So are we saying that if Butch gets us to the sec championship game two straight years and can't get us in the playoffs that he should be fired??? That is basically what you guys are saying here. Holly won the sec regular season championship last yr and advanced to the elite 8 and this year won the sec tournament championship and got a #1 seed in the tournament and you guys want her fired?

Look I don"t know if she is the right fit or not but these discussions are stupid right now. Replacing someone like pat was going to be tuff to begin with and she is still trying to do that and it isn't like she has let us slip considerable. Remember what we said about pearl living in Knoxville and that being difficult for Martin? Same can be sad for pat and holly especially since pat still comes to practices and games. Also name someone outside of geno that you would hire??

Does holly need to change some things, yes but geez calling for her firing is premature at best. Also the lady vols still have a schedule of who's who just not uconn. They still play ND every year. Stanford every year and other top programs.

Where did anyone say she should be fired?  The question was more along the lines of should it be in the conversation at all?  And just looking above, I don't think anyone thinks it should.   

BTW, what is it with UT basketball and the city of Milwaukee?  We hired O'Neill from Marquette and Bruce from UWM, and now Marquette may hire CM from us.  Weird.

In fact, it's the only major American city to have elected three socialist mayors...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5FT3IGXtAk

 

Yeah, this was a bad way to end, but she has more time.  I agree that she will never be Pat, but I can see us winning it all with Holly.   I would definitely expect a deeper run next year.

It's pretty cool to have a program where you are disappointed by anything less than the Final Four though.   I just hope that stays true.

Murf,

If Shaka Smart would not go to Marquette, why would he come to Tennessee?  Shaka was asked if interested and offered big money and turned it down.

I can understand why you think it worth pursing, but he will not come IMO.  Does not hurt to ask, but looks like a No answer.

Is Marquette better than Tennessee?  Maybe...they won a NC in the 70s, but that was long ago and kind of a fluke IYAM.

Yes, they have a better tradition than Tennessee, but I am not sure that recent success or recruiting capability is much better. Proximity to Chicago probably does tip the recruiting a bit to Marquette...but it's not like  a huge step up IMO.

Yup.  Not to mention DOOK playing the first round in NORTH CAROLINA, in our bracket no less.

But fizzle them, they lost anyway.   

Ah, Vinnie's putting on the sales pitch.

PM me for Dish...don't trust his glowing recommendation, he just wants the money.   

It's a conspiracy...they know they blew the call in our game and are repeating the mistake to cover their tracks...they all stick together, right?   

I wouldn't say this is our second best season ever.  Maybe if you judge it strictly on the postseason, but I don't think you can just disregard what the 07-08 team did in the regular season.  OOC wins over OSU, WVU, at Xavier, at Gonzaga, and at previously unbeaten and #1 Memphis.  Beat UK and Vandy at home.  Swept UF, including at their place on Senior Day.  First ever #1 ranking.  Went into Selection Sunday with the highest RPI number of all time (it was criminal that they didn't get a 1 seed).  And that team made the Sweet 16 as well.  I think that season and 09-10 have to be considered our two best.  

That's fair enough.  I would agree that some of our high profile wins in 07-08 were pretty impressive.  And our regular season record this year was not that impressive compared to some other years.

So let me modify that to "second best POSTseason ever".     Or maybe third, but definitely one of our most successful postseasons.

I had Direct for over two years and ended up switching.  I switched partially because my contract ran out after two years...and they jacked my rates three times in four months!    It was ridiculous.

Then when I called to complain, they said there was nothing they could do.  It was only when I called to cancel the service that they made a real attempt to keep me, but by then it was too late.   

I guess what you are supposed to do is immediately tell them you are cancelling....my one year contract with Dish just ran out...I need to call them.  Meant to do so a couple weeks ago but I have been simply crushed at work and could not find the time.

But I do think Dish is a bit better than Direct on price...that part I agree with.  OTOH, the replay option on my Dish DVR is not as smooth as the Direct one was.  Sometimes when you hit the "instant 10 second rewind" feature it doesn't go back for some reason and in general the controls don't work as well...it's real easy to fast forward right past something.

But that's something I am willing to tolerate given what I save for Dish vs Direct....it was something like $8-10 per month and I actually got a few more channels with Dish.

Another thing...the ACC, with 6 teams, also has NO ONE LEFT.  Wow...were they really all that better than the SEC?  I dunno.  Top to bottom, sure...but our two top teams and ....ahem...even the number three SEC team could, IMO, at this point in the season compete with ANY ACC team.  Did we ... the third best team in the SEC, not CRUSH their top team in December?  I think we beat Virginia by more than 20 points, in fact.

Counterpoint...the Big 10 DOES impress me...they have three very good teams left, all in the Elite Eight, in MSU, Wisconsin and Michigan.  Michigan won the Big 10 in the regular season, and we were very close to defeating them. 

I think we can agree that Tennessee was seriously under-seeded and IMO Slive needs to address that.  What I suspect is that he cares more about football and is willing trade SEC tourney slots for future considerations of the football committee...which, BTW is coming and I personally don't like it for the very things I cite here and above...it's too subjective IMO.

And finally...I am actually GLAD that we were under-seeded...I am thinking a higher seeding would have actually been a tougher path.  What if were were eighth or ninth, and then had to play a similarly talented team for the "honor" of playing a no. 1 seed?  In a way, there might be an advantage to having to do a playin game to be the 11th seed...or at any rate our particular seeding this year worked to our advantage.

what if the committee hadn't chosen UT for the tourney? It was that close. We wouldn't be having this conversation. Barely the 64th team is not impressive. And like I said they benefited from a charmed bracket is the main reason for winning three games. UMass was way overceded, which they had no control over.. He is not a bad coach just not great.

Right.  And that has more to do with THE COMMITTEE...than anything else.

First, BDV linked something below that apparently suggests that Dayton was actually the last team selected to not have to play a play in game, and they put us in because that particular game was in Dayton.

Second, only three SEC teams made the tourney.  While I completely accept that the SEC, top to bottom, was weak, I DON'T accept that we could not have had another team, or even TWO OTHER TEAMS in.  When I see the SEC having only three teams in while the Big 12 (with only 10 total members!) has SEVEN TEAMS, including a weak Texas team that finished down the stretch 4-6 and was dominated by the same Michigan team we almost beat.  Guess how many Big 12 teams are in the tourney still?  NONE!  Zip, zero, nada, zilch.  Whereas the SEC has two in the Elite Eight, and ALMOST HAD THREE!!!  And the loss was to the (in terms of regular season as a whole) best team in the vaunted Big 10, a team that only lost three conference games, and had a no. 2 seed.  Without the butt kicking by MSU in the Big 10 tourney, U Mich probably would have been seeded no. 1.

So...do you think we DESERVED to be seeded 11th and have to play a play-in game, while Texas...to take only one example...with only a slightly better record was seeded 7th?

I don't think you can read too much into our seeding, other than that the committee, and in fact seemingly everyone, has gone IMO too far in saying how weak the SEC was. It was weak, to be sure...just not THAT WEAK. 

If on the other hand, you are saying that the fact that we were reasonably close to not making the tournament, and combined with Martin's tendency to struggle in the first half or so of the season, means even with talented teams we might struggle to even make the tourney then that is also a concern of mine.

But let's see how that plays the next two years....what if Martin just needed three seasons to get "his system" rolling and it will continue to get better?  That is possible...though I expect us to have a hard time making the tourney next year, but ICBW....

Here ya go.

http://blogs.clarionledger.com/um/2014/03/27/marshall-henderson-breaks-twitter-silence-in-the-most-marshall-henderson-way/?nclick_check=1

LOL!  I am more amused by him than offended.  We can both agree he is an idjut though.   

A couple things I left out...Martin won three tourney games in a row, which actually matches what Pearl did in 2010, the year we made the Elite Eight (and the ONLY time Tennessee has accomplished that).   It's just that Martin had to start a game earlier.  So I would say that this makes this year the SECOND BEST year in Tennessee history, period, dot.  Because it was harder to get to this point.

The other thing is, I give Martin a pass for not making the tourney in 2011-12, as I discuss elsewhere.  As for last year, it can be argued that Martin "should" have made the tourney.  This is a criticism I share with others.  However, I am perhaps not AS CRITICAL as most because I factor in that we played the entire season of 2012-13 without Maymon, our best player in the previous season, and that we were literally considered the "first team out" or really close to it.  So that, without our best player returning, we almost made the tourney in Martin's second year....and while I DEFINITELY think we should have won a couple more games and made the tourney, it's not like we completely suxed or anything.  In fact, I think if Pearl or some other prominent coach had the same resume as Martin last year, the Committee may have let them in on "coach brand recognition" which Cuonzo certainly didn't have last year.

But who knows....I accept that Martin deserves criticism for not making the tourney last year...I just don't find it a reason to want him gone as many seem to.  It was "good enough" that I would be willing to wait for additional evidence...which we now have.

And I am going to be waiting for more....I am not saying that Martin is the coach of the future forever, just that he deserves a couple more years.   Of course, if he leaves, I won't be waiting and neither will you.   

Is that all it takes to be a good coach is make the tourney. I want  coaches that give teams a legitimate shot at a title. I don't think he's that. Barely made the tourney, and got a fortunate seeding to  get to the Sweet 16. I do think they probably beat Duke if Mercer didn't first.

Another way of looking at it is, Pearl made the tourney every year, but in only three of those years did he make the Sweet Sixteen. 

Of the three years he made the tourney, only once did we advance to the Elite Eight.  Of the other two times, we suffered a decisive defeat and a close defeat.

So arguably, in his third year, Martin has matched what Pearl did in his second best year (close defeat in Regional Semifinal of NCAA tourney).  A good question is "did Pearl have more or less talent than Martin?".  I'm not going to address that question here, but does anyone claim this team of Martin is massively more talented than any Pearl had?  I don't think anyone would.

So you can say what you want about our performance this year....it arguably ties the second best year that Tennessee has ever had!   Are you saying that's not good enough?

Further, do you think there is a coach out there who can do better, and if so, who is it?

Pearl was and is an exceptional coach...Martin less so, though I believe he can continue to grow into the job.

But if you truly want him to leave, go find someone else likely to do this well in his first three years, and be sure to factor in the disruption caused by Martin leaving.   If you can identify a coach clearly better than Martin who is willing to come to Tennessee and build us into a national power, then have at it.

And what is very critical to this discussion is....Pearl ain't available any more.   


To some extent, I think people were much more willing to diss Martin as long as they thought Pearl might be waiting in the wings.  Well that is "Nah gonna happen". 

So is there another Pearl out there, and if so who?   If you can answer that with certainty, and be sure he will actually come to Knoxville, AND be willing to wait a year or two for his system and recruits to develop, then I can get on the "Martin needs to go" train with you.  But until you convince me of all of the above, I am going to say I hope Martin stays a couple more years. 

He projects to 36th here:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/draft/prospect-rankings

High second round.

And although it was for football, I found that site to accurately predict all of Tennessee's players last year in the draft, except for the undrafted Bray, who they had as late 4th round. 

I have discussed my views on Martin below and could elaborate a bit more, but I will stick to addressing whether it would be good for Martin to leave us or not.

Let me just sum up my thoughts on Martin (which again I could explain more) by saying that I was like everyone else in doubting his performance, but not to the same extent many did.  And the run at the end of this season has convinced me that he deserves two more years to show that this run was not a fluke. 

So given that this is my view...it would be bad for him to leave at this point in time.  All the players we have coming back are almost entirely his recruits and have grown into his system.  A new coach means ... IMO ... that the rebuilding year will be worse.

Further, my estimation of Martin has gone from "average to below average" to "above average to good".  I still don't think he is "great" and all these terms are subjective, but to the point of this discussion what I am saying is that I think he is likely better than many of the coaches who are currently available...so that if he does leave, the odds of getting a less capable coach are greater than getting an improvement...perhaps much greater.

In summary, I don't want him to leave and think it would be bad...potentially very bad to the program.  I would far rather give him a couple more years....if he can make the tourney next year or come close, and then perhaps have a run like this in two years, then he is about where I want him to be.   

Correction Louisville has recruited well. I think my Louisville friend was referring to Van Trease, Hancock, and Russ Smith. All major contributors.

Yeah but not as well as Kentucky.

Whatever, Callipari will find a way to choke.  He always does, when not in possession of 5 no. 1 draft picks.   

Last I checked he was projected at 40th in the draft....early to mid second round I guess.  I don't know if that's good enough.  He had a great run in the tourney and his stock may have risen.

The fact that he seems to be a spiritually grounded person, IMO means he is more likely to not be impressed by the big money allure of the NBA and make a decision that is legitimately in his best interest as a whole person and not just his financial interest.

So I give him a higher chance of making the decision to stay than say...Tyler Bray, who didn't appear to be spiritual at all, in any way form or fashion (though I stop short of saying that for sure, because who am I to "throw the first stone"?   ).

I think it's more likely he will go than stay, but there is IMO a pretty decent chance he will stay.

Jarnell after the game when asked about NBA draft: "I don't want to go out like that."

Per tweet from Wes Rucker

Hmmm....

I didn't hear the interview, but a friend told me Martin said the play was for Stokes to draw a double-down from Jordan's defender and then kick to him for either a shot or drive.  Maymon was to crash boards from the weak side.

I went back and watched again and it does seem that Stokes is looking at Jordan to get him the ball - and the lane had an opening.  All a coach can do is draw up a play that gets the look for the player(s) he wants. Players gotta make plays.

If this was indeed the plan, it appears to me that the plan was solid.

Agree...that's how it looked in slo mo.


There is criticism on other sites that Stokes got the ball where he got it, probably inspired by the color guy's remark during the game, but in slo mo the plan looks exactly like what you said and IMO was a solid one.

And again, given this teams' occasional struggles, I am glad they got it in to anyone...anyone at all.  

Watch it again (if you want to torture yourself)- he didn't plow into the guy.  He was flopping before Stokes' shoulder even touched him.

I did watch it again.  The thing is, the Michigan player clearly touches Stokes in the chest before he started to dribble...what happened the "touch foul"?  Maybe it would have been questionable also, but...

Also, the double team occurred later than I thought, and it did look like Stokes was trying to pass in slo mo.  In real time it looked like he wanted to drive to the hoop.

Finally, the ball was knocked out of bounds.  The best call there is Tennessee ball out of bounds...second best is a foul on the defender...ref chose the third best option.   

Yeah, pretty much...

LOL...wow...speaks volumes

Actually, now that I think about it, Stokes might have been trying to draw a foul...which makes that call even worse.   

I still feel good about the way the season ended, but I hate that it ended with a questionable call.   

He's not who I thought would be the go to guy.

BUT....there were nine seconds left and he was wide open.  I think he would have been better served to give the ball up instead of driving into a double team...if he is double teamed, someone is open somewhere, and in fact, McRae was in a good spot.

As for the call...bleah, I don't even want to discuss it really.  I thought it was questionable, but Stokes did plow into the guy.   

Whatever...it was a really nice comeback that came up just short.  And I give the team props for fighting back...it would have been so easy to quit.

Good try by the team. They didn't lay down when it got bad.

+1