Some cherry-picking of data from Tubby's resume challenged me to do some objective analysis.

Parameters:
On the court success is the driving metric. We can talk recruiting rankings and clean programs all day long. He may be a below average recruiter. And he has run clean programs everywhere he's been. (Are the 2 related?) In fact, I was surprised to see that every program he has been with except Tulsa, has had NCAA wins vacated by predecessors of Tubby. Nonetheless, winning leaves all else in the dust.

Benchmarking should be other coaches at the same programs, during the era since the NCAA tourney began getting all conference champs (1975, best I can tell). With a subset benchmark of "immediate peer" coaches preceding and succeeding Tubby, for the same number of years Tubby was at the program.

The grading is the debatable part.

In reverse order, first up is Texas Tech:

Tubby went 46-50 in 3 years for a 48% win rate. He went to 1 NCAA tourney and went 0-1.

The preceding 3 years saw them go 32-62 for a 34% win rate. They went to 0 NCAA tourneys.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, included a record of 639-535 for a 54% win rate. They went to 9 NCAA tourneys (1 every 4 years) and went 6-9. They average 1 NCAA win every 6 years.

Other: He won a COY award in the B12 and a national COY award. The Admin had a strong desire to retain him.

Summary: Mixed success. He certainly performed better than the program he took over. Compared to the other coaches in the modern era he had a lower win% but got to the tourney a year earlier than the average.

Grade: B

Minnesota:

Tubby went 124-81 in 6 years for a 60% win rate. He went to 3 NCAA tourneys and went 1-3.

The preceding 6 years and following 3 years, saw them go 146-144 for a 50% win rate. They went to 1 NCAA tourney and went 0-1.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, had a record of 624-552 for a 53% win rate. They went to 8 NCAA tourneys (1 every 4 years) and went 11-8. They average 1 NCAA win every 3 years.

Other: At the end of his term, he experienced a lot of transfers out of the program. In retrospect, that was the timeframe when the NCAA relaxed transfer rules and things were changing all over the country. However, boosters and the admin lost faith in Tubby and he was terminated.

Summary: Tubby outperfomed immediate peers in all categories. He outperformed historically in regular season winning and NCAA tourney appearances. The area he falls short on is historic NCAA winning % for the modern Minnesota era.

Grade: A-

Tubby is doing a great job here. Outstanding, IMO.

Nah, if you can't turn it around in 9 months you just suck.

1 too old, he should be put down. Old people have nothing to offer society.
2 can't recruit these young guys, because he won't lie to them or pay them.
3 still young enough to play golf.

Terrible hire, death of the program.

People like to be told what they want to hear, even if it is a lie. They can't believe their lying eyes, especially if it doesn't fit their agenda.

Most people are idiots.

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  Nah, if you can't turn it around in 9 months you just suck.

1 too old, he should be put down. Old people have nothing to offer society.
2 can't recruit these young guys, because he won't lie to them or pay them.
3 still young enough to play golf.

Terrible hire, death of the program.

People like to be told what they want to hear, even if it is a lie. They can't believe their lying eyes, especially if it doesn't fit their agenda.

Most people are idiots.

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  Nah, if you can't turn it around in 9 months you just suck.

1 too old, he should be put down. Old people have nothing to offer society.
2 can't recruit these young guys, because he won't lie to them or pay them.
3 still young enough to play golf.

Terrible hire, death of the program.

People like to be told what they want to hear, even if it is a lie. They can't believe their lying eyes, especially if it doesn't fit their agenda.

Most people are idiots.

Hats off to you Bucc, you have a great sense of humor. Very funny post

Sadly, there are those who believe your exaggerated post. Some have made their minds up on Tubby's recruiting without giving him a chance. I wonder what they will do if Tubby is both successful in recruiting and successful on the court, will they admit they were wrong and be a real fan again?? Or will they stay stubborn and negative about Tubby?? I'll be waiting to see, it will be interesting. In the end, if Tubby proves to be successful in both recruiting and winning they chose to judge before allowing him to prove that he could or couldn't get the job done. These type of fans suck and are foolish. If Tubby doesn't get the job done, I'll be one of the first on here blasting him, but I choose to give him a chance. To not support him due to the fact that the university didn't hire the guy you wanted is bogus and weak.

(02-08-2017 12:59 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  Nah, if you can't turn it around in 9 months you just suck.

1 too old, he should be put down. Old people have nothing to offer society.
2 can't recruit these young guys, because he won't lie to them or pay them.
3 still young enough to play golf.

Terrible hire, death of the program.

People like to be told what they want to hear, even if it is a lie. They can't believe their lying eyes, especially if it doesn't fit their agenda.

Most people are idiots.

I take it you didn't view his post as funny?

(02-08-2017 01:17 PM)TubbyTime Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  Nah, if you can't turn it around in 9 months you just suck.

1 too old, he should be put down. Old people have nothing to offer society.
2 can't recruit these young guys, because he won't lie to them or pay them.
3 still young enough to play golf.

Terrible hire, death of the program.

People like to be told what they want to hear, even if it is a lie. They can't believe their lying eyes, especially if it doesn't fit their agenda.

Most people are idiots.

Hats off to you Bucc, you have a great sense of humor. Very funny post

Sadly, there are those who believe your exaggerated post. Some have made their minds up on Tubby's recruiting without giving him a chance. I wonder what they will do if Tubby is both successful in recruiting and successful on the court, will they admit they were wrong and be a real fan again?? Or will they stay stubborn and negative about Tubby?? I'll be waiting to see, it will be interesting. In the end, if Tubby proves to be successful in both recruiting and winning they chose to judge before allowing him to prove that he could or couldn't get the job done. These type of fans suck and are foolish. If Tubby doesn't get the job done, I'll be one of the first on here blasting him, but I choose to give him a chance. To not support him due to the fact that the university didn't hire the guy you wanted is bogus and weak.

Can you be seen as a failure in recruiting if your teams win at a high level?

(02-08-2017 01:46 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Can you be seen as a failure in recruiting if your teams win at a high level?

Obviously not and the definition of high level can also be a sliding scale.

I don't think anyone expects to get back to 2008, but I think most expect to be on par with Dayton or Gonzaga (this year being an exception) or Wichita State or similar.

Be one of 2-3 teams that run your G5 league, get the Dance almost every year, sometimes advance...wash, rinse, repeat.

Every now and then put one of those teams on the floor - like Gonzaga this year, Wichita a few years back.

It's really not that difficult of a G5 job.

(02-08-2017 01:46 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 01:17 PM)TubbyTime Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  Nah, if you can't turn it around in 9 months you just suck.

1 too old, he should be put down. Old people have nothing to offer society.
2 can't recruit these young guys, because he won't lie to them or pay them.
3 still young enough to play golf.

Terrible hire, death of the program.

People like to be told what they want to hear, even if it is a lie. They can't believe their lying eyes, especially if it doesn't fit their agenda.

Most people are idiots.

Hats off to you Bucc, you have a great sense of humor. Very funny post

Sadly, there are those who believe your exaggerated post. Some have made their minds up on Tubby's recruiting without giving him a chance. I wonder what they will do if Tubby is both successful in recruiting and successful on the court, will they admit they were wrong and be a real fan again?? Or will they stay stubborn and negative about Tubby?? I'll be waiting to see, it will be interesting. In the end, if Tubby proves to be successful in both recruiting and winning they chose to judge before allowing him to prove that he could or couldn't get the job done. These type of fans suck and are foolish. If Tubby doesn't get the job done, I'll be one of the first on here blasting him, but I choose to give him a chance. To not support him due to the fact that the university didn't hire the guy you wanted is bogus and weak.

Can you be seen as a failure in recruiting if your teams win at a high level?

Nope

UK:

Tubby went 263-83 in 10 years for a 76% win rate. He went to 10 NCAA tourneys (100% rate) and went 23-9 (72%) with 1 NC. He averaged 2 wins per year.

The preceding 10 years and following 9 years, saw them go 514-148 for a 78% win rate. They went to 14 NCAA tourneys (74% rate) and went 48-12 (80%) with 2 NC's averaging 2 wins per year.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, had a record of 828-242 for a 77% win rate. They went to 25 NCAA tourneys (81% rate) and went 70-22 (76%) with 3 NC's averaging 2 wins per year.

Other: UK averages 1 NC every 10 years. That is exactly what Tubby achieved. Boosters felt Tubby was under-achieving and put a lot of pressure on him and the Admin. He left for the Minnesota job. He was later inducted into the UK HOF. He won 3 SEC COYs and 1 national COY.

Summary: Tubby pretty much hit all the averages at UK. One thing he did that no other coach has, is he took all 10 of his teams to the NCAA.

Grade: B

Georgia:

Tubby went 45-19 in 2 years for a 70% win rate. He went to 2 NCAA tourneys (100% rate) and went 2-2 (50%). He averaged 1 win per year.

The preceding 2 years and following 2 years, saw them go 67-56 for a 54% win rate. They went to 0 NCAA tourneys.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, had a record of 653-568 for a 53% win rate. They went to 10 NCAA tourneys (26% rate) and went 5-10 (33%) averaging 1 win per 8 years.

Other: NA

Summary: Tubby blew away all expectations at Georgia.

Grade: A+

Tulsa:

Tubby went 79-43 in 4 years for a 65% win rate. He went to 2 NCAA tourneys (50% rate) and went 4-2 (67%). He averaged 1 win per year.

The preceding 4 years and following 4 years, saw them go 149-98 for a 60% win rate. They went to 3 NCAA tourneys (38%) and went 2-3 (40%) averaging 1 win every 4 years.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, had a record of 721-472 for a 60% win rate. They went to 13 NCAA tourneys (35% rate) and went 7-13 (35%) averaging 1 win every 5 years.

Other: Tubby led Tulsa to their NCAA win ever.

Summary: Tubby exceeded all expectations at Tulsa.

Grade: A

(02-08-2017 02:22 PM)Penny Lane Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 02:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Tulsa:

Tubby went 79-43 in 4 years for a 65% win rate. He went to 2 NCAA tourneys (50% rate) and went 4-2 (67%). He averaged 1 win per year.

The preceding 4 years and following 4 years, saw them go 149-98 for a 60% win rate. They went to 3 NCAA tourneys (38%) and went 2-3 (40%) averaging 1 win every 4 years.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, had a record of 721-472 for a 60% win rate. They went to 13 NCAA tourneys (35% rate) and went 7-13 (35%) averaging 1 win every 5 years.

Other: Tubby led Tulsa to their NCAA win ever.

Summary: Tubby exceeded all expectations at Tulsa.

Grade: A

I need you to write my resumes. You could land me CEO of Apple job.

Don't flatter yourself. You would have had to actually earn notable achievements to be listed, like Tubby has done throughout his career...

(02-08-2017 01:51 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 01:46 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Can you be seen as a failure in recruiting if your teams win at a high level?

I don't think anyone expects to get back to 2008, but I think most expect to be on par with Dayton or Gonzaga (this year being an exception) or Wichita State or similar.

Miller's Dayton, or historical Dayton?
Few's Gonzaga, or historical Gonzaga?
Marshall's Wichita, or historical Wichita?

I'm sure you mean the current versions of those programs - which happen to be the most successful in their histories.

You say no one expects 2008, but you compare to other G5's at the historical peaks.

(02-08-2017 02:25 PM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 02:22 PM)Penny Lane Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 02:17 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  Tulsa:

Tubby went 79-43 in 4 years for a 65% win rate. He went to 2 NCAA tourneys (50% rate) and went 4-2 (67%). He averaged 1 win per year.

The preceding 4 years and following 4 years, saw them go 149-98 for a 60% win rate. They went to 3 NCAA tourneys (38%) and went 2-3 (40%) averaging 1 win every 4 years.

The modern era, excluding the Tubby years, had a record of 721-472 for a 60% win rate. They went to 13 NCAA tourneys (35% rate) and went 7-13 (35%) averaging 1 win every 5 years.

Other: Tubby led Tulsa to their NCAA win ever.

Summary: Tubby exceeded all expectations at Tulsa.

Grade: A

I need you to write my resumes. You could land me CEO of Apple job.

Don't flatter yourself. You would have had to actually earn notable achievements to be listed, like Tubby has done throughout his career...

Hello

(02-08-2017 02:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 01:51 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 01:46 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Can you be seen as a failure in recruiting if your teams win at a high level?

I don't think anyone expects to get back to 2008, but I think most expect to be on par with Dayton or Gonzaga (this year being an exception) or Wichita State or similar.

Miller's Dayton, or historical Dayton?
Few's Gonzaga, or historical Gonzaga?
Marshall's Wichita, or historical Wichita?

I'm sure you mean the current versions of those programs - which happen to be the most successful in their histories.

You say no one expects 2008, but you compare to other G5's at the historical peaks.

Let me simplify - folks expect Memphis to be at the top of their league, especially as long as it's a G5 league AND they expect to routinely make the tournament and occasionally advance to the second weekend and/or beyond.

I can throw out VCU or St. Mary's or Butler or San Diego State or whatever you team you want...the NAME of the team wasn't important, amigo.

To put it at another angle - Memphis should NEVER be the Seton Hall or St. Bonaventure or the Air Force of the American Athletic Conference where basketball is concerned (again, feel free to pick a different school, not important to the main discussion).

Now, if you're going to argue with all of that, good for you.

Most aren't listening - THOSE are the expectations for most. Like it or not.

(02-08-2017 02:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  You say no one expects 2008, but you compare to other G5's at the historical peaks.

And none of their historical peaks match the 2005-2008 runs either .

Dayton isn't even close.

You could make a thin argument for Wichita and a fairly solid argument for Gonzaga, though the postseasons aren't that comparable.

(02-08-2017 02:26 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 01:51 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(02-08-2017 01:46 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  Can you be seen as a failure in recruiting if your teams win at a high level?

I don't think anyone expects to get back to 2008, but I think most expect to be on par with Dayton or Gonzaga (this year being an exception) or Wichita State or similar.

Miller's Dayton, or historical Dayton?
Few's Gonzaga, or historical Gonzaga?
Marshall's Wichita, or historical Wichita?

I'm sure you mean the current versions of those programs - which happen to be the most successful in their histories.

You say no one expects 2008, but you compare to other G5's at the historical peaks.

2005-2008 is higher than the historical peak for any of those schools. So yes, its reasonable to expect to be at their level while not expecting 2008.

Mark Few has reached 0 final fours.
Gregg Marshall has made the NCAA 5 of 9 seasons, with 1 Final Four.
Archie Miller has made the NCAA 3 of 6 seasons, with 1 Elite Eight.

The expectations for Memphis basketball compare favorably to the historical peak of most other G5/Mid Majors schools.

edit: Hoopdreams beat me to it. Sorry for the redundant post.