dereknad wrote:Seems like a decent hire to me. A reputation as a solid X's and O's guy, which Ernie was not. Just wish the UO would have realized what we are as a basketball school long ago and not wasted so much time getting other coaches raises. I think we all need to swallow the bitter pill that Oregon is simply not a destination for a proven, top tier coach, regardless of our affiliations. The humility will do us all a bit of good me thinks.
Oregon has had a competitive basketball program for many years...The last two, not so much...Apparently you either werent around or werent paying attention during the days of the Kamakazee Kids, or more recently with the teams sporting the talents of Alex Scales, Freddie Jones, the two Lukes, etc. No we were not and probably never will be a Duke or UCLA quality powerhouse, but to make a statement of "what we are as a basketball school" is nothing short of rediculous. Man, I surely wouldnt want you havin my back in the trenches...Put your white flag down and dont be negative. We compete, and some years at a very high level. And to think that with our new facilities, our financial successes and backing, that we may not attract the attention of a high level coach is .....well, u fill in the blank....You shoot for the moon and the stars....and maybe, just maybe someday, you will achieve your goals.
To excel, one has to shoot for the moon and the stars, not play around in a wagon all your life....
Since the conference expanded for the 1978-79 season, Oregon’s winning percentage against conference opponents is better than only Washington State’s. That’s also true going clear back to 1916, the first season any of the current members were in the Pacific Coast Conference.http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/si ... etball.csp
The Ducks may be competitive, but history says they are closer to the bottom of the conference than the top.
dereknad wrote:Seems like a decent hire to me. A reputation as a solid X's and O's guy, which Ernie was not. Just wish the UO would have realized what we are as a basketball school long ago and not wasted so much time getting other coaches raises. I think we all need to swallow the bitter pill that Oregon is simply not a destination for a proven, top tier coach, regardless of our affiliations. The humility will do us all a bit of good me thinks.
Oregon has had a competitive basketball program for many years...The last two, not so much...Apparently you either werent around or werent paying attention during the days of the Kamakazee Kids, or more recently with the teams sporting the talents of Alex Scales, Freddie Jones, the two Lukes, etc. No we were not and probably never will be a Duke or UCLA quality powerhouse, but to make a statement of "what we are as a basketball school" is nothing short of rediculous. Man, I surely wouldnt want you havin my back in the trenches...Put your white flag down and dont be negative. We compete, and some years at a very high level. And to think that with our new facilities, our financial successes and backing, that we may not attract the attention of a high level coach is .....well, u fill in the blank....You shoot for the moon and the stars....and maybe, just maybe someday, you will achieve your goals.
To excel, one has to shoot for the moon and the stars, not play around in a wagon all your life....
Since the conference expanded for the 1978-79 season, Oregon’s winning percentage against conference opponents is better than only Washington State’s. That’s also true going clear back to 1916, the first season any of the current members were in the Pacific Coast Conference.http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/si ... etball.csp
The Ducks may be competitive, but history says they are closer to the bottom of the conference than the top.
Same could likely be said about the football program before the 2nd half of Brooks' era + MB And now CK.. I'm curious to see what the ducks football record against conference opponents was before Rich Brooks took over.
During the Kamikaze Kid era, if your team did not win the conference, you did not get the opportunity to participate in March Madness... 16, then, 32 teams received invitations, as the tourney went through the expansion process.
Oregon didn't even get an invitation when they defeated the eventual Conference Champs, UCLA, while finishing a legitimate second in the PAC. The best a non-champion could hope for was the NIT.
Yes, EK had 5 appearances... But the circumstances under which he labored were very different than most previous coaches endured.
Autzen Stadium... Where great teams go to die...Hard!
It depends how you want to define competitive. Under Kent, Oregon had 4 20 win seasons in 13 years. There were only a few horrible seasons, but only a few really good seasons. I think the point is that we probably shouldn't have expected a "big name coach" or "home run hire" to come here. We have been a decent program, but there is a lot of room for improvement.
duckgrad99 wrote:It depends how you want to define competitive. Under Kent, Oregon had 4 20 win seasons in 13 years. There were only a few horrible seasons, but only a few really good seasons. I think the point is that we probably shouldn't have expected a "big name coach" or "home run hire" to come here. We have been a decent program, but there is a lot of room for improvement.
That's sort of why I took the rumors of landing someone like Izzo with a grain of salt. Oregon really has not had any sustained winning in it's history. It lasts for a couple of years and then it takes about another 10 before another spurt happens. A coach like Altman is about what we should have expected from this search.
To have gone to the Dance 8 times in 16 or so years is pretty good, but in the 21 years he's been a head coach he has never made it to the Sweet Sixteen. My problem isn't that he's a mid-major coach. It's that his record, in my opinion, is not "pretty damn impressive". It's good, but I was hoping for a more successful coach. Instead, we got a 52 year old who has never made a real run in the NCAA tourney.
Again, I hate to be negative about this and I really will give him a real chance and I'll keep my mind open. But, of literally every coach who has been mentioned, this is the least exciting choice to me.
His post season record is what troubles me. A record of 2-7 (NCAA) and 3-5 (NIT) is lackluster at best but I don't know where Creighton was seeded in their tourney appearances. Losing all those games as a 15 against a 2 is a lot different than an 8 against a 9. The good news is his style puts fans in the seats, which Oregon desperately needs. He also apparently gets quality kids who graduate.
We should have a pretty good idea how good this hire is in about 3 years.
Something to keep in mind about Creighton is that its a small catholic school. Grade standards are very high which can make recruiting at a smal school like that, that already has money & location issues, next to impossible. His teams never had the talent to make any kind of run in the tourny.
It will be a completely different story at Oregon. Especially if Payne stays, Dana will get talent to come here. And with his coaching prowess he will actually do something with that talent. I think he will be a very successful coach.
Just remember Arizona, a top 10 program, had every bit as hard of a time landing a new coach just 1 year ago. If the people running our search would have looked at that fact, we would have hired Altman 3 weeks earlier.
Plus, the coach Arizona landed was 1-3 (at Xavier) against the coach Oregon is bringing in... And gives big props to Altman's defense for those losses.
Autzen Stadium... Where great teams go to die...Hard!
maxduck wrote:
Since the conference expanded for the 1978-79 season, Oregon’s winning percentage against conference opponents is better than only Washington State’s. That’s also true going clear back to 1916, the first season any of the current members were in the Pacific Coast Conference.http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/si ... etball.csp
The Ducks may be competitive, but history says they are closer to the bottom of the conference than the top.
Same could likely be said about the football program before the 2nd half of Brooks' era + MB And now CK.. I'm curious to see what the ducks football record against conference opponents was before Rich Brooks took over.
Not exactly accurate. Oregon under Casanova was very competitive (Rose Bowl, Sun Bowl), especially when you consider the lack of resources and facilities. Same could be said about Jerry Frei, whose downfall was not being able to beat OSU. They were upper division more often than not. It was the dark ages under Dick Enright and Don Reed that everybody remembers.
past records dont matter at this point. Ernie is gone. Dana Altman is the
coach. He's 0-0 as the duck coach. He just upgraded to a bigger conference.
The pressure for him to win pretty darn soon is there. Not the same kinda
pressure he felt at Creighton. The talent level will be a notch above. He's
a midwest guy, doesn't know the west coast as well im sure. He doesn't
know the rivalry between us and the bark rats. Most likely he hasnt been
in a pack ten building. That being said tho, he has the system that i
think will be exciting to watch, presses for 40 minutes, actually has a
half court offense and gets up and down the court, shoots threes.
They say he is a excellent recruiter. Works on relationships with high school coaches and AAU'S. Im all for giving him a chance. Now Jamie Dixson was my first choice. id would have love to have Anderson or Turgeon. Stevens would have been awsome. But they wont come here until oregon becomes a constant winner. I think Altman will do just fine. Let's not get on him before he's even set foot on out court. If he doesnt turn this around the u of o will take care of that.
woundedknees wrote:I read earlier today that Turgeon has a losing record against Altman's teams. Take it for what it's worth.
Also 3-1 against Arizona's Sean Miller. His record against Turgeon wasn't even close, Dana pretty much owned him. When you see multiple quotes from coaches & other basketball people that talk about this guy being "one of the best coaches they've coached against", "One of the smartest coaches out there" etc, etc, thats very promising. Fans & media can say all they want but it really means nothing. When that kind of praise is coming from experienced people in the baskteball world, it holds a lot of weight.
woundedknees wrote:I read earlier today that Turgeon has a losing record against Altman's teams. Take it for what it's worth.
Also 3-1 against Arizona's Sean Miller. His record against Turgeon wasn't even close, Dana pretty much owned him. When you see multiple quotes from coaches & other basketball people that talk about this guy being "one of the best coaches they've coached against", "One of the smartest coaches out there" etc, etc, thats very promising. Fans & media can say all they want but it really means nothing. When that kind of praise is coming from experienced people in the baskteball world, it holds a lot of weight.
I like that we have a coach that others really respect for his coaching and not just his supposed recruiting prowess.
When you really start digging, it becomes really intriguing to anticipate what Altman can do with the type of talent he may be able to lure to Oregon. More than one coach has commented that they exoect him to do really well here.
Hope they are right!
Autzen Stadium... Where great teams go to die...Hard!
woundedknees wrote:When you really start digging, it becomes really intriguing to anticipate what Altman can do with the type of talent he may be able to lure to Oregon. More than one coach has commented that they exoect him to do really well here.
Hope they are right!
I think that he can succeed here with the better talent that he can recruit here versus at Creighton. While his teams at Creighton were good, he tended to start off with players who needed a lot more work to compete against the major schools of college basketball.
