What makes Romar a "good man"

PurpleThrobber said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

MelloDawg said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

TheHB said:

If it is realistic to think UW can compete for Pac-12 championships in football every year and have a legitimate shot at a national title at least once a decade, the same is realistic to expect for hoops.

Romar should have been ass-door-out six years ago. There is no winning culture whatsoever and very few are demanding it. The mere fact that there is any kind of argument that Romar should come back next year is the only proof you need that UW is a pussy school when it comes to basketball.

Fuck, WSU expects more out of their hoops program than UW does.

It's Door.Ass.Out.

Agree otherwise

Doog new narrative, parroted from their leader:

We can't hire a successful mid major coach because it's easy to get to the tournament in their current conference. If he comes to the PAC-12, it's more difficult to make the tournament, so why would he come here?

It conveniently eliminates a good portion of candidates

Wayne Fucking Tinkle went from Montana to take Oregon State to the tournament

Except Tinkle was good at Montana.

Romar was a combined 93-88 at Pepperdine and St. Louis. Conference record of 46-44. He never set the world on fire at the mid-major level.

He's not comparing Tinkle to Romar, he's comparing Tinkle to the masses of midmajor corches who would be improvements on Romar.

RoadDawg55 said:

Tequilla said:

So you are claiming UW sucks at hoops because the 3 coaches before Romar were various forms of bad hires that were never head coaches at a D1 or NBA level going forward as indicative that this is a shit program?

Let's not forget that Bender was a rebound away from an Elite 8 appearance and had done a decent job turning the program around until he pissed off the local AAU scene ...

Let's not forget that Romar had strong success by keeping the local talent home and recruiting has never really been the issue.

It's all coaching here ... get the right coach and this program can be very, very strong ...

Nobody is saying that the UW program needs to be better than UCLA or Arizona ... but there's also no reason why this program can't be at a level where it is consistently in position to make the NCAAs ... no reason to say 6 straight years of missing the NCAAs is acceptable

You completely miss the point as usual. We are saying the program sucks because it does. Nobody is saying that it can't be good. Not hard to realize the difference. Good coaches win, bad coaches lose. UW with the right coach will win. What an observation dumb ass.

UW has won 5 conference championship since 1953. You're using Bob Bender as an example of a coach doing a decent job. But how is this a historically weak program?

You are fucktarded as usual ...

Tell me how many PAC schools have conference titles through the 60s and 70s ... that's UCLA territory with the greatest coach in college hoops history. It was also back in the day where only the conference champion made the NCAAs ... one year USC lost only 2 games all year (both to UCLA) and got nothing to show for it.

Bender isn't an example of a great coach you fucktard ... Bender is an example of a guy that had success in this program BEFORE his alienation of the local hoops power brokers came back to bite him in the ass.

On the whole, Nance, Russo, and Bender were shit coaches. Suggesting that the program will always suck because it sucked under them is insanely FS. As was pointed out elsewhere, if Oregon can compete at a high level then why can't Washington?

This idea that Washington will more often than not have a shit program because that's the way it is is so fuckingly doogishly stupid ... the program largely hasn't been prioritized and been an afterthought ... there's not a single other program that I can think of at UW that has been neglected with indifference more than hoops ... look at baseball for example as an indication of how a little focused prioritization can result in a revitalization of a program

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Tequilla said:

So you are claiming UW sucks at hoops because the 3 coaches before Romar were various forms of bad hires that were never head coaches at a D1 or NBA level going forward as indicative that this is a shit program?

Let's not forget that Bender was a rebound away from an Elite 8 appearance and had done a decent job turning the program around until he pissed off the local AAU scene ...

Let's not forget that Romar had strong success by keeping the local talent home and recruiting has never really been the issue.

It's all coaching here ... get the right coach and this program can be very, very strong ...

Nobody is saying that the UW program needs to be better than UCLA or Arizona ... but there's also no reason why this program can't be at a level where it is consistently in position to make the NCAAs ... no reason to say 6 straight years of missing the NCAAs is acceptable

You completely miss the point as usual. We are saying the program sucks because it does. Nobody is saying that it can't be good. Not hard to realize the difference. Good coaches win, bad coaches lose. UW with the right coach will win. What an observation dumb ass.

UW has won 5 conference championship since 1953. You're using Bob Bender as an example of a coach doing a decent job. But how is this a historically weak program?

You are fucktarded as usual ...

Tell me how many PAC schools have conference titles through the 60s and 70s ... that's UCLA territory with the greatest coach in college hoops history. It was also back in the day where only the conference champion made the NCAAs ... one year USC lost only 2 games all year (both to UCLA) and got nothing to show for it.

Bender isn't an example of a great coach you fucktard ... Bender is an example of a guy that had success in this program BEFORE his alienation of the local hoops power brokers came back to bite him in the ass.

On the whole, Nance, Russo, and Bender were shit coaches. Suggesting that the program will always suck because it sucked under them is insanely FS. As was pointed out elsewhere, if Oregon can compete at a high level then why can't Washington?

This idea that Washington will more often than not have a shit program because that's the way it is is so fuckingly doogishly stupid ... the program largely hasn't been prioritized and been an afterthought ... there's not a single other program that I can think of at UW that has been neglected with indifference more than hoops ... look at baseball for example as an indication of how a little focused prioritization can result in a revitalization of a program

No one here is saying any of that.

Chill with the strawmen.

Among other things that have been said is the comment that Washington is historically a bad program. Washington is top 20 all time in total wins in the history of college basketball:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_with_the_most_victories_in_NCAA_Division_I_men's_college_basketball

I've heard versions of the argument that UW sucks at hoops and that is their lot in life for almost 20 years now ... it's a horseshit argument to me. It's not one that was in place when Romar was at the top of his tenure ... it's just a narrative that has come back to explain away why we suck now, how it can't be Romar's fault, and who are we going to hire afterwards ... I'm not saying you are saying that but these are classic doog arguments.

I can't speak to what the budget looks like and what we can afford for whoever the next coach is at UW ... but what I do know is that if we make a strong hire for this position (which we haven't made a strong hire for this job dating back to Harshman) there's no reason to not expect that this program can't be strong.

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

The more research @Tequilla does, the shittier his posts become.

At this point, I'm pretty sure @Tequilla is purpledawgfan

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Tequilla said:

So you are claiming UW sucks at hoops because the 3 coaches before Romar were various forms of bad hires that were never head coaches at a D1 or NBA level going forward as indicative that this is a shit program?

Let's not forget that Bender was a rebound away from an Elite 8 appearance and had done a decent job turning the program around until he pissed off the local AAU scene ...

Let's not forget that Romar had strong success by keeping the local talent home and recruiting has never really been the issue.

It's all coaching here ... get the right coach and this program can be very, very strong ...

Nobody is saying that the UW program needs to be better than UCLA or Arizona ... but there's also no reason why this program can't be at a level where it is consistently in position to make the NCAAs ... no reason to say 6 straight years of missing the NCAAs is acceptable

You completely miss the point as usual. We are saying the program sucks because it does. Nobody is saying that it can't be good. Not hard to realize the difference. Good coaches win, bad coaches lose. UW with the right coach will win. What an observation dumb ass.

UW has won 5 conference championship since 1953. You're using Bob Bender as an example of a coach doing a decent job. But how is this a historically weak program?

You are fucktarded as usual ...

Tell me how many PAC schools have conference titles through the 60s and 70s ... that's UCLA territory with the greatest coach in college hoops history. It was also back in the day where only the conference champion made the NCAAs ... one year USC lost only 2 games all year (both to UCLA) and got nothing to show for it.

Bender isn't an example of a great coach you fucktard ... Bender is an example of a guy that had success in this program BEFORE his alienation of the local hoops power brokers came back to bite him in the ass.

On the whole, Nance, Russo, and Bender were shit coaches. Suggesting that the program will always suck because it sucked under them is insanely FS. As was pointed out elsewhere, if Oregon can compete at a high level then why can't Washington?

This idea that Washington will more often than not have a shit program because that's the way it is is so fuckingly doogishly stupid ... the program largely hasn't been prioritized and been an afterthought ... there's not a single other program that I can think of at UW that has been neglected with indifference more than hoops ... look at baseball for example as an indication of how a little focused prioritization can result in a revitalization of a program

No one here is saying any of that.

Chill with the strawmen.

Among other things that have been said is the comment that Washington is historically a bad program. Washington is top 20 all time in total wins in the history of college basketball:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_teams_with_the_most_victories_in_NCAA_Division_I_men's_college_basketball

I've heard versions of the argument that UW sucks at hoops and that is their lot in life for almost 20 years now ... it's a horseshit argument to me. It's not one that was in place when Romar was at the top of his tenure ... it's just a narrative that has come back to explain away why we suck now, how it can't be Romar's fault, and who are we going to hire afterwards ... I'm not saying you are saying that but these are classic doog arguments.

I can't speak to what the budget looks like and what we can afford for whoever the next coach is at UW ... but what I do know is that if we make a strong hire for this position (which we haven't made a strong hire for this job dating back to Harshman) there's no reason to not expect that this program can't be strong.

What are you talking about? It was absolutely a statement that was in place when Romar was at the top of his powers. That was how his inability to get past the S16 was propped up - "we were never anything before he got here but look now, we're making the tournament and even winning a game or two!" It was around when Bender started winning early on too, for the same reasons. Where have you been?

Nobody gives a fuck about total NCAA wins. Washington hoops is not a historically strong program. We have made the Final 4 once in our history. Less than San Francisco and Butler, the same as Seattle fucking U (and they at least made a title game).

No one cares about the tournaments we could have made if we weren't John Wooden's bitch. We are nobody in the world of college hoops. No one. This doesn't mean we can't have success. There is only one Iron Law of CBB, coaching wins. Hire a great coach and we will be fine. But it's okay to admit that we and basically always have been irrelevant.

Regarding the "doogish response about the state of the program and how it will always suck" referenced in your first paragraph, you're right that the doogs referenced it to prop up Romar's job and explain why we should just be happy with Sweet 16 trips and never aspire to more ... NOBODY was using that to reference an eventual downturn from Romar ... the only other use for it was for when people that know something about basketball would come and point out Romar's deficiencies and then referenced the past as their defense to Romar by saying that we'll never have better than him and therefore FUCK OFF ...

As for total NCAA wins, by and large I agree with you in that nobody per se cares ... the only illustrative point that I'm attempting to make here is that historically UW has won more than their fair share of basketball games ... I'm not suggesting that UW is a blue blood but there's also no reason to not think that UW can't be a 18-20 win team annually and in a position where they are at least in the discussion to be in the NCAA picture ... history suggests that that's realistic. And that's really the point to me ... UW should never bottom out and miss 6+ NCAAs in a row ... we don't have to be an elite program but we should be a program that is at least mid-tier in the PAC and when things break right for us in a position to compete for conference championships and in 2nd weekend discussion of the NCAAs ... if EVERYTHING breaks right for us then perhaps we get to a Final Four ... but that has NEVER been the standard that I've put forth for the program.

Even at the height of Romar's tenure, the primary reason why I would be critical of him was because he never maximized the talent that he had on his team or in the program ... the only year where you could argue they got the maximum out of in the end was the year they got to the Sweet Sixteen as an 11 seed and were blown out by West Virginia.