OLD BUC- My post was about whether Bartow was a good coach. My points are made about how the team has played during his entire tenue at ETSU, not his first season (when he inherited the best team in the SoCon) and not last season (when his team struggled to beat the worst teams in the A-SUCK). I certaintly said nothing to demean any individual players performance. My points were about team performance.

I said nothing about recruiting seven footers, in fact in an earlier post, I specificially said " I would be very happy if ETSU could recruit good 6'7 - 6'8 players.

What is your point that we have had helluva guards and numerous p.o.y and why go after slow bigs that can't keep up with the pace because it all about winning the league? If you think these points are correct, then why do you disagree with my points? Bartow has not won the A-SUCK or gone to the NCAA tournament with his players.

So, what are you saying? What is your reason or reasons that the ETSU has not gone to the NCAA tournament? Is it the players lack of abilities or the poor coaching of Bartow? Either way its still Bartows fault.

Being in the A-Sun has put Bartow (or any coach in the position at ETSU) in a bad situation. He can't recruit the players he needs for the system he wants to play, he is forced to try to sign the best players he can then HOPE to be able to come up with some system in which they can play. That's a tough roe to hoe.

Face it folks, recruiting for a low major is T-O-U-G-H

College basketball is all about recruiting.

My opinions and I'm sticking to 'em.

What system? That is my point, he doesn't have any system here and he didn't have one a UAB.

PosterKnownAsTheDoctor-

If we "let our own words speak for themselves," it is totally illogical to assume that if you feel-

posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:

Quote:I must say I am surprised with all the He is a okay bench coach votes so far. I guess I am the only one who remembers all the blown halftime and later leads. The way Bird[sic] and others out coach him on a regular basis. The awful showings we had in the A-Sun tournament in our gym. The lack of defense exp againist the 3pter, how many players have had career games againist us? The fact we have no offense sets in the half court. I gotta say your definition of "okay" and mine is miles apart.

I gotta agree with shaw here again. Do you posters have that short a memory? I won't go into a full litany of his sins, other than to remind you all about how he REFUSED to clamp down on Tim Smith when he was trying to go 1-on-4 over and over again. ("Timmy's my man.") And to remind you all that he most likely ran Jackson off by not playing him. I detailed how in Asheville, he tried to put Jackson in with about 4 minutes left in the game, but the clock just kept running, and he wouldn't call a time out or anything to let him get in. Jackson had this look of disgust on his face - as did I. Also, either he and/or Lee Morrow must take some of the blame for Nuckles being hurt because they made the decision to try and pack too much weight on him. We don't know what happened with Twilley, but we *do* know he really didn't let Tirade have a chance after Eddie D. left. As discussed on here previously, the number of defections has been higher than normal attrition. But, as far as being a bench coach, the blowing of literally countless LARGE leads, habitually, shows he's getting out-coached almost every game. We're still waiting on an inbounds play. We're still waiting on offensive sets. We're still waiting on someone since Oatman who could make an entry pass (Oatman's greatest asset). We'll ALWAYS be waiting on transition defense, it seems. The debacle in the ASun tournament in 2006 when nobody defended the inbounds pass, despite Smith's frantic attempts to do something about it, resulting in yet one more of those examples of salvaging a loss from an almost sure win. (See link for this story at the bottom in case you all have forgotten.) Look at how successful the 1-3-1 trap was with Eddie D., and contrast that to it's much inferior effectiveness under Murry. Look at how long it took him to wake up this last season to how much of an asset Hamlin was. I think we win about 2 or 3 more games during the season if he had allowed Hamlin some more PT earlier. I think in general his substitution pattern leaves a lot to be desired, and he said so himself in an interview last year. (We've gotta find a way to get more playing time for these guys....") I think that's a lot of what drives players to leave. Yes, I could go on and on. But the bottom line is he has repeatedly found ways to lose games that were well in hand, and *almost* lost others that were salvaged at the last minute. With the superior talent ETSU has had since his arrival, they should have won the league every year. NOBODY has argued, not even the other team's coaches, that we've had the best talent every single year. At least the best athletic ability. The vast majority of the other teams in this league play SMARTER than we do. Yes, they're mostly private schools, with likely higher SAT scores for their basketball players (in general), but poor preparation in practice is what causes poor decision-making at crunch time in games. You all KNOW this is true. That's coaching. Also, as Rod has said many times, most players who've come through ETSU since his arrival don't progress in their time here. Strong probably did. Reed probably did a small amount. Sneed certainly did, but he did it mostly with just dang hard work. But one just doesn't see the progression that should be expected. That's coaching, too, or lack thereof. Enough said.........

G-W stuns ETSU in ASun tournament game

that you want to keep him around.

IT MAKES NO SENSE!

So I am NOT putting your words in your mouth. Either you want the guy gone or the quoted post was just you blowing smoke.

It's gotta be one or the other.

Are you so stupid you don't even know the meaning of what you write?

You are wrong. Won't be the first time (or thousandth); won't be the last.

Let me try and clarify it "one more time"......

Bartow is NOT a good bench coach. I'm sure there are worse ones out there. There actually *may* even be one or two in the ASun. He *should have* been fired after his second year, imo. He should have been fired after his third year, imo. As we know, the first year he at least was smart enough to not mess up what he was handed on a silver platter.

It's also clear Mullins/Stanton are reticent to do so, even to the point of extending his tenure at a horrible time. I'm also a big fan of keeping one's word (it's called a "contract"). So, despite how much I feel he's not done a very good job in most areas *other than recruiting*, now that we've given him this "contract", we should live up to our word and honor it. On top of that, certainly one doesn't fire a coach at this time of the year, barring highly significant misconduct of some sort.

For years, you've tried to put your own little spin on what others have written, and for years you've been shown to be all those names I've legitimately called you. Let the words of others speak for themselves; and let readers make up their own minds. Simple concept - just like a simple poll.
Listen to goldfinger; leave this alone. It's done....

Personally, I think one reason Bartow wasn't fired at those times is because that was the time of big changes in the ETSU athletic dept. Football had just played it's last game the year before and ETSU was trying to deal with the fallout of that mess. Firing Bartow would have made them admit they made a mistake hiring him and given one (of many) indication they didn't know what they were doing. They wanted to avoid any perception of incompetence, so therefore wanted to be forced into a corner in firing Bartow.

I believe Goldfinger was the one who called you "quite mad."

You now say you believe in honoring a man's contract, but previously in the post you wanted him gone "imo" after seasons in which he had time left on his contract.

You keep talking out of both sides of your mouth and you don't even realize it!

You've never said anything about "honoring a man's contact" before.

Regardless, what you've done is say "Bartow is a bad coach but we should keep him for three more years and THEN fire him."

Yes, let the board decide what you mean. That is a MARVELOUS idea.

00- Mullins hasn't fired anyone except a waitress on the cheerleading squad (and technically that was the coach's wife). To do so would be to admit failure.

I'm convinced after they re-signed Tony Skole (and didn't release that information to the media) Mullins will not fire a coach, unless, heaven forbid, his new bosses call him on it.

That is, if he stays on with the new bosses. But then, you've got to look at three years left on a contract there.

Bottom line- we'll have plenty to ***** over throughout the forseeable future.

What is tiresome and pointless is all of this petty bitching at Bartow. He is here for the foreseeable future. He has his positives and negatives. The season is at hand and I don't see how it is in anyone's best interest to start these stupid polls for the sole purpose of wanting a majority to vote against him and then whine when it backfires.

Now is the time to get behind the team and hope for the best this season. There will be plenty of time to discuss the future once a new president is named. Not that will bring in a certain change...but perhaps an opportunity.

Goldfinger Wrote:Now is the time to get behind the team and hope for the best this season. There will be plenty of time to discuss the future once a new president is named. Not that will bring in a certain change...but perhaps an opportunity.

Well said...

Goldfinger Wrote:What is tiresome and pointless is all of this petty bitching at Bartow. He is here for the foreseeable future. He has his positives and negatives. The season is at hand and I don't see how it is in anyone's best interest to start these stupid polls for the sole purpose of wanting a majority to vote against him and then whine when it backfires.

I am not whining but I don't see the poll results as any kind of endorsement of Bartow. I will be watching to see how some of those 14 react first time Bartows "okay" bench coaching costs a game.

I think what buggs you is the fact that the poll is not damning. You wanted the poll to come back with overhwelming disgust for him at the start of the season. Your uninspired blather reminds me of the actor trying to play the Baron Munchausen whose people are shrouded in doubt until the real Baron Munchausen steps forward and proclaims "Open the Gates"!

The point is...you are invested in defeat. You have more to gain by Bartow/ETSU failing than you do in them winning. I have no patience for that.

RodShaw2 Wrote:I will be watching to see how some of those 14 react first time Bartows "okay" bench coaching costs a game.

That is undeniable proof that you want Bartow to fail, which is the kind of fandom that is never an asset to the institution (in this case Men's Basketball) which receives its "support" If you must be invested in defeat when it comes to ETSU...you might as well invest in another men's basketball program.

If it takes defeat to get some changes then so be it. Do you really think Bartow would have had the same kind of “okay” success if we had remained in the SoCon? But okay is good enough, to be one of the top dogs in a weak conference but blowing it at tourny time is good enough. Winning 1 road non conference game in 3 years is fine. Just as long as the W-L record looks okay. Lets say ETSU goes 18-2 in the A-Sun and wins the tournament plus beats Wingate that is 22 wins. Someone above said 22 wins plus a NCAA trip would be a success but would it really? Do you think those 22 wins would get ETSU any kind of a decent seed?

I am negative but there is a thread gloating about the fact that ETSU’s nationally ranked
golf team blew a tournament in the 3rd to fall to 12th place. How is that different then what you are accusing me of? Seems like a lot of fans want to support coaches like Skole who is doing a terrible job and Bartow who is doing okay in an extremely weak conference. Pitt is rushing to the defense of Hamilton because he was able to string together three 6-5 seasons. Yeah all these coaches are really standouts. But the two teams that have the most success golf and tennis get bashed and people are calling for the head of the coach who has lead ETSU to a string of NCAA tournament appearances and national rankings. But lets keep Bartow but is “okay” and lets keep Skole because.. heck I
can’t even remember the excuses to keep him around.

As for my fandom I have had season tickets with my father for over 25 years plus countless road games, conference tournaments etc.

I'm not going to respond to all of that drivel...I will just repeat...A true supporter does not start the season hoping the team will fail so that the head coach will look bad. You are invested in defeat.

Rod- I think ETSU would have lost a lot more games if they stayed in the So Con. I've said that all along.

However, let us just say that a SUPER COACH came to ETSU tomorrow.

And he won 22 games.

Would this be a failure?

This is why I think criticism of Bartow and retroactively to Hamilton is misguided. ETSU could go undefeated and there's always the "Yeah, but look at the schedule. Anybody could do that at ETSU with that kind of schedule!"

You put the coach in a no-win situation that way.

Rod- here's what I'll give you. I am willing to say it was STUPID for ETSU to play zone so much in 2007 during the A-Sun final against Belmont. Absolutely ridiculous.

However, did it make 27 points of difference? Probably not. Gotta face the fact that Belmont was a better team.

Now, how could ETSU get a coach better than Rick Byrd? Possibly they could fire Bartow and hope to get someone better- but coaches better than Byrd do not grow on trees.

And what made Byrd such a good coach? Could it be that as his tenure at Belmont grew, so did his influence internally- thus allowing Belmont to join Division I ranks?

And that with his longevity, recruits knew he'd be there for the duration of their playing career?

Go back and read what I've said. I believe that Bartow is about as good of a coach as ETSU is going to get right now, and as such having him stay on and have the sort of longevity that brings respect wouldn't be such a bad thing.

Bob McKillop, for instance, was .500 for the first 10 years or so of his career at Davidson and made the worst coaching decision I saw in basketball when he failed to have a real play lined up at the end of the Kansas game. Had he, Davidson very well could have won the national championship (because UNC was NOT going to win that Final Four game with that kind of performance no matter who they played).

So does McKillop suck?

Right now if McKillop is recruiting you- you know you'll be going to a place with a good tradition and that McKillop has a good reputation.

If ETSU is to advance out of the A-Sun, they would need a guy like that to lead them out. Having a long time coach from a good basketball family and ties to Bobby Knight isn't such a bad guy to undertake that endeavor.

RodShaw2 Wrote:Lets say ETSU goes 18-2 in the A-Sun and wins the tournament plus beats Wingate that is 22 wins. Someone above said 22 wins plus a NCAA trip would be a success but would it really?

Ummm, if all what you say happens, then yes. Bartow would have done everything he was hired to do (if again what you say happens). You cannot blame Bartow for being in the ASun. But you can go ahead a root against him (and them, the team). That is your choice, I guess.

So Rod, with that essay, let me ask you this.

Since basically NO RECORD would be good enough for you in the A-Sun (and I kind of agree with you there), wouldn't it be wiser to go after the people who PUT ETSU IN THE A-SUN?

Instead of making Bartow into a Fall Guy while the athletic director who put ETSU in this conference creates a scapegoat that allows him to stay on?

I'm worried about getting ETSU on the map. You're worried about inbounds passes.

So get off Bartow's case, get off mine, get off Paul Hamilton's (as if that is even relevant anymore!), get off Ed DeChellis, and get on the administration.

And if you're not willing to do that, PLEASE TELL US WHY!

Well, only one person thinks he is a "good" coach.

Lukewarmness seems to be the overall sentiment.

If he were a stock, his value would be volatile. He is not a blue chipper for sure.

Go to the NCAA and those numbers go up.

Let Belmont waste you by 30 at home again, and off with your head.

Bump.

Anybody want to change their vote? I don't need to. I knew the "answer" to this question immediately. The patterns are the same as they've been since year 2; really year 1 if you consider the way he (didn't) handle Tim Smith.

Start a fresh one, Shaw, call it "Simple Poll about Bartow - revisited". Although I'd personally prefer you not capitalize "bartow", you probably should to attempt to remove bias.

Quote:I am not whining but I don't see the poll results as any kind of endorsement of Bartow. I will be watching to see how some of those 14 react first time Bartows "okay" bench coaching costs a game.

I didn't bump this thread but since someone else did I will bump this part.
I will admit it wasn't the 1st time, (Hostra) but I am seeing some rumbling now that we have blown 4 conference games down the stretch.