Let's end some myths

[cycloneG]

Morgan's teams on average gave up 71 points per game. GMac's teams on average give up 68 points a game. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[clones_jer]

Morgan's teams on average gave up 71 points per game. GMac's teams on average give up 68 points a game. Draw your own conclusions.

Now tell me the offensive numbers, just because we walk it up doesn't mean we play good defense.

 

[Tre4ISU]

One thing. I don't think we were close to the death penalty under Morgan and as it has been stated before a lot of our penalties came in relation to the coaching change. For the death penalty to be brought on there has to be a lack of institutional control which would mean a lot of things would need to be going wrong on serious levels. There would have to be more than some relatively small APR issues.

I agree Morgan probably gets a worse rap than he deserves but I also do not believe he was a good long term option. He had, IMO more talent in his last year and did worse with it. Of course you cannot judge simply off one year but it is an indication. I know he is happy doing what he is doing now but I also believe that if he was thought of as a great coach an offer would come his way that he would take. I guess overall I would have to same I am on the fence with the Morgan decision possibly leaning toward we should have given him more time, similar to how I am now but I have moment going toward the firing side on Mac right now.

 

[cycloneG]

Now tell me the offensive numbers, just because we walk it up doesn't mean we play good defense.

Morgan: 73
GMac: 66

 

[khaal53]

For the record, I don't think anyone has ever said we were close to the death penalty. What has been said is that when McDermott took over the situation was similar to the death penalty. Follow?

 

[clones_jer]

Morgan: 73
GMac: 66

now do the math ...

 

[Tedcyclone]

i would also say he had nba type talent on his teams. same as greg does. loan exception is craig is prob an nba player... gilstrap the verdict is still out. if hes as outta control and inconsistant in the nba as he was this year he is not nba material, not even close.

 

[clones_jer]

For the record, I don't think anyone has ever said we were close to the death penalty. What has been said is that when McDermott took over the situation was similar to the death penalty. Follow?

yes, exactly what you said - except its not at all similar to the death penalty and thats what the OP has a problem with.

 

[khaal53]

yes, exactly what you said - except its not at all similar to the death penalty and thats what the OP has a problem with.

Well, it was similar when you consider that when McDermott took over he had 4 sholarship players to work with after the attrition of the coaching change. And some small APR issues that could've been handled better by everybody.

 

[cycloneG]

now do the math ...

What math?

Another criteria to consider, FG% defense:
Morgan: 44%
GMac: 42%

 

[bawbie]

Morgan's teams on average gave up 71 points per game. GMac's teams on average give up 68 points a game. Draw your own conclusions.

Ken Pomeroy measures an offensive and defensive efficiency, which takes the tempo into account.

100 is about average, and for defense the lower the number is better.

For Defensive Efficiency:
For Morgan's teams, we had 95.7, 86.8 (6th best in the nation), and 99.2

For McDermott's teams, we've had 95.0, 93.2. 96.3, 93.6. Which is generally between 50th and 70th in the country.

Generally Morgan's teams had a better offensive efficiency than McDermott's, but this years team has a decent offensive efficiency number.

 

[mikeiastat]

I actually get tired of defending Morgan, but I've stated before that as long as some keep posting rumors and opinions that ignore the facts, I'll keep defending Morgan. Myth 1 is that Morgan could recruit but couldn't coach. Then how do people explain that he beat many ranked teams that had NBA talent while he had none of his own. His record against ranked teams is far better than even Orr, Floyd and LE, who had pros like Grayer, Hornacek, Hoiberg, Cato, Fizer and Tinsley to work with. Another myth is that his practices were unorganized chaos (though that's contradicted by some). So again how did he beat those ranked teams and go 5-2 in the NIT and NCAA? Don't most coaches say that a team plays like it practices? Again a myth that holds no water. Another myth is that Morgan had undisciplined players that some have called thugs. George is the only player I can think of who got in trouble and he was booted immediately. In fact I haven't heard of any of Morgan's kids in any trouble since they graduated. Fact is almost all of Morgan's recruits were good kids and still are. Fact is Morgan did a very good job at ISU, especially taking over a program in scandal and having trouble getting anybody to take the job. Defend Mac all you want, just don't do it by dissing Morgan because that's ignoring the facts.

And to go with those admittedly great wins, were some real stinkers. Look at 05-06. Losses to Iona, Fresno St., a terrible Tex tech, and Nebraska, all at home. That was the problem. There was no consistancy and the results were so unpredictable because they were not diseplined. It made for exciting wins, but some really terrible losses that weren't getting better.

Name me some Mac bad losses this year. Our worst losses this year are @ Colorado, @ Ok, and neutral court NW. Far cry from Iona, Fresno St. a TT team that wouldn't have sniffed the CBI if they expanded to 50 teams and home against Neb. Not saying we're where we want to be. Some upsets would be nice, yes, but the crazyness went both ways, and it showed a lack of structure. Consistancy and a few upsets are what build lasting foundations in the NCAA. If you want to be the flavor of the month then, pulling rabits out of your hat and players failing to meet NCAA requirements is great. But that gamble wasn't paying off either and it was ruining our longterm success.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Ken Pomeroy measures an offensive and defensive efficiency, which takes the tempo into account.

100 is about average, and for defense the lower the number is better.

For Morgan's teams, we had 95.7, 86.8 (6th best in the nation), and 99.2

For McDermott's teams, we've had 95.0, 93.2. 96.3, 93.6. Which is generally between 50th and 70th in the country.

Generally Morgan's teams had a better offensive efficiency than McDermott's, but this years team has a decent offensive efficiency number.

I take it the hard numbers are defensive correct?

 

[clones_jer]

What math?

subtraction.

 

[jdoggivjc]

Well, it was similar when you consider that when McDermott took over he had 4 sholarship players to work with after the attrition of the coaching change. And some small APR issues that could've been handled better by everybody.

Except that's not even close to the death penalty...

Death penalty (NCAA) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The [repeat violator] rule stipulates that if a second major violation occurs at any institution within five years of being on probation in the same sport or another sport, that institution can be barred from competing in the sport involved in the second violation for either one or two seasons. In cases of particularly egregious misconduct, a school can also be stripped of its right to vote at NCAA conventions for four years. The "repeat violator" rule gave the Infractions Committees of the various NCAA divisions specific instances where it either must bar a school from competing or explain why it didn't. The NCAA still has the power to ban schools from competing in a sport without any preliminary sanctions in cases of particularly serious violations.

McDermott having only 4 scholarship players to work with his first season in no way relates to what the death penalty is.

 

[bawbie]

I take it the hard numbers are defensive correct?

Correct, I'll clarify.

 

[Tre4ISU]

subtraction.

Fine. I'll do it

Morgan-+2
Mac- -2

 

[khaal53]

Again, no one said it was like the death penalty in terms of institutional control, at least not that I've heard. All I've ever heard is that it was similar situation as to what the punishment would be from the death penalty. Mainly meaning loss of scholarships. And the exodus of players did lead to APR considerations that had to be made.

 

[jdoggivjc]

Again, no one said it was like the death penalty in terms of institutional control, at least not that I've heard. All I've ever heard is that it was similar situation as to what the punishment would be from the death penalty. Mainly meaning loss of scholarships. And the exodus of players did lead to APR considerations that had to be made.

How is it similar? The death penalty is the NCAA forcing the cancellation of an entire season due to multiple major rules violations over a several year time span and losing many scholarships. At worst, ISU was guilty of a couple of minor rules infractions and was at risk of losing one or two scholarships due to academic issues.

Yeah, the death penalty and what ISU was facing really sounds similar to me... :skeptical:

What is really clear is you and whoever originally made this argument that you are referencing clearly do not know what the death penalty is.

 

[ClimbIowa]

I thought the big problem ISU faced before hiring GMac was their absolutely abysmal graduation rates and the increasing penalties the NCAA began placing on those teams (especially a team like ISU that was graduating under 20% for three years in a row).