He certainly did that. It looked like he spent a good minute talking over things with Buckley at one point. Those kinds of immediate explanations can help a player learn faster.
Playing Colvin - Mac's biggest mistake
- Thread starter michaelrr1
- Start date
He certainly did that. It looked like he spent a good minute talking over things with Buckley at one point. Those kinds of immediate explanations can help a player learn faster.
Winner for totally irrelevant comment of the day!
It's not like the guy has no history with ISU fans...he has been the HC for four years now.
It's not their choice and sometimes the team pays for the actions of one.
Have any of you ever been on a team before?
Did you ever have to run because someone other than you was late or dogging it?
Did you get to vote to not do so?
I was responding to the poster that implied that ISU gained nothign from Colvin playing. But I guess it was too hard for you to read the quoted message.
Originally Posted by Cloned4Life
Right before Mike was officially kicked off, after his last offense in the middle of that summer, I was told that several players walked into Mac's office and said something along the lines of "enough is enough with that kid...if Mike Taylor is still on this team, we won't be."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
If the above is true, it's yet another indictment on Mac. They obviously didn't have confidence that he was capable of doing the right thing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
If the above is true, it's yet another indictment on Mac. They obviously didn't have confidence that he was capable of doing the right thing.
At the time the APR hit coaches for ANY transfers, even if they transferred to another school and got a degree there. The changed the rules for the entire NCAA after Mac came here.
One thing about it, I can say with great confidence that if Mac was coaching the last 4 years at ISU under the old APR rules we would be looking at a lot of scholarships getting yanked.
Originally Posted by Cloned4LifeRight before Mike was officially kicked off, after his last offense in the middle of that summer, I was told that several players walked into Mac's office and said something along the lines of "enough is enough with that kid...if Mike Taylor is still on this team, we won't be."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
If the above is true, it's yet another indictment on Mac. They obviously didn't have confidence that he was capable of doing the right thing.
Or perhaps they were seeing things outside of basketball Mac wasn't seeing. Are you really going to make an argument that that was the wrong move.
As I said this morning, Mac probably made a big mistake by publicly giving a term for Colvin's suspension...by saying he wouldnt play til February. If he said he was indefinitely suspended, and that the date of his return would be at Mac's discretion, there would be little to no flare up.
The problem is, is that Greg has brought this totally onto himself with his comments related to the suspension, that he got into this line of work because he loves the game and loves the kids and to teach them and if it every just turns into something about the wins, then its time to leave, how its Ok if the decision costs him some wins....
And then last night saying he felt horrible about it, said that it went against things he believed in, etc.
Why did he feel horrible about it, is the first question I ask...why? I think Greg knows...or he wouldnt have said it.
Listen, I still like Greg McDermott. He'd be a great neighbor and from everything I have heard, a very good friend that you can trust and count on. I still think he does like the game because of the kids, and that's a big part of it for him. Totally believe it.
But he's also just like a lot of the other guys in the industry....winning regardless of some of the costs... I think it was a desperate decision. So in the coaching sense, he's just another guy, less than two weeks after taking an admirable stand, and one that was universally applauded here...and I totally understood why that was
I remember rolling on Ron Zook when he suspended some Florida players for the first game of the season against no name state....that game got pushed back to the end of the year because of a Hurricane...so the first game Florida actually played that year was against a solid team...and Zook said the suspension would be served at the end of the year when no name State came back on the schedule, because that was the game they were scheduled for.
Which illustrated his suspension was meaningless....which is one of the reasons why schools have a no name state right out of the chute to begin with, IMO...or one of the unspoken benefits...you can suspend players and not lose a game.
Yes, Iowa's State's team situation changed with Lucca leaving. And apparently, the Colvin suspension went from having nothing to do with wins and losses, which is what Greg's original words certainly implied, to "“I hated to do it, but given the choice I had, it was the only choice.”
If it was the only choice, and if Colvin had atoned for his transgressions as some have said, then why feel horrible about it and why did he hate doing it?
That's the question to ask yourself. Why did Greg hate to play Colvin last night?
Last edited:
So in the case of Wesley Johnson for instance, where do we stand? You lose less points for a guy transferring than you do for someone quitting or becoming ineligible right.
And you know what that's stupid. The NBA is killing APRs with their rule then. One year of college in which the second semester doesn't matter at all of the kids is leaving. How does that work then? Does that last semester count against them?
I'm also curious as to how much Greg would have hated it if Colvin went off for 20 points and shot the game winning shot in an ISU win.
Because it went against his word. That's it. He didn't feel bad because Colvin hadn't done what he'd wanted. But Greg realized that it punishes the team to not have him play. Greg did point out that against Texas he had 3 players that were banged up. Boozer was out, Craig left for a while, and Gilstrap had to come out for a while. If that happened last night and Colvin wasn't in, we would play with 4 players.
When he made that suspension circumstances were different. Not that it is right, but no one saw us losing 2 players at the same position. I think he feels bad because he had to do it. I think he feels that way because he knows he is going against what he said. He also knows this team may need that kid. The team came to him apparently unanimously wanting Chris back. If he has proven himself to the team, then I don't have a problem. Had the team not commented on it to Mac, then I would have a problem. I said that from the get go. The decision was going to directly impact the team. The teams was disrespected by Colvin. If those kids are willing to forgive that then so am I. This was a lose-lose. I would have been on him the other way if he hadn't reinstated him after the team went to him. I won't say they begged him, but if CB went so far as to say he had no choice that's pretty damn close. The only other option is pulling a redshirt for 2 weeks of 3-4 min per and then not playing again. That's not fair either.
But it didn't.
Suit Colvin up. If you get down to just having four, play him. I don't know anyone that would criticize that. But that's not what happened.
It would have punished the team to play 4 on 5. I agree with that.
Do you think Greg is unintelligent? Do you think he reacts emotionally with serious decisions related to his program?
No, he didn't make a mistake with the public...This wasn't about you, me, or the public. This was about Colvin and the team. Mac needed to know if Colvin was serious about being part of the team. You're making it into a bigger deal than it is.
Question Mac's integrity, that's fine....but I know better.
This is what I thought was going to happen. When Colvin went out into the game, alot of my respect for McDermott went out.
Motive is always a key...I can't know the motives of everyone involved, just as none of us can.
However, I wonder...I wonder if the motives were to let a guy back on that was going to help them win basketball games, and make it to the NCAA tournament. If that was the motive, and they took a vote based on that, and the coach allowed that 'vote' to speak for him, when it went against what he had said days earlier related to "I dont care if it costs me wins"....well, here we are.
I think that the fact that the team is involved is a good thing. I think that for all our complaining about team chemistry, this is part of how you build that.
Look, the team was hurt (at least I hope so) by Lucca leaving. They were probably more worried than we were about how this would affect them. They have a teammate who screwed up and was punished and BEFORE LUCCA LEFT was doing a good job of trying to make it up to those guys. If those guys feel like he's made it up to them, then that's OK by me.
