point, how many T.O's did U.T. have left? Iowa would have put their giant 7'2 player on the ball and made it difficult to get the ball in. I'm not sure how many T.O's were left, but if it were 1 or 0, no way you risk a turnover.

 

[Unimane]

Don't know about Keady's teams, but Freak is right about CBP also doing the same thing in similar situations.

Obviously I'm not a coach, and those guys have forgotten more basketball than I'll ever know. It just makes sense to me to call timeout in that situation and draw up a play for either McRae or Stokes, rather than dribble out the clock and then going one-on-one. Obviously, one could argue both sides effectively.

Either way...I'm hoping if we were down one last night in that situation, rather than tied, that we would've had something better drawn up. This place would be in full-blown meltdown mode if that possession would've led to a loss, instead of OT.

For as much as I criticize Martin, I 100% believe in not calling the TO there. It's far easier to get a good shot without calling one as it's easier to create a disruptive defense out of a TO than to have some magical game winning play called. It's easier to get mismatches, defensive break downs, avoid the coach switching a defense, etc. by not calling a TO. I only think you call a TO if the offense is out of whack or you aren't able to get the ball in the right person's hands.

 

[zjcvols]

For as much as I criticize Martin, I 100% believe in not calling the TO there. It's far easier to get a good shot without calling one as it's easier to create a disruptive defense out of a TO than to have some magical game winning play called. It's easier to get mismatches, defensive break downs, avoid the coach switching a defense, etc. by not calling a TO. I only think you call a TO if the offense is out of whack or you aren't able to get the ball in the right person's hands.

Not only that but you:

1) Save the timeout for OT because you can't lose.

2) Have a better chance to grab an offensive rebound because they don't have proper rotation/box out assignments.

 

[lostsheep]

I think if you get the ball into your senior play makers hands, you shouldn't call a time out. If they hadn't been able to get it to MacRae, he would have probably called one.
Any drawn up play was going to go to MacRae anyway, so why worry about having to get the ball in bounds. If U.T. called a T.O. at that point, how many T.O's did they have left. Iowa would have put their giant 7'2 player on the ball and made it difficult to get the ball in. I'm not sure how many T.O's were left, but if it were 1 or 0, no way you risk a turnover.

True.

Like I said, it can be argued effectively either way. If you call the TO and then turn it over on the inbounds play, then you're going to have everyone asking why in he!! you called a TO and allowed the defense to set up.

 

[zjcvols]

My philosophy in one possession games:

1) Down with more than ten seconds, call TO.

2) Down with between 7-9 seconds, depends on who has the ball.

3) Down with less than seven seconds, no timeout.

4) Tie game with no shot clock, save the TO and run the clock down. Get a shot with less than five seconds.

Also, I think CCM only had one TO. We had trouble getting the ball in all night against their length. You don't want to inbound the ball with zero TO's.

 

[indian rick]

Hey Vols fans; I have a novel idea passed down to me from my mama.
If you can't say anything good don't say anything at all. So, either cheer the basketball team on or be quiet and start wearing Auburn Orange

 

[Lefteye]

Hey Vols fans; I have a novel idea passed down to me from my mama.
If you can't say anything good don't say anything at all. So, either cheer the basketball team on or be quiet and start wearing Auburn Orange

My mama said alligators are angry cause they got all them teeth and no tooth brush.

 

[SmokinBob]

I too have not been pleased with the team or how CCM coaches them. I am rethinking this as well. Win or lose tomorrow, I think that CCM is trying to do it right.....the old fashioned way. That means there are no giant "media darling" splashes. It is a longer road, but the foundation will be sound. Recruiting concerns me because of what he has and, also, what he can pull without being a "sizzle" guy. However, the bottom line is that I totally respect the man's character and plan. This is hard for me to say, but if I remove my own knee-jerk emotions and look at this from 30,000 feet I am convinced that he is on the right path. Now, let me watch them kick the teeth of UMass in!!!

Well said.:hi:

 

[vol66]

I'd rather be 100% sure on what a coach'a ceiling is before I make a huge commitment (I don't find two years added on while making 700K extra a year to be a big commitment) or I fire him.

Do I think Martin's the answer? No. If Hart fired him I completely get it. However, I am not 100% confident in my assessment in that. I'm about 75% sure.

I'd rather give Martin one more year to be 100% sure I know what I got, especially since he's at least decent enough to get you a winning record and a decent recruiting class at the minimum, plus the fact he's not getting huge bucks.

I like this post, or I will, go back click the button and like it in a minute.

That's fair.

Seeing the upside in a young, inexperienced coach is a huge factor in THIS particular situation and it's somewhat made more complex because Martin is following Pearl.

As it stands we aren't paying this guy big bucks. There are vastly more experienced coaches, getting paid more money and they aren't in the dance.

He's not Mr. Charisma, though he seems to have the respect of his players. They could have quit on him, they didn't.

My position around the time of the Vandy loss, was if we don't make the tourney, I thought it would be fair of people to say he should be fired, though I personally didn't think he should be, I could at least see that people don't see an upside. Well... he did make the tourney.

Which leaves you at this. If you don't make a move to keep him now...do the other guys like Pitino Jr., the guy from La. Tech ,who all have similar experience, are they going to do any better? Martin has already stood toe to toe with Billy Donovan and Calipari and Stallings...what makes anyone think those other guys will be better?

Sure, there are guys out there like Howland, he's got some risk, but the real issue is... is UT going to pay a guy like that as much as we pay our football coach? Because... that's probably what it would take.

 

[zjcvols]

I like this post, or I will, go back click the button and like it in a minute.

That's fair.

Seeing the upside in a young, inexperienced coach is a huge factor in THIS particular situation and it's somewhat made more complex because Martin is following Pearl.

As it stands we aren't paying this guy big bucks. There are vastly more experienced coaches, getting paid more money and they aren't in the dance.

He's not Mr. Charisma, though he seems to have the respect of his players. They could have quit on him, they didn't.

My position around the time of the Vandy loss, was if we don't make the tourney, I thought it would be fair of people to say he should be fired, though I personally didn't think he should be, I could at least see that people don't see an upside. Well... he did make the tourney.

Which leaves you at this. If you don't make a move to keep him now...do the other guys like Pitino Jr., the guy from La. Tech ,who all have similar experience, are they going to do any better? Martin has already stood toe to toe with Billy Donovan and Calipari and Stallings...what makes anyone think those other guys will be better?

Sure, there are guys out there like Howland, he's got some risk, but the real issue is... is UT going to pay a guy like that as much as we pay our football coach. Because... that's probably what it would take.

Your last paragraph says it all. If I was the AD, I would fire Martin give Howland a $20M contract and call it day. But I have no control or backdoor idea on UT athletics.

If we are going to just pay $2M a year, you might as well keep the guy who's had a top four SEC program and averages 20 wins a year. The probability of you getting better than that for $2M a year is highly doubtful.

 

[Unimane]

Hey Vols fans; I have a novel idea passed down to me from my mama.
If you can't say anything good don't say anything at all. So, either cheer the basketball team on or be quiet and start wearing Auburn Orange

What if I don't have something nice to say about Auburn?

 

[YankeeVol]

I'm sure you'll be singing a different tune if we lose to UMass

 

[bleedingTNorange]

Your last paragraph says it all. If I was the AD, I would fire Martin give Howland a $20M contract and call it day. But I have no control or backdoor idea on UT athletics.

If we are going to just pay $2M a year, you might as well keep the guy who's had a top four SEC program and averages 20 wins a year. The probability of you getting better than that for $2M a year is highly doubtful.

Well said