Dana Altman
However his team is lazy on defense, looks unorganized on offense, doesn't play at all like a team, turnovers, stretches where they just look uninterested.
He isn't as good as some think
Comments
-
I've been trying to tell people this since he got to UO. WAY overrated.
Dude's in his 25th year as a head coach and he's made it to the Sweet16 exactly once. His tournament record is 4-9.
People want to hail him as some great coach, but he's not. If it wasn't for the 5th year transfer rule they'd be ready to run him out of Oregon. Even with it he's just another mediocre coach.
Even if we throw out everything at Creighton and Marshall, he's been a HC at the BCS level for 7+ seasons and has just two NCAA tournament appearances with two NCAA wins - Romar had two appearances and four wins by his third season at UW.
This won't be popular here, but I'd take Romar over him. -
I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pastner with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire. -
A typical basketball team recruits 4-5 guys a season. So teams like Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Kansas, etc. are very careful on who they pick. If a player from Oregon is on their list, they will get him. It's not even a question.Mosster47 said:I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pastner with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire.
The slim number of recruits makes basketball a much more nationally recruited sport, unlike football, where Alabama, Texas, USC, Florida St, etc. can pluck 15-20 guys within 100 miles off campus.
Where football can even itself out, basketball is all about who your top 2-3 guys are. Oregon unfortunately will never be a basketball powerhouse. They don't have the tradition. Basketball is interesting in that the top 10-15 programs hasn't really changed in the last 20 years. -
Altman is making Helfrich look like a geenyus in the plane crashing department.
-
greenblood said:
A typical basketball team recruits 4-5 guys a season. So teams like Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Kansas, etc. are very careful on who they pick. If a player from Oregon is on their list, they will get him. It's not even a question.Mosster47 said:I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pasleft with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire.
The slim number of recruits makes basketball a much more nationally recruited sport, unlike football, where Alabama, Texas, USC, Florida St, etc. can pluck 15-20 guys within 100 miles off campus.
Where football can even itself out, basketball is all about who your top 2-3 guys are. Oregon unfortunately will never be a basketball powerhouse. They don't have the tradition. Basketball is interesting in that the top 10-15 programs hasn't really changed in the last 20 years.
This just isn't true. Arizona has tradition because of Lute Olsen. Duke gets whoever they want because of Coach K. Syracuse is awesome because of Jimmy B. Kentucky sucked cock for a decade before they hired Calipari. UNC is a power because of Dean Smith then they were mediocre until Roy showed up. Bill Self left
A basketball program is almost 100% tied to their success by their current coach. Look at WAZZU. Bennett leaves and they're instantly terrible. Bill Self had the Illini kicking ass, Webber pulls a Larry Coker then crashes the plain, Kansas is instantly elite when Bill shows up. Tom Izzo would dominate anywhere. Pitino could win a championship from an outhouse. Indiana's junk between Knight and Creek isn't an accident. Ohio State forgetting they even had a basketball team until Matta showed up isn't luck.
If you want to be an elite basketball program you have two choices: 1. Hire a great teacher and buy him players (John Wooden). 2. You hire/fire until you get an elite recruiter that can coach a little bit (every other coach ever)
Oregon went expensive on the buildings, cheap on the people. All that gets you is shit in a nice toilet. -
Who is Tom Creek, does he post here?Mosster47 said:greenblood said:
A typical basketball team recruits 4-5 guys a season. So teams like Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Kansas, etc. are very careful on who they pick. If a player from Oregon is on their list, they will get him. It's not even a question.Mosster47 said:I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pasleft with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire.
The slim number of recruits makes basketball a much more nationally recruited sport, unlike football, where Alabama, Texas, USC, Florida St, etc. can pluck 15-20 guys within 100 miles off campus.
Where football can even itself out, basketball is all about who your top 2-3 guys are. Oregon unfortunately will never be a basketball powerhouse. They don't have the tradition. Basketball is interesting in that the top 10-15 programs hasn't really changed in the last 20 years.
This just isn't true. Arizona has tradition because of Lute Olsen. Duke gets whoever they want because of Coach K. Syracuse is awesome because of Jimmy B. Kentucky sucked cock for a decade before they hired Calipari. UNC is a power because of Dean Smith then they were mediocre until Roy showed up. Bill Self left
A basketball program is almost 100% tied to their success by their current coach. Look at WAZZU. Bennett leaves and they're instantly terrible. Bill Self had the Illini kicking ass, Webber pulls a Larry Coker then crashes the plain, Kansas is instantly elite when Bill shows up. Tom Izzo would dominate anywhere. Pitino could win a championship from an outhouse. Indiana's junk between Knight and Creek isn't an accident. Ohio State forgetting they even had a basketball team until Matta showed up isn't luck.
If you want to be an elite basketball program you have two choices: 1. Hire a great teacher and buy him players (John Wooden). 2. You hire/fire until you get an elite recruiter that can coach a little bit (every other coach ever)
Oregon went expensive on the buildings, cheap on the people. All that gets you is shit in a nice toilet. -
The toilets in the Dowlin complex are even nicer, but the shit doesn't stink any less. It makes total since to spend more than $150 million on new complexes and cut corners with coaching hires.Mosster47 said:
Oregon went expensive on the buildings, cheap on the people. All that gets you is shit in a nice toilet.greenblood said:
A typical basketball team recruits 4-5 guys a season. So teams like Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Kansas, etc. are very careful on who they pick. If a player from Oregon is on their list, they will get him. It's not even a question.Mosster47 said:I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pasleft with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire.
The slim number of recruits makes basketball a much more nationally recruited sport, unlike football, where Alabama, Texas, USC, Florida St, etc. can pluck 15-20 guys within 100 miles off campus.
Where football can even itself out, basketball is all about who your top 2-3 guys are. Oregon unfortunately will never be a basketball powerhouse. They don't have the tradition. Basketball is interesting in that the top 10-15 programs hasn't really changed in the last 20 years. -
doogsinparadise said:
Who is Tom Creek, does he post here?Mosster47 said:greenblood said:
A typical basketball team recruits 4-5 guys a season. So teams like Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Kansas, etc. are very careful on who they pick. If a player from Oregon is on their list, they will get him. It's not even a question.Mosster47 said:I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pasleft with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire.
The slim number of recruits makes basketball a much more nationally recruited sport, unlike football, where Alabama, Texas, USC, Florida St, etc. can pluck 15-20 guys within 100 miles off campus.
Where football can even itself out, basketball is all about who your top 2-3 guys are. Oregon unfortunately will never be a basketball powerhouse. They don't have the tradition. Basketball is interesting in that the top 10-15 programs hasn't really changed in the last 20 years.
This just isn't true. Arizona has tradition because of Lute Olsen. Duke gets whoever they want because of Coach K. Syracuse is awesome because of Jimmy B. Kentucky sucked cock for a decade before they hired Calipari. UNC is a power because of Dean Smith then they were mediocre until Roy showed up. Bill Self left
A basketball program is almost 100% tied to their success by their current coach. Look at WAZZU. Bennett leaves and they're instantly terrible. Bill Self had the Illini kicking ass, Webber pulls a Larry Coker then crashes the plain, Kansas is instantly elite when Bill shows up. Tom Izzo would dominate anywhere. Pitino could win a championship from an outhouse. Indiana's junk between Knight and Creek isn't an accident. Ohio State forgetting they even had a basketball team until Matta showed up isn't luck.
If you want to be an elite basketball program you have two choices: 1. Hire a great teacher and buy him players (John Wooden). 2. You hire/fire until you get an elite recruiter that can coach a little bit (every other coach ever)
Oregon went expensive on the buildings, cheap on the people. All that gets you is shit in a nice toilet.
Dude, if we're not all going to learn how to read Auto-Correct then I am fucking out!!!!
-
Lol. Great mobile environment as always, Mods?
-
I like to call him Jimmy B.
-
-
Who will get fired first, Altman or Sling Blade?
-
It will be interesting as Oregon's AD is more into bean counting than winning.HFNY said:Who will get fired first, Altman or Sling Blade?
Altman plays out of a building with a ridiculous amount of yearly bond debt.
Slingblade pays everyone's tab.
If the fans just STFU and pay then neither will have anything to worry about.
-
Marinerization is creeping into the Oregon program.Mosster47 said:
It will be interesting as Oregon's AD is more into bean counting than winning.HFNY said:Who will get fired first, Altman or Sling Blade?
Altman plays out of a building with a ridiculous amount of yearly bond debt.
Slingblade pays everyone's tab.
If the fans just STFU and pay then neither will have anything to worry about.
When did Phil Knight die anyway? -
Best. Oregon. Basketball. Post. Ever.Mosster47 said:greenblood said:
A typical basketball team recruits 4-5 guys a season. So teams like Kentucky, UCLA, Arizona, Duke, Kansas, etc. are very careful on who they pick. If a player from Oregon is on their list, they will get him. It's not even a question.Mosster47 said:I said this initially as well. If you've got 20 plus years in and no one really knows who you are then you're not a great hire.
Duck fans wanted more consistent yearly success than Ernie. Altman was pretty much a guarantee of that, but little else.
It's funny to me that Oregon football is a Top 10 program with almost zero local talent while the basketball program is mediocre with tons of in-state talent. If the AD had any fucking sense it would have just built a normal college level arena and spent the rest on an elite recruiting staff. If Oregon could keep the talent from Oregon home they'd dominate.
They didn't though. They build an arena that looks like a tin foil UFO in the middle of a nature scene with a gimmicky court and make medium level hires and watch all the in-state talent run away. Let's be honest though, the locker room has Jamaican Rosewood floors so team success means very little.
Someone like Josh Pasleft with a bright future who is a tremendous recruiter would have been a much smarter hire.
The slim number of recruits makes basketball a much more nationally recruited sport, unlike football, where Alabama, Texas, USC, Florida St, etc. can pluck 15-20 guys within 100 miles off campus.
Where football can even itself out, basketball is all about who your top 2-3 guys are. Oregon unfortunately will never be a basketball powerhouse. They don't have the tradition. Basketball is interesting in that the top 10-15 programs hasn't really changed in the last 20 years.
This just isn't true. Arizona has tradition because of Lute Olsen. Duke gets whoever they want because of Coach K. Syracuse is awesome because of Jimmy B. Kentucky sucked cock for a decade before they hired Calipari. UNC is a power because of Dean Smith then they were mediocre until Roy showed up. Bill Self left
A basketball program is almost 100% tied to their success by their current coach. Look at WAZZU. Bennett leaves and they're instantly terrible. Bill Self had the Illini kicking ass, Webber pulls a Larry Coker then crashes the plain, Kansas is instantly elite when Bill shows up. Tom Izzo would dominate anywhere. Pitino could win a championship from an outhouse. Indiana's junk between Knight and Creek isn't an accident. Ohio State forgetting they even had a basketball team until Matta showed up isn't luck.
If you want to be an elite basketball program you have two choices: 1. Hire a great teacher and buy him players (John Wooden). 2. You hire/fire until you get an elite recruiter that can coach a little bit (every other coach ever)
Oregon went expensive on the buildings, cheap on the people. All that gets you is shit in a nice toilet. -
I like Altman. He didn't want 10 more years.
-
If only the staff would listen to Mosster, but of course that will never happen. Begin the search for a good coach now.
Can't expect JV players to jell until late in the season. They are accustomed to playing their way and that is what they do. We have a dozen individuals playing as such. That is on the coach big time. He is not doing his job. -
He flat out lost this game. When a team with a pro Wisconsin crowd gains momentum you cannot wait for the media timeout. You have to call a timeout and use the media timeout to slow it down. He allowed rhat run to go way too long. The ducks also had 2 rebounds in their hands at 75-74 Oregon but lost them both due to shifty communication, 2 ducks going after the board at the same time, clearly on the coach. He also left Lloyd in way too long, Lloyd was never going to do shit against such a big team
-
-
Looks like Oregon should have hired Izzo after all.
-
I'll give Altman a W for the year. A Sweet 16 followed by a first round win is good for every Pac-12 program outside of Tucson.
It wasn't the NC run Quooks were predicting after beating up on bad teams early on but it's a successful season overall. If all of the potential recruits get in for next season the expectations should be to get to a round with a cool name.
I would take Altman over Romar, but I could see valid points for both on either side. -
I would take Altman over Romar too. Romar had talent that very few Pac 12 teams have had since. There are very few Brandon Roy's, let alone teams with Brandon Roy, Nate Robinson, and 3-4 other All Conference players. Isaiah, Brockman, and Pondexter on the same team? No conference team has that kind of top 3 this year.Mosster47 said:I'll give Altman a W for the year. A Sweet 16 followed by a first round win is good for every Pac-12 program outside of Tucson.
It wasn't the NC run Quooks were predicting after beating up on bad teams early on but it's a successful season overall. If all of the potential recruits get in for next season the expectations should be to get to a round with a cool name.
I would take Altman over Romar, but I could see valid points for both on either side.
Romar had elite talent. The only argument one could make against that was he didn't have a great big man, but Brockman and MBA were both pretty good, especially Brockman. I think the vast majority of coaches could have achieved what Romar has.
