The Gillispie Honeymoon

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 22, 2007 6:27 AM EDT in Basketball Comment 55 comments

We are starting to see some commentary by Kentucky basketball program opponents suggesting that Billy Gillispie won't have long to get the UK program back on him before Kentucky fans turn on him. I have been wondering if it were possible to "read the tea leaves", and quantify this theory. So let's try to reason it out.

My thinking is that the loudest Gillispie detractors, assuming that UK doesn't have immediate success on the court, would be mostly the same group of people as the Tubby Smith detractors -- probably to the tune of 90% or so. This group of people would be the loudest and most vitriolic should Kentucky get off to a slower start than we might expect.

I think it is instructive to look at Louisville fans for guidance -- not really most Louisville fans, but the loudest and most impatient among them. Back between November and January of last year, there was a loud hue and cry on the Louisville Rivals board for Pitino's dismissal as coach. The team at that point was mired in a series of games where it looked utterly inept.

About 20 months prior to this uprising, Louisville was celebrating a return to the Final Four and a first-round draft pick in Sergio Garcia. Pitino was being hailed as the program's savior and all was well in the Cardinal world.

I think we can apply this reasoning somewhat to Gillispie's situation. Let's say the Cats have a surprisingly bad year this year and wind up in the NIT. Many of the loudest would still be inclined to blame Tubby Smith for "leaving the cupboard bare" or some such. Gillispie will probably get a complete pass his first year as far as wins and losses are concerned.

Fast forward to 2008. Another NIT year would unquestionably start an uprising, but I think it's safe to assume that barring a personnel catastrophe, 2008 will be a reasonably good year. Patterson and Legion will be sophomores (since we are assuming a bad year for the sake of argument in '07, I think we can assume they will stay in school), and I think our '08 recruiting class will be another good one.

But lets say that the Cats tank in '09 after Patterson and Legion leave early. That's about the point, I figure, where we could first see the signs of grumbling, but no real uprising. I figure that Gillispie, after a two-year honeymoon period, will pretty much get the same deal as Pitino did at Louisville (unless, of course, he wins a National Championship - that buys you at least one extra year).

In other words, after the first two years, two bad seasons back-to-back (i.e. seasons like we had the last two years) and Gillispie will be on the outs with some of our fans. However, I think most fans would agree that the odds against this happening are pretty high, given his known skill as a coach and the way he is lighting up recruiting these days.

One other caveat. If Gillispie doesn't get a team in the Final Four within 5 years, I expect some serious dissatisfaction around the Big Blue Nation.

Bottom line: This is a question that will remain hypothetical for a very long time. Barring an NCAA investigation, Gillispie will be our coach for the next five years no matter how badly he coaches, in my estimation. After that, though, the faithful will begin to get restless.

0 recs | Comment 55 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The Honeymoon

I don't think we will have a bad year this year. Even if we do, you have to allow the coaching staff adequate time to implement his coaching philosophy prior to his banishment. I think he would get (but not require) a 2 to 3 year time period to prove his style of coaching is the right fit for Kentucky. The excitement Coach Gillispie has brought back to Kentucky Basketball is enough for me right now.

by kyroundball on Jul 22, 2007 8:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

27 wins...

Even accounting for my unfettered optimist streak, I see a pattern of new coaches and overperforming teams.

The enthusiasm and will of the full united force of the UK fanbase is good for anywhere from 3-6 extra wins. Considering this is a team built for 22-23 wins, I figure 27 wins is a fair assessment, puts the Cats in the 2-3 seed range and challenging for the SEC East title.

This rosy scenario anticipates Ramel's maturity and consistent scoring from Crawford and Meeks, not to mention plenty of Patterson.

I think Gillispie will be a great fit, but that folks thinking he's the UK coach for 20 years are setting themselves up for disappointment.

The Online home of Big Blue Nation ...

by JL Blue on Jul 22, 2007 9:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Gillispie Success

Lets play optimist here... if Billy G wins a national title this year, do you think ten years from now people will be saying "But he did it with Tubby's players?" ;-)

As to another note, perhaps you are caught up with watching the British Open today... but the U of L player from the Final Four team you are thinking of was Francisco Garcia, not Sergio.

by chirop1 on Jul 22, 2007 10:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

if BG

can win it all with this set of Tubby players then it would be thre greatestcoaching job in the history of the NCAA.

Winning the SEC east would be a great accomplishment. Making it past the Sweet 16 would be amazing.

by Catfan on Jul 22, 2007 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

5 years no matter what... ?

Really? I can't see this. Two or more NITs and a bad third/fourth year if his stars leave early... they'll be calling for Gillispie's head in year three, at latest year four if that happens.

But I don't think that will happen. I think he'll be successful. I think his first year will be pretty good and his second year even better.

Orange & Blue Hue http://www.orangeandbluehue.com

by Gatorpilot on Jul 22, 2007 10:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Well ...

you have to think like a Big Blue fan. "No matter what" still has to take into account who we are and what is likely.

He gets a pass this year because of Smith's players. Even assuming the very worst except multiple key injuries, it's hard to see how we miss the NCAAs. Next year, even in the worst scenario, it's again hard to see how we miss them, so the Big Blue faithful only get restless early if he quits bringing in talent. Not likely, given the way he works.

You have to figure that he will have at least two good seasons in there due to the recruiting upgrade. Even if he coaches no better than Mark Gottfried or John Brady, this is Kentucky, not Florida -- he'll wind up with one or two sweet 16's and possibly a final 8 even looking at the worst case scenario.

But the Big Blue Nation wants a Final Four. Why, I don't know -- to me, it's just a stop on the road to a national championship, and a Final Four banner without a national championship means shite to me. But virtually everyone in the BBN but me wants a Final Four, and if we don't get that in 5 years, I expect Gillispie will be on the hot seat.

Of course, he could go completely south like Matt Dougherty at UNC and have us at .500 or below with NBA talent. And I suppose I could flap my arms and fly to the moon. But you have to throw out the ridiculously unlikely. :-)

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2007 7:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Honeymoon

For the first time, Truz, I have to disagree with everything you have said. One thing most folks are failing to consider is that the '07 Cats have a lot of talent to put on the floor. This fall's team will have far more talent than we have had in some time.

With Billy G. at the helm, there won't be any lax efforts with this group. This year's Cats will far exceed the past two seasons. After that, going upward is the only way we will travel.

by xgrunt on Jul 22, 2007 3:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Far more talent?

Let's see, Morris goes to the NBA and we add Patterson and Legion and a couple other players that will be easy to forget. How can you logically say a "far more talent?"

It will be a couple more years before UK has the talent to consistently compete for Final Four spots. The past several weeks the national media has finally pointed out just how poor Tubby Smith's recruiting had become and more importantly just how good and committed a recruiter BG is.

And committment it will take. UK will have to be adding 3 top 50 players year in and year out to be a dominant team once again. UK has always had the resources and program to acheive this and now it appears we have the coach as well.

by Catfan on Jul 22, 2007 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Far more talent

"How can you logically say a "far more talent?""

Wow! That's an easy answer. We have addition by subtraction. We had three bums playing last season who probably would have seen no pt on any other D-1 program. We had superior talent in Harris sitting on the bench.

We now add Stewart, Patterson, Legion among others, all more talented than those we lost, with the possible exception of Morris. Tubby relied far too much on Morris. Billy G. won't do so. He will utilize the 'team' concept.

This year's Cats will be in the top 10 by January. Trust me.

by xgrunt on Jul 22, 2007 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope you are right..

but it is wishfull thinking. Calling Harris, a guy who couldn't earn 2 minutes playing time a game, superior talent, is a an incredible reach based on nothign but speculation.

"Tubby relied far too much on Morris." Seriously? He relied far too little on Morris.

Listen, I hope you are right. But dreams of a top 10 team are only going to lead to disappointment. The talent level of UK has produced a 1-24 record against ranked teams the past few years. To contend that now UK is going to be a top 10 team based on three incoming freshman and one sophomore who didn't play 2 minutes a game is absurd.

by Catfan on Jul 22, 2007 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Far more talent

"To contend that now UK is going to be a top 10 team based on three incoming freshman and one sophomore who didn't play 2 minutes a game is absurd."

Sorry, again. Some of you obviously don't know much about the game. Write me come January and tell me my thinking is absurd. You guys are in for some big surprises.

by xgrunt on Jul 23, 2007 2:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Far More Talent

Typical, " the best quarterback is on the bench", mentality.

Calling the three seniors "bums" comes from the same UK fan mindset responsible for the national media crucifying all UK fans as unrealistic, having overblown expectations, and being totally devoid of reason. If anyone played hard, it was those three players. While not has physically gifted as some, they played with heart and effort. Your invective speaks volumes about you, not them.

You further cement your standing with your lucicrous contention that Harris was a "superior talent". Yea, Tubby knew Harris could make a huge contribution, but he wasn't interested in winning though, therefore Harris sat. If you follow college basketball closely one finds many freshmen, who join their team in December, often contibute mightily to the success of their respective squads. There are so many I can't name one. Maybe it's my advanced age.

I do not enjoy countering, in such a way, a readers comment, but I felt I had to respond to the absurd nature of the above comments.

by Ken Howlett on Jul 22, 2007 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Far more talent

"You further cement your standing with your lucicrous contention that Harris was a "superior talent".'

Sorry, guys. Harris is a superior talent to last year's seniors. Tubby's penchant to do things his way, i,e, play seniors even though they have no talent, is the very reason Harris sat.

Tubby didn't keep Harris on the bench because he wanted to lose. He kept him there because of his mentality that he knew best and was unwilling to change....and that is why Tubby is in Minnesota.

by xgrunt on Jul 23, 2007 2:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Harris

Wow. I am at a loss. Writing over and over that Harris was a "superior" talent last year, doesn't make it so. Xgrunt needs to back up his/her argument with some facts or related statistics, rather than an unsubstantiated "feeling".

The minutes I saw Harris play, which was every minute he was on the court, his performance was as one might expect: Hesitant, unsure, lost. I can't imagine why. Perhaps because he has just arrived from Alaska, and knew less than nothing about any of the sets.

If one wants to harp on a mistake Tubby made regarding Harris, complaining about him not being redshirted is much more on target, and is actually based in reality.

Harris may turn out to be a terrific player at UK. I hope he has a great career, but writing that he should have been playing in front of Perry and Thomas frankly makes me wonder if xgrunt realizes what it means to play in the SEC.

Playing Harris substantial minutes last year is comparable to Bill Curry starting Tim Couch his first college game versus defending national champion Florida, on the road. Quite simply, a recipe for failure. Couch was totally unprepared for what he faced, just as Harris was totally unprepared to play versus such a high level of competition. If one can't process that fact, perhaps a battery of reality checks should be ordered through a psychologist of your choice.

by Ken Howlett on Jul 23, 2007 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Harris

"Xgrunt needs to back up his/her argument with some facts or related statistics, rather than an unsubstantiated "feeling"."

xgrunt doesn't speak of his own personal feelings. Instead, he echos the facts as presented by those who know the game of basketball, those who watch the practices and gets to see the players in action.

According to them, Harris was the best player in practice after arriving at UK. With the seniors lack of contribution, do you not think he should have been given a chance? Could he have done any worse? I doubt it.

Who is the best player in this summer's pick-up games? Once again, it's Harris. Ask those who have been there before suggesting I'm speaking from an unsubstantiated feeling. The difference is that the best players will see pt under Billy G. The 'good ole boy' network will cease to exist.

by xgrunt on Jul 23, 2007 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

pickup games

let's not forget that harris has been playing extremely well in the summer pickups games as most people have reported.

but as i know we've gone over before in other posts, those results mean very little when it comes to the actual season. there have always been reports of guys tearing it up during practices and during the summer, only to stop doing that when the season begins. i'm sure those of you who have been following the offseasons longer than me (this is really my first year) can name plenty of examples besides r. carruth and a. barbour.

GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!

by UKWildCatFanatic on Jul 23, 2007 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Once again I try...

If you are so connected that you know people who witnessed practice on a regular basis, I would think you would have more than a sophomoric understanding of major college basketball.

What Harris is doing in pick-up games today, has nothing to do with his ability to play affectively last year.

If you can navigate this sight you might look under "Kentucky Basketball 2207: Finding the way back Part II--The Body and Bones". Under this story by Tru, you will find a post entitled "The Razor". It will be a bit of an education on pick-up game "legends".

"The good ole boy network"..... You are truly, thankfully, one of a kind.

I give up on this, hmmm, guy.

by Ken Howlett on Jul 23, 2007 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sharing opinions....

"I would think you would have more than a sophomoric understanding of major college basketball."

"Obviously, I have a far better understanding than you. Simply because you disagree is not a valid reason to pretend you know all the answers.
I love it how you guys resort to your 'juvenile' digs and slurs to to expand your arguments. They speak volumes.

Btw, I've read all of Truz's posts. His posts are his opinions, just like your's is. However, I usually agree with his. You've got some work to do.

by xgrunt on Jul 23, 2007 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

a few things

I love it how you guys resort to your 'juvenile' digs and slurs to to expand your arguments.

scroll up a little and you;ll see that you do the same: "Some of you obviously don't know much about the game." that is what you meant by juvenile digs, right? as for slurs, i think you're playing a little loose with that definition.

Obviously, I have a far better understanding than you. Simply because you disagree is not a valid reason to pretend you know all the answers.

one, it really doesn't seem that obvious. two, read that second sentence. now read it again. it applies to you too.

i brought up carruth and barbour as guys who were awesome in practice and summer games that didn't pan out during actual games. i want to say cote and hawkins had the same reps, though i'll need someone to make sure i'm right about that. hawkins was good...cote not so much. those aren't my opinions anymore.

GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!

by UKWildCatFanatic on Jul 23, 2007 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hawkins

Cliff Hawkins is the reigning King of Pick-up, and practice games. Hawkins though, was a good/very good player when it mattered. Barbor I feel gets a bad wrap for his unproductivity come game time. His broken hand robbed him of valuable experience, and when he did return, I think he played hesitantly. This in turn caused him to lose some confidence, which will wreck the psyche of even the most talented players.

Back to Hawkins: I wrote under another Tru blog that Hawkins "broke so many ankles" in pick-up games and practice, that Keightly had to start charging him for tape.

by Ken Howlett on Jul 23, 2007 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps you should re-read....

Thanks, CatFanatic. Since I wasn't referring to your posts, I'm sure you simply wanted your voice to be heard. Had I been referring to you, I would probably have highlighted something you had written. Thanks for jumping in, but I'm not impressed.

by xgrunt on Jul 24, 2007 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

couldn't care less

that you weren't impressed. that wasn't my intention, or ever will be. as for just wanting my voice heard, i've been commenting on this site for a while now, so i don't feel the need to write for the sake of writing.

as for not referring to my posts, what does that have to do with anything? am i supposed to wait to speak until spoken to? so go ahead now and highlight something i've written.

and how about trying out some facts...you haven't said anything about the summer game "legends" i've mentioned before.

GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!

by UKWildCatFanatic on Jul 24, 2007 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If you don't care, don't post....

"...you haven't said anything about the summer game "legends" i've mentioned before."

Nor will I. I don't comment on things I know nothing about. If you recall, I was talking about Harris.

Furthermore, there's not a man alive who can say I ever said a disparaging remark about anyone unless he threw the first rock. I don't know about you, but I don't throw roses at those who try to belittle me in a juvenile manner.

Also, you might want to look up the word 'slur'. It does have various meanings.

by xgrunt on Jul 24, 2007 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

harris

let's forget about all about that other junk and talk strictly about harris. i hope he is as good as you say he will be. i really do. but my point is that there have been others who have impressed during summer games but have not produced. i was wondering what makes you believe that harris will be different? i'm not saying you're wrong and he'll suck, but i just wanted some reasons on why you think he'll be a solid contributor when the season starts.

and come january, if harris is all you say he will be, i'll be the first to say congrats.

ken, good point about barbour. the broken hand slipped my mind, and no doubt kept him from playing up to his true ability.

GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!

by UKWildCatFanatic on Jul 24, 2007 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

More Harris

Very simply this. Billy G., Coach Cyp and other knowledgeable types have all marvelled at his talent and athleticism. Unless they all are lying, Harris will surprise many this year. He has surprised the coaches already.

by xgrunt on Jul 25, 2007 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Small margins

I just want to see how small the margins for this post will get if I reply here...

;-)

by chirop1 on Jul 25, 2007 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

harris

ok, that makes sense. i believe the coaches as much as anyone. but it still makes me wonder about the regular season, because i'm sure coaches have felt this way before when someone has played well during the summer. and i'm notturning this into a tubby vs. billy g discussion. i'm sure coaches before tubby and at other schools have seen this too.

i also think one reason they're surprised at his talent and athleticism is because they've never seen him play before now. the coaches know what they have in ramel, joe c, and some others, so i'm sure the everyone else is getting more playing time so that the staff can get acustommed to their skills. not sure they'll see as much PT during the season.

GO BIG BLUE!! GO BIG BLUE!!

by UKWildCatFanatic on Jul 25, 2007 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Theoretically ...

we do have more talent. We have 2 McDonald's all-Americans and 2 parade all-Americans, instead of 2 and one.

We also have more talented players incoming than outgoing, with the exception of Morris. It remains to be seen if Patterson will be better than him, but we have every reason to expect he will be at least as good.

You also have a very talented freshman class returning as sophomores. So I agree that we are more talented. How much more is certainly open to debate.

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2007 7:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That was a very talented freshman class?

They were so talented that only one of them received significant playing time. The others will likely see very little playing time during their UK careers. To call them "very talented" is void of reality and is based on hope, because it certainly has not been proven.

Yes Meeks was an impressive freshman, but one player does not make a class "very talented."

I hope they prove to be a "very talented" group, because if they are UK will be very good for the next three years.

by Catfan on Jul 23, 2007 8:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did you forget ...

about Jasper? I believe he started for most of the year.

Meeks and Jasper were both top 40 and Stevenson was 63 in the Rivals top 150. I think that qualifies as "very talented", but your mileage may vary.

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2007 8:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jasper proved

to be a liability and was totally ineffective as the year progressed; that doesn't appear to qualify as talented. But you ar correct, he did receive lots of playing time.

They can all be Rivals top 10, if they don't prove it on the court it is meaningless. They have not proved it on the court. Actually they have proved the opposite, at elast so far; but the were freshman so time will tell. However, Stevenson was athletic but proved to be of little value, Porter proved he is inover his head and with the guards signign with UK he is likely to average less than 5 minutes a game durign his UK career, and Jasper, well he proved to be an offensive liability and unless that changes he won't play much at all going forward.

I am excited about the upcoming year, but my expectations are realistic and if UK can win the SEC east and make it to the Sweet 16 it would be a very good accomplishment considering that the last few years under Tubby UK could not beat a ranked team (1-24 was it?).

by Catfan on Jul 23, 2007 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jasper's progress...

was more of an example of Tubby's ability to kill a player's confidence than of Jasper's lack of talent. IMO, Jasper's performance against UCLA was much more indicative of his talent than his performance against Kansas (after a year under Tubby). Tubby seemed to have that effect on a number of talented players -- but that doesn't mean they were/are inept. I suspect we'll see something quite different from Jasper (and others) under BG.

by bluenva on Jul 23, 2007 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Talent versus Style

Lose-Obrzut, Perry, Thomas, Morris.
Gain--Stewart, Legion, Patterson, Williams.

Even though this team will have veteran leadership in Bradley, and Crawford the '07-'08 'Cats will rely heavily on youth for scoring and defensive production.

The loss of Morris in the middle, while two months ago looked devastating, I think will be offset by the triumverate of Patterson, Stewart, and Stevenson-- Plus the change in style of play. BCG has no choice but to push. Both offensively and defensively. If the newbies can acclimate to the college game relatively quickly I feel this team could be very dangersous.

The one glaring POTENTIAL problem I see is a matchup quandary at the 5. If BCG doubles the 5, help has to come quick on the dish out. Something UK has had problems with in the past. A Tyler Smith/Chris Lofton duo at UT is enough to give a fella nightmares.

But, I digress.

I agree with Tru on the talent evaluation. I feel though, that utilized properly, this team could minimize the hole in the middle, and excel. My thought: Make teams pay for putting a 5 on the floor with UK's "mighty mites".

by Ken Howlett on Jul 23, 2007 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually ...

I agree with you. What I was trying to do here is look at the situation from an unexpected angle -- that is, that in spite of the success we have had recruiting and in spite of our talent, we do not see a substantial improvement over last year.

It could happen, you know. We will be young, even if we are talented. Gillispie is not really proven at an elite school like UK. It's not as if he was coming to us from Kansas or Syracuse.

As recently as 2004, we found out that having great talent in the person of 4 Micky D's didn't guarantee anything.

I don't expect this to happen, I am just trying to examine it from the perspective of a skeptical non-fan. I intended to be a bit controversial.

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2007 6:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

I think I need some bourbon after that post. I prefer not to think about such things happening.

by GregJ on Jul 22, 2007 3:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Not that I need a reason to pour myself a drink of Maker's Mark, neat.

by catlanta91 on Jul 22, 2007 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ah, come on now ...

we can't hide from unpleasant possibilities.

But really, we shouldn't expect this will happen. If we had a poor year next year, something like 10 or 12 losses, I would be very, very surprised. But it certainly isn't impossible.

None of us expects Gillispie to fail. Virtually all of us expect him to succeed, but he might not succeed as well as we expect.

Sometimes, just for the fun of it, we need to set our blue-tinted glasses aside, and look at possibilities rather than expectations.

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2007 7:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Section

Tru,

You are an eloquent and fair-minded blogger about subjects I find easy to care about. I value the service you provide. You do extremely good work, and at a high volume, in my opinion.

This might be unnecessary to point out, and it's definitely not too important, but I felt compelled to write briefly from the perfectionist/"not-huge-baseball-fan" parts of me.
Sometimes you label "basketball" segments as "baseball." I think maybe it's a testament to your high quality of work that this minor blemish bothers me enough to comment about it (I hope in a non-obnoxious way, if not helpful).

by Cat Merrill on Jul 22, 2007 3:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the catch

That sort of thing usually happens when I get up at 5:30 AM trying to write a post on the way out the door to an all-day golf match. Like yesterday.

Also, the two are right together on the drop-down, and sometimes these aging eyes just get a little dyslexic.

I'll get in there and fix it.

Thanks again for the sharp eyes. And thank you for the nice compliment.

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 23, 2007 6:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

To be "successful" at Kentucky...

Several years ago when asked by an "outsider" what it took to be successful at Kentucky, this is the answer I gave him:

The season should never end before the Elite 8 (we will understand the occaisional Sweet 16, and even a round of 32 anomaly); a final four should be reached every 3-4 years; and a national championship should be won once a decade. It should be understood that we expect SEC tourney and regular season championships on a routine basis.

Its a tall order... but one that I think is an honest evaluation of what we truly expect.

by chirop1 on Jul 23, 2007 9:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Tru, I think you got it totally backwards....

When you say, "My thinking is that the loudest Gillispie detractors, assuming that UK doesn't have immediate success on the court, would be mostly the same group of people as the Tubby Smith detractors -- probably to the tune of 90% or so. This group of people would be the loudest and most vitriolic should Kentucky get off to a slower start than we might expect."

I strongly believe that the loudest group of Gillispie detractors are already and will continue to come from a remnant of the Tubby supporters. You can see it on several of the messageboards already. I've read posts calling into question everything about BCG from posters that claim UK as their school of choice, that were vehemently battling for the Keep-Tubby agenda that you would expect to come from an opposing fan (DUI, job-hopping, tireless worker that's more concerned about his job than his personal life, perceived skirting of the rules based on aggressiveness and instant recruiting success, recruiting and landing verbals from the class of 09 and 10).

And it's not by the same posters I read who were fully ready for Tubby to exit stage left. It's coming from the people who defended Tubby to (almost) the bitter end, and some who are still vehemently defending him today. While there really are some of the Tubby supporters in the fanbase who REALLY followed through on their promise of "I'll fully support the coach at UK until he's not the coach of UK anymore, then I'll fully support whoever the new coach is", there are a lot more that are already lying in wait for the first setback that BCG has.

Whether it's a subpar season this year (no better than Tubby's last two seasons), not signing a bigman in the 2008 class, or just piling on the sentiments of knuckleheads like Kevin Stallings and some of the other SEC coaches who are realizing that THEY TOO better step up their own recruiting and work ethics if they want to remain on the current footing they enjoy alongside or ahead of UK's current state of the program.

See, the issue isn't that the UK fans that wanted Tubby gone are constantly unhappy with anything less than 100% perfection, because that's very largely untrue. It's that many of us saw much earlier than most what more and more people are realizing since Tubby's departure and BCG's hiring: there REALLY IS a better fit at UK than what Tubby was. Mitch found him. His name is Billy Gillispie.

by vickster3 on Jul 23, 2007 10:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The question is (IMHO)...

Why do the SEC coaches think that Gillespie will be unpopular? Is it because they see a little Joe B. Hall in Gillespie, or because they don't think he will be able to compete with the bench strategy in the SEC? We all know it won't be a lack of talented players!

I really don't enjoy bringing this side of the conversation up all the time, because I'm as excited about the revival of UK BB as the rest of the BBN. However, I really feel that this needs to be said, and it needs to be said now. IF this does turn out to be a "hard row to hoe" for BCG and the BBN turns on him like they did for Tubby, then UK is likely to have a VERY DIFFICULT time finding a replacement coach. That would definitely confirm the irrational demands of the BBN, and the fact that the University of Kentucky will cater to those same irrational demands.

This would be the beginning of the end for UK basketball. The Media Era will give the BBN a national voice, and the BBN will destroy itself. The best coaches won't come here anymore, and then neither will the recruits. Don't forget BBN, the Roman Empire fell, just like all the other great empires in history, due to discontent from its own people. (Political footnote- Just like the US will do sometime in the future if it continues on its current "Path of Self-Righteousness" and government corruption.)

by blueblood on Jul 23, 2007 11:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

roman empire

There was a host of reasons why the roman empire fell. none of them were becuase the discontent of the people. Most of it was due to government corruption.

by davw83 on Jul 23, 2007 11:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Like I said - (IMHO)...

the point was that every empire in history has fallen at some point, each for their own reasons. No matter the reason of those empires, this one can and will self destruct if the fans don't learn a little tolerance.

To defend my statement on the Roman Empire - What happened with the government and the defense of their borders was the most visible cause of the demise of the Roman Empire. However, the discontent of the people did affect the defense of the Roman Nation. People don't want to die for what they don't believe in. Why defend this country that is so full of corruption? At some point the potential of the unknown becomes more intriguing than the security of the stagnant known.

The size and rearrangements of power through the years had also rearranged the structure of society to the effect that money and power became more important than national pride(sound familiar?-USA?). People become attached to those and then nothing but personal gain matters. Society loses sight of the fact that personal character is the basis for happiness. Why do you think that the Asian cultures are some of the oldest nations in the world? They live their life trying to protect the public image of their family. That's not to say that they don't have corruption. Its just that they haven't lost sight of the importance of personal character in society.

by blueblood on Jul 23, 2007 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if it is the same 90%

then that pretty much kills off the racism angle so many like to throw out

by KFWA on Jul 23, 2007 12:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Honeymoon

Under no set of circumstances can this ever be equated to the situation when Tubby Smith arrived. First Tubby left Coach G with the thinnest group of talent in many years as opposed to Smith taking over a group with at least 3 first round draft choices straight off two trips to the FF.

Coach G will get some banter from a few, but my guess is the Tubby supporters will be the first and loudest. UK Fans will always have high expectations, but for the most part they are fair, heck look how long they tolerated Tubby's slide before it got so loud.

My guess would be if after 4 years the fanbase doesn't see the move toward excellence then the screams will start, but that seems rather unlikely at this point due to Coach G already upgrading the talent. It should continue upward after the 08-09 season once Coach G has gotten a couple of frontline players and we have started to move back toward the top of the SEC East, but it will take some time due to the depressed state the program was left to Coach G. The fans are well aware where the program was, that's why we heard the screaming to begin with, if Tubby had done his job this fanbase would have continued the love affair it had for Tubby. Tubby's stubborn do-it-my-way attitude was the straw that broke the fanbases back.

by abud4me on Jul 23, 2007 1:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

First year pass...

I, too, think Billy G. gets a total pass this year, a partial pass next year, and a "Hall" pass in year three. (Although Joe B. did get us to the final four in year three of his tenure.)If things don't start poppin' by year 4 then "all the hounds begin to howl"*. Only in this case it will be cats. Scary

*Willie Dixon, Lil' Red Rooster

Stinky Blue

by Stinky Blue on Jul 23, 2007 2:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

RickyP taking over from Eddie, BillyG from Tubby

That is the analogy, in my opinion, as to the subject, which is, how much of a honeymoon does BillyG have? I'd say, the same amount as RickyP had.

UK fans will put up with losing, we did with all the other coaches, provided that there is plenty, year to year, to be optimistic about for the upcoming year. New recruits coming in and good recruits getting better from frosh to soph year, that's what keeps us buzzing. The buzz around UK had become a deafening silence.

We just stopped having that "next year's better" optimism several years back as recruiting declined and declined and declined. We began to have the "malcontent of the month" as players did their best to leave. Some players leaving would be understandable with a change in coaches, yet aside from Morris' totally understandable departure, no one has decided to leave. I'd guess that the players are optimistic about the season, now, too!

by bigsky on Jul 23, 2007 2:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

0-16 to beating UofL at Rupp in the Big Dance

I'd say that's a record that speaks of future accomplishments.

by bigsky on Jul 23, 2007 2:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

blueblood

I got your point. I was just splitting hairs. I believe it was the corruption in the government that caused the discontent of the population but I was just argueing for arguments sake.

by davw83 on Jul 23, 2007 3:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That's exactly....

why we are all here. We have an opinion and a desire to express it.

by blueblood on Jul 23, 2007 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

corruption/discontent...

exactly, the lack of personal character at the top of the societal hierarchy(government) led to the demise of character across the whole society. Just like what is currently happening here at home. The people in power are the people with the most money, the government is just the puppet on a string for the most part. Oil/Steel/Finance has been controlling the government for years, the only current difference is that now the "Big Oil" guys just decided that they wanted to take over the whole thing....

I really need to find a political blog and stop dirturbing the balance here. Sorry guys...

by blueblood on Jul 23, 2007 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Honeymoon

I believe that Gillispie will get a lot of latitude as long as he recruits well and plays a uptempo, exciting brand of basketball. I enjoyed the 13-13 season that Pitino had far more than I did the last two years. I disagree about who would start complaining first about Gillispie. I think it would be the die-hard Tubby supporters that would be the first to call for his head.

by blue4ever on Jul 23, 2007 5:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Honeymoon

An interesting and, obviously, highly comment-worthy post, Tru. I think BCG may get a fairly long (3-4 year) grace period for a UK basketball coach--although for the record I do not think he's going to need it--because, as other commenters have alluded to, of his seeming ability to create buzz for the program. I think Tubby's crime to many was as much that he wasn't buzz-worthy as it was he didn't win enough basketball games (and obviously his inability to be an exciting "face" of the program went hand-in-hand with his recruiting problems). Respected and respectable as he certainly was, Tubby was never and will never be hip. He seemed uptight on camera and seemed to want the media to just go away. Even though I was always a Tubby supporter, I can't disagree with those who say that because of this, he was not a good fit at UK. We UK fans crave buzz around our program as much, almost, as wins, I think. The program means so much to us, and we love college basketball so much, that it is just painful for us for UK not to be at the center of college b-ball universe. To be hated in the college basketball world, well, that's just fine with us, but to be ignored, forgotten--that, we just can't take. Gillispie's ability to get people talking about UK hoops again (outside Kentucky, I mean) should be his saving grace, even if the wins don't immediately pile up like we imagine they will.

by blue kentucky girl on Jul 23, 2007 8:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I would tend to agree ...

that Gillispie isn't really likely to need a honeymoon. He gets one, by default, but I expect him to deliver good basketball immediately. Not just because he is the Kentucky coach, but because of his success on a slightly lower level under what would arguably be considered more difficult circumstances.

I also think that the Big Blue Nation craves a "buzz" around the program, and Gillispie has certainly proved himself capable of generating one. He has denied that as an intention, but I think he is gently dissimulating about that.

by Truzenzuzex on Jul 24, 2007 8:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs