6 (maybe more) golden tickets
- Thread starter etowncoug
- Start date
Not defensive at all. You consistently misinterpret my comments . Having KB on this website at this stage is humorous so I had humor to the absurdity .
What I have a hard time understanding in all these Bone and Tony discussions is how critical you are of Tony who coached 2 Tournament teams and an NIT and got us to a Sweet 16 but defend Bone who couldn't get to the Tournament with a Lottery pick, blame the Lottery pick (a Tony recruit) but not Moore who started the off-court issues that season and wasn't punished by Bone until Moos stepped in. You continue to criticize Bennett's recruiting yet when those recruits left town Bone could no longer win.
What more do you need to hear. Ken didn’t recruit well enough, he deservedly got fired .
Again it could have been you coaching and I would have wished Tony’s recruiting mistakes didn’t come at a a critical time and at a critical position.
I am not sure what you want to hear . Ken sucked ? Ken’s recruiting was so hit and miss he couldn’t overcome his mistakes . If it makes it feel more even handed bone sucked at WSU and got fired .
That's a bit dramatic and I don't think "Ken sucked". I asked you to explain why the constant criticism of Tony, saying he didn't leave quality talent for the next coach, and for the most part only blame his recruits like Thompson and Thames? IMO it's pretty unfair.
Ken was unsuccessful . Not sure what more you wanted . And he got fired. I would think that would summarize his job recruiting.
I have written maybe in two threads ever about tony Bennett. I am more critical because of what he inherited in large part because of his dad taking the bullet and his dad’s reputation. It was a team that could not fail. Even if they had an injury there was enough depth to be successful . Tony was in a no lose situation . He had two ncaa teams to recruit from . That is so key. It would be like if Wulff took over the 03 team and had the recruiting woes Doba had. It is about the one advantage WSU had at the time . Winning in the near history .
Let me put it to you this way . Let’s say the Bennett rebuilt the program just as they did. And instead of tony taking over year four Wisconsin hires them back, and Tony is the head coach and dad is associate head coach.
Say Bone is hired and has Low and Rochestie and he has similar success and makes the tournament. He then proceeds to negotiate a new deal after not having another offer but simply wants more money . He then does the same thing year two.
On top of that he brings in the exact same class as Tony , then-after his third year hands off to Kent. My criticism is equal to that I have given Tony because that meant he left several major holes without experience, most notably point guard.
Then Kent would be going into his third season without Klay and Casto which has never happened before .
The type of players Dick Bennett pulled in excelled when they had experience and why recruiting misses at the most critical time was relevant . If Sauls for example was ready and healthy we might have a different discussion .
I know there were several nice pieces ... but how was any coach gonna get 55 points out of that crew. ? Thompson was 14 a game , Casto 8, kop 10, Capers 4 , hartune ? Witherill? Thames 8. If he had a player near the quality of Rochestie bone finishes probably 8-10, and MAYBE he can make up for the early in mistakes he made .
Last edited:
You know what is Kelvin Sampson hadn't learned about telephone calls and had stayed in Pullman at WSU since he started. What if Kevin Eastman had been smart enough to hire 2 decent assistants who could recurit. What if Graham had never been hired. All these things didn't come to pass.
Now we have a new Coach in Kyle Smith and I am impressed so far. I like his first 2 assistants and I like his Director of Operations.
Now we have a new Coach in Kyle Smith and I am impressed so far. I like his first 2 assistants and I like his Director of Operations.
Jim Shaw was in Oklahoma while Sampson's telephone violations were going on.
At UW while Venoy was caught pimping underage girls (not kicked from team just suspended from the Pac 12 tournament). But hey, Venoy got his UW degree.
Easy to say it couldn't fail after the fact but who was predicting a Tournament and 13-5 conference finish Tony's first year. The year before without Harmeling for the season and Low for conference we went 4-14 in conference.
You start by saying "Ken was unsuccessful" and then turn to "what ifs" to explain what? Bone wasn't successful because Tony didn't leave him a Rotchestie? Tony's first year Rotchestie was the 3rd PG they used that season. Hopson started the season in his first year in the program but was benched because he turned the ball over too much. Koprivica (true freshman) replaced Hopson in the lineup and Weaver mostly and sometimes Koprivica and Low took over triggering the offense. Then Koprivica was injured and Rotchestie (a redshirt soph) took the point.
Tony left Thompson, Casto, Motum, and Thames. Also at least solid role players in Koprivica and Capers. There was talent to build off of and the trouble for Bone didn't really come until year 4 and 5. I'm just not seeing your point of view but is what it is.
Last edited:
First who predicted year four? Dick Bennett. He was at Saltys before year three and said at every rebuild year three is the hardest . He said year four is his big jump and they will go to the NCAA tourney .
Second dicks players didn’t win until they were vastly experienced then you wonder why with a relatively young team Bone struggled .
Bones first year which would have given momentum to overcome mistakes through credibility were hurt by the fact there was no leadership and kids who didn’t hit front end of 1-1 free throws down the stretch , which includes Moore
If you reverse Bone and tony , and have Bone inherit dB s class and kids then hands off to Tony I would have the same criticism of Bone .
Why do I hold Klay more responsive than Moore. For several reasons . One there was an ncaa birth at stake . WSU has a 20 point lead with their best shooter and FT shooter not on the court . They lost to UCLA because they couldn’t hit free throws down the stretch.
This isn’t about bone . I would have hoped the guy who looked at other jobs all three years he was head coach and leveraged the non offers to more money would have left close to the same roster he inherited including most importantly in the pg / leadership position .
This isn’t about bone . It is about the program and having a situation that was handed to toney and wanting it to be left in similar shape.
Pullman and that job is pretty unforgiving if you make a mistake . I would rather Kent ale over from tony and have success be looking for our third coach in ten years and that is why I would have rather tony miss on thames and Motum than the class that needed experience in 2009 and 2010 .
Dick was amazingly prophetic in his understanding of what the rebuild would look like. I am pretty sure he made the same statements on how each year would look in his opening presser and they all were pretty much spot on.
Hindsight is an interesting thing though. I was probably as optimistic as anyone back then on these boards but Ava's the only poster I remember predicting a tournament of any kind and I believe it was the NIT. Now you knew we were an NCAA Tournament team? My memory is not always the best but I don't remember you making NCAA Tournament predictions.
All this reversing of things and now you would rather Tony missed on Motum and Thames? I am not following the logic at all just like I wasn't with blaming Tony for not leaving a "Rotchestie". Bone had been a head coach. If what was left wasn't good enough he had 5 years to buid his own program.
Something seems to be clouding things a bit.
The suggestion that Bone would have had the same success Tony did if he would have followed Dick in year four is disingenuous at best and most likely absurd. Nothing in Bone's record indicated he was remotely capable of having an excellent season in the Pac-12 regardless of personnel.
This statement, to me, clearly indicates your bias against Tony Bennett. Even if true, what would his looking at other jobs have to do with the roster he turned over to Bone? Why would you include that description of Bennett if not to cast him in a negative light?
Also, your "what if" game can always be played no matter the circumstances. What if Sauls doesn't suffer a serious concussion and basically have to quit the game? Answer: Then maybe Tony leaves Bone an experienced point guard. What if Fabian Boeke doesn't suffer a career ending back injury? Answer: Then maybe Tony leaves Bone an experienced, high scoring big man. What if Kopravica doesn't blow up his knee and never get back to 100% in his career? Answer: Bone gets a potential all-conference player with experience courtesy of Bennett. What if Harthun justifies being the 4-star prospect that EVERYONE seemed to be excited about and not the recruiting bust you continually point to? Answer: Yet another experienced scorer handed over to Ken Bone.
I'll say it again....it mystifies me how some of our "fans" concoct arguments to diminish the accomplishments of our best coaches yet develop arguments designed to boost our less than successful coaches. Seems screwy to me.
Glad Cougar
Not clouded at all. Maybe I will TRY keep answers to some one sentence key points.
1) Yes I believed Dick B when he said year four would be a tourney team and I thought as much. He explained why year three would look like a step back. He said because his sophs become very confident and start to try and do more than they are capable of doing. Yes, I believed they would be very good in year four of the Bennett's.
2) I always think it is "easier" to recruit off success thus a harsher grade if you will for the misses by those who have that advantage.
3) TB did not leave the program in the same shape he inherited it. That was my initial assertion that started this convo and my attempt to clarify my position as you asked questions.
4) TB missed on two very key classes to keep the momentum. That is SO KEY. I get people think it is about Bone, it is not. Plug in any name. The longer the school can sustain success the more cred it has.
5) Why I would rather have Bennett hit on Hopson, Ambercrombie in his first class an Enquist Sauls Boeke in his second instead of Thames and Motums they would have been seasoned (an absolute key in kids they were recruiting for success)) for the next coach.If they are the caliber of Taylor Rochestie for example they would be seasoned and mature to get the new coaches team over the hump and continue the momentum of what the Bennett's started.
6) Bone made two critical mistakes before he coached one practice. One made sense (as it was his core philosophy)and I put on the person hiring him as much as him, but he changed the core philosophy of the program. They may have been better finding someone who ran Tony's exact program and see if that type of play was sustainable.
His second mistake was in thinking he was going to get the A- kids from the Seattle area because of the history and great relationships he had in the area. Those two mistakes we hard to overcome, and if he had Sauls and Boeke for example with experience it would have made up for the holes that were in the roster by Witherill Hartune etc and would have given him momentum to overcome those mistakes.
Truth be told when Klay and Casto left after his second year he was done, he didn't have the Mike Leach type cache to overcome it. Going to a tourney with Klay his junior year in part lends him some of that cache and gives him a recent history of success to recruit from. .
Well... how does the job leveraging diminish Tony in your eyes? (my guess it doesn't or wouldn't if what I posted is true) He was successful. I have a couple of core beliefs. One, coaches are never as good as we think, and they are never as bad as we think unless it is Wulff, Bone and Kent.
I have an exact opposite view as you. Why do we heap ultimate praise on them and they never stick around to build the program where they have sustained success?
You state I sully his reputation by stating he leveraged job offers three consecutive years. Does it change your opinion at all if it is true? My guess us probably not. My opinion is simple.
Dick Bennett and WSU gave him this fantastic opportunity, one that held ZERO risk. How many coaches are ever afforded that opportunity? If Dick B doesn't get it turned around it is on him, not Tony. All the losses aren't on his (Tony's)resume. They are on Dicks. If they aren't successful Dick was too old and couldn't get it done, the game passed him by. And what did he do? Stated LSU wanted him year one, Marguette I believe year two and got two raises. And when he got his first offer he bolted.
Those opportunities are never given to an assistant coach, much less the son. I don't begrudge Tony, I simply wished he left the program in same shape, experience and talent that he inherited it, and for anyone to say that he did I think is a mistaken opinion.
When it comes to Tony, I think of him much like I think of Dennis. They came in when it was right and left when it was right, for them. Dennis was handed one of the most talented teams in school history and he was .500. Yet he is thought of as one of the great coaches even though his recruiting was marginal and did not leave the program in the same shape he inherited it.
I am agnostic when I think of Tony when he wins or loses, and I have a much different thoughts when I think of his dad.
I heap ultimate praise on any coach who is able to give us back-to-back 26 win seasons and gives us the best 3-year run in Cougar basketball history. Absolutely, his dad built up the program to the point to where it could be successful.....(even though they were picked to finish 7th that fateful 4th year of the Bennetts). But you omit two factors I consider important: (1) Dick didn't build that team by himself. Tony was probably the most involved assistant coach to ever work at WSU. His dad entrusted him to help identify players, assess players, and recruit them with the knowledge that these kids were ultimately going to play for Tony. (2) You make it sound like it was so easy for Tony to take over that team and lead it to 52 wins in 2 seasons. No fail situation? Ralph Miller left OSU in the hands of Jimmy Anderson with a team led by Gary Payton and probably a stronger roster than Tony ever inherited and look what happened there? The new coach still needs to deliver, still needs to develop players, still needs to make adjustments during the game, etc...Tony delivered, that's why I give him praise. The fact that Tony didn't stick around longer than 3 years (6 years, if you want to count his time as an assistant at WSU) doesn't diminish his record as a Cougar head coach one bit for me. So yes, you and I do have an opposite view of things.
Glad Cougar
Glad Cougar
I am pretty sure the fact that Glad keeps getting "likes" on his posts and CougEd not so much is completely lost on CE, else-wise he wouldn't keep blathering on about the same subject, ad infinitum. Oh, wait a minute, its CougEd. My bad.
Not sure if you aren’t making my point with the Jim Anderson example. It has always been my contention talent acquisition is the most important part of the job and the hardest as well.
Jim Anderson won the conference with Ralph’s talent then as he got further away from that talent he had less success.
Sauls Boeke , Enquist Ambercrombie hopson, Koprivaca, Lodwick in two classes .
Quick question for you: You say Tony was in a zero risk situation when he took over for his dad. You also state that Dick built everything up for the Cougars to be a tournament team in that 4th year. What if Tony had failed to deliver? What if the team had finished in 7th place as predicted? Don't you think he would've run the risk of being someone who failed to deliver? Or was it truly risk free? The fact is Tony Bennett led that team to back-to-back NCAA tournaments and a Sweet Sixteen appearance. Again, you make it sound like anybody could've come in and deliver that 3-year run thanks to Dick Bennett. And I also repeat my other point that Tony was an important part of the architecture of that team whether or not you want to deny him credit.
Glad Cougar
Well the tourney team did not surprise me for several reasons . First, Dick Bennett to almost the minute described perfectly what was going to happen in year three and year four.
Second, his team his third year lost four conference games by 2 points and two more by 5.
Yeah I give DB the lions share of the credit cause it was his plan and he j ew how to execute it. Does TB get Jeff Varem year one, or the core of the tourney team by himself . I don’t think he comes close.
And I think strategy and game day coaching can be done by some really quality assistants as Jimmy Anderson pointed out. As Bill Doba pointed out. The hard part was getting more talent in .
I just view it differently . I don’t root against TB, I just don’t pay attention to what he is doing at Virginia , nor do I hold him in the same manner as I hold his father.
This is the fifth or sixth time I have read about my lack of “likes” . This is a semi-serious question, do I get something for it? Do I get money off the subscription I no longer have ?
Yeah getting a “like” from Mike from so and so would mean something to me. When I shut off my computer at night , I am not sure I would get anywhere with my better half by saying “hey honey Biggs liked my latest post. “Ed who is Biggs?”. “Ummm I don’t know but he or she liked my post”
Since you don't pay attention to what he's doing at Virginia, I've got a news flash for you. Tony won a national championship. That's something his dad wasn't able to do.
Glad Cougar
There wasn't much to suggest 26 overall and 13 conference wins were coming. Everything you have posted about Dick I have heard but I don't remember him predicting an NCAA Tournament. The Pac 10 at the time was a pretty tough conference. I was about as optimistic as anyone about where we were headed but I really thought we could easily miss getting to the NIT similar to Sampson in I believe his year 4. I was definitely higher on year 3 than most because of the OOC without Harmeling, Low lost for conference, and Baynes played gimpy all season long. Nobody was much higher on Baynes than I was at least in terms of posting about what he was becoming.
Why don't I remember you posting it was guaranteed we were on the verge of the NCAA Tournament after year 3? I definitely remember Ava making the post-season prediction and literally nobody else on this board. I don't remember you ever posting that in year 4 it was a guaranteed Tournament team. Even that you expected it? If you say you did to either fair enough. If you didn't then what was holding you back?
I feel like I would remember but again my memory has failed me before.
Time to chime in here. I remember well Dicks prediction about the 3rd year being the toughest. However Dick csme very close to being a bad prognosticator. That 3rd year saw them at 12-2 and getting AP votes when Low went down. That injury had more severe consequences that just losing Low. It also set up a guy who did not buy in to the system (Akogon) to become the scorer. He came in to the starting lineup and put up 30 leading us to a victory over the Huskies. In some respects that performance came at a high price. People in Pullman told me he became a cancer on the team as the season wore on and the losses started to pile up.
I think that Cowgill Low Weaver group had more maturity than Dick expected, but the injuries derailed what could have been a year earlier breakout
I think that Cowgill Low Weaver group had more maturity than Dick expected, but the injuries derailed what could have been a year earlier breakout
I will need to be careful because someone may go back and track every post I made during the Bennett years, but truth be told I don't remember posting more than 20 times (and I believe I am being generous) during the Bennett and Bone years, so it would not surprise me that you did not see that "prediction."
I went to the DB dinner at Salty's. It was right before the third year started and he said at every stop year three is the toughest, and he said without Kelati it will look like a step back. He set expectations beautifully. He then went on to say year 4 would be the tourney year.
And it makes sense after year three was complete. 12 more points and he wins four more games. He lost an additional two by five points a piece. It reminded me much of what I saw during the 2000 football season. They had to walk before they could chew gum. They had to learn what a game winning play looked like and eventually did.
Akognon also only was allowed to get through the season and then both he and program moved on. We already had recruited over him before he was gone anyway with Rotchestie sitting the year, picking up Hopson, and Low probably envisioned off the ball plus Koprivica was coming in as well.
I never heard Moore described as a cancer. In fact other than “sky blue” and maybe rumored incident with an assistant coach I remember him described as a really good kid. He simply wasn’t asked to do more such as play defense and eliminate the pipe. Look at Clark who wanted his offensive role expanded. He sat the bench late in his career. IMO Moore was allowed a bit too much free reign while it sounded like others were controlled a bit tighter.
Well back to the golden ticket allotment.
PG Isaac Bonton is supposedly visiting this week: https://www.tbirds.cc/sports/mbkb/2018-19/bios/bonton_isaac_ijow
PG Isaac Bonton is supposedly visiting this week: https://www.tbirds.cc/sports/mbkb/2018-19/bios/bonton_isaac_ijow
Scottie Pippen jr signed his National Letter of Intent with Vanderbilt. Others to follow with different Universities
Oh well. Truthfully we are stuck with the players who were previously interested in WSU. If they now go elsewhere I am fine with that. I am more concerned with year 2 and 3 recruiting.
P.S. tell Ernie I wish him the best in retirement.
I don't think Smith was actually recruiting Hampshire....I think EK offered him a scholarship but Hampshire didn't take it. Hampshire only played 15 mpg, averaged 6 ppg, 5 rebounds per game. He would've given WSU some size, but his stats remind me of the 7-foot stiffs from junior college that Paul Graham used to bring in. Coach Smith did travel to Casper College but it was to meet with PG Bonton, who is a second team JC All-American.
Glad Cougar
Glad Cougar
Still clinging to EK's thirty-something winning percentage the way the $600,000 Club clings to an even lower Wulffian abyss, I see. Losers unite!
Yup the 12 million dollar man will unite the losers all right. what a farce he has never been to a post season tournament. I guess Scottie Pippen and other potential recruits are well aware of the 12 million dollar man? Kent is long gone but they do not want to talk about the new coach s credentials.
We have a new coach because our last one completely sucked!! The losers just can’t seem to grasp that Kent was horrible at WSU and horrible for WSU and that’s the reason we had to fire him and we have to pay extra for a real coach.
When they finally hire a coach with a good coaching resume let me know. He is certainly not worth over 12 million dollars Cam Mack 6'3 PG signed with Nebraska. They hired a real coach with the ability to recruit winners. Boynton is a joke for the PG position.
