Ken Bone left Montana...
- Thread starter CougEd
- Start date
That's interesting. Spoke to him briefly two weeks ago at the Big Dipper a couple of blocks from campus with his daughter. She was decked out in Coug gear.
Not surprised that he's found something else. When my son was at the Griz hoop camp last year I saw Bone and talked with him a bit. He was pleasant but clearly seemed out of place as an assistant on a Big Sky team.
Hope he found something he can excel at. He may not have done much for us but I've had four encounters with him through the years and he's a nice guy.
Not surprised that he's found something else. When my son was at the Griz hoop camp last year I saw Bone and talked with him a bit. He was pleasant but clearly seemed out of place as an assistant on a Big Sky team.
Hope he found something he can excel at. He may not have done much for us but I've had four encounters with him through the years and he's a nice guy.
Bone had success at Seattle Pacific and Portland State as well as doing an excellent job as an assistant at the uw. No such success in Pullman as we all know. He might be a good choice as a head coach at a smaller school or as an assistant at a larger one. He will land on his feet somewhere. I wish him luck.
I know it is rather surprising that in this era even the smallest coaching change is typically reported. Heard it from two people. One person in Pullman and one person in Seattle.
He doesn't have anything lined up, I do know that.
Bone is a good coach. His issues at WSU were at least as much about the difficulties of succeeding in Pullman as about his short comings as a coach. He just couldn't recruit enough pac 12 caliber talent to Pullman. Those first 3 seasons he had good game plans, and his NIT final 4 is largely under appreciated by WSU fans.
I don't see him getting a major conference gig based on his lack of success at WSU, but there are a lot of mid major schools in the west that could do much worse than Bone.
I don't see him getting a major conference gig based on his lack of success at WSU, but there are a lot of mid major schools in the west that could do much worse than Bone.
His issues were that he wasn't a good enough coach. He wouldn't win at many P5 stops. He left Portland State and WSU in an APR mess. He won with transfers from the UW at PSU and once Bennett's players left at WSU he went down hill. Cast his ship to Reggie Moore. That's all on Bone.
The NIT run was nice but he needed to quickly get back to the Tournament. Once he didn't it was all over. Bone agreed with KJR that you can't win in Pullman. I'm sure that went over well with Floyd. Forget about Raveling, Sampson, Bennett, can't win in Pullman. If that's what he really believed he was sunk before the ink was dry on his contract.
Save, I probably disagree with some of what you say, not all of it. So let's start with Moore. Who would you have played with a team that lacked scoring? Moore or Thames?
You do get Thames quit and the reason he quit. Did Low quit when Rochestie came on board? Or did Low know he was going to be on the court enough and not quit after his freshman year. Thames whole problem is he wanted to be the primary ball-handler and quit on the team before the Pac 12 season started. I would venture to say for a struggling team on the offensive end, not sure many Pac 12 coaches would have picked Thames over Moore. Moore was the most explosive PG we have had since maybe Dominic Ellison.
What I don't get is you qualify why he won at PSU. Why? Who else had PSU made it to the tourney in a 40 year period? Yes he had APR issues, and it bothered him.
I would very much like to see the KJR interview. He knows you can win in Pulman. Consistently? That is a tougher order. What I will say (never spoke to him on the issue) but I think he fully expected his Seattle connections to follow him to the Palouse. I would imagine he thought he would be able to pluck one kid from Beach, one from Garfield, and one from Federal Way or another school that had a D1 prospect that wasn't headed to the UW.
Without having the KJR replay at my disposal, I think you will find that his feelings is you had to have a defined system, one that works at WSU. I think he would also tell you is you better have a couple of dynamic recruiters at your disposal.
As for other D1 stops, I think he would do well at Oregon. Probably would struggle at OSU. Stanford? I think he would have success there.
I agree, he needed to get to the tournament following the NIT year. Matter of fact, he should have gone to the tourney that year. Do you disagree?
And if WSU didn't have its first early entry into the NBA (Thompson and Casto) I think they make the tourney the following year.
Ed, I wasn't making a comparison to Moore vs. Thames although I have my thoughts on the 2 players. What I said was he 'tied his ship to Moore' and ultimately over Moore's time at WSU that ended up a bit of a disaster.
Two stops at PSU and WSU and 2 APR messes.
Mitch asked Bone something like, "would say you can't win in Pullman"? Bone's response, "well I guess you would have to say that". Then after a pause, "I'm sure people wouldn't agree given the last guy (Tony Bennett)". Well yeah Ken, the last guy did have a little bit of success in Pullman.
Bone was a total mess at WSU and I doubt he would succeed at any P5 program. The level is too high for him. I don't think there is any shame that he was in over his head like Eastman, like Graham, like Len Stevens. His only shot in the Pac 12 was going to be WSU and he sunk the program. He won't get another shot. I wish Bone well, hope he finds a spot somewhere in Seattle where maybe he is a better fit. Seattle U maybe, SPU, Western Washington or something.
I guess I disagree when you say he "tied" his ship to Moore. The other ship in the port quit. Thames bugged out as fast as Shelton Danzy. If coaches in the Pac 12 had to pick between the two as freshman, Moore would have been the one who received the most minutes. Now the fact Moore got injured, and smoked weed as did Casto and Thompson, I think he fit right in and unfortunately there was no one else to turn to. But I can't fault him one bit for hitching his wagon to Moore. He was more talented at an earlier age at the end of the court that needed him to play.
Is this the quote you are referring to : (What would you say to the critic who argues you can’t have continued success at Washington State.) “I would say it would be hard to argue that at this point, but I think a lot of WSU fans would have loved to have seen Tony Bennett stick around. Him and (his father) Dick came in here and they instilled a system that in time was effective those two years that Tony had were really, really good. The last year he had, it dropped off but he’d been here a few years already. The system was in place. And if he could have stayed here, I think there’s a good chance they would have continued to have had good success.” That quote?
Do you think things would have been different if Thompson doesn't smoke a bowl right after the USC game playing UCLA? If we beat UCLA we are in the tourney I believe? Did you watch the game plan against UCLA playing without Thompson and had a 20 point lead but didn't have a player in crunch time who could hit their free throws.
Do you think he would be successful at a place like Gonzaga?
At least two things suggest Bone wronged Thames: he recruited someone at his position when he already had that position covered, and he didn't value Thames' skillset. I think Bruce Fisher would of picked Thames over Moore because he valued his skillset, and subsequent events proved him right. Even if Moore had never had the drug problem, his skillset never translated to winning basketball.
This has been debated a lot over the years (Thames vs. Moore). I agree with Save Ferris, Ken Bone hitched his wagon to Reggie Moore and paid for it dearly. When he had no choice but to kick Moore off the team, he had no point guard option. Reggie's selfishness through breaking team rules played a huge role in the demise of Bone and the program, IMO. Losing one game because of Klay's indiscretion doesn't compare to losing a whole season without a serviceable point guard because of Reggie's indiscretion. Also, had Ken Bone properly dealt with Reggie's first offense with pot (freshman year), it may have sent a strong message to the rest of the team that breaking team rules would not be tolerated. If you remember, nothing happened immediately and then after a couple of weeks had gone by (and perhaps with a strong message received from Moos), Bone decided to suspend Reggie for a brief time. Can't remember if he missed more than 1 game, but I remember being irritated that it was not dealt with swiftly and decisively.
For me, the bottom line is that Reggie Moore was not an asset to the program yet he was clearly the guy Bone wanted as the team leader. Didn't work out, obviously.
I also have a problem characterizing Marcus Thames as a quitter. He transferred at the end of the year, never quit the team....unless you think guys like Jordan Railey, Royce Woolridge, Guy Williams, Mike Ladd, etc....were quitters too. After all, they decided to leave their teams at the end of a season to play for WSU.
Glad Cougar
That is exactly what Thames did. He knew he was transferring by December 25th. He just rode out the season. Let's put it this way, he wasn't the team player Derek Low was.
Thompson missing that UCLA game was pivotal. And you think that was the first time he or Casto smoked?
Yes, if Moore didn't get hurt, didn't smoke so much we might be having a different conversation. That may have allowed Bone time to adjust his staff, get a dynamic recruiter on his staff, and he would be the a senior coaching member of the Pac 12. And we would have had a lifer coach who wouldn't look at another job. Unfortunately it didn't work out that way.
Thames was not as good a player as Reggie Moore and didn't IMO become a better players than Reggie Moore but he did have a more successful college basketball career than Moore. Off court issues should have been a consideration, Moore's off court antics really screwed WSU basketball, i believe a tourney run his senior year was very very possible.
Bone hitched himself to Moore. Ed hitches himself to loser coaches (Bone, Wulff, Ball).
That's the quote and overall even worse than I remembered. After his initial response (ok, not quite as bad as I remembered) he remembers the guy behind him was doing just fine and therefore his statement was ridiculous. So of course the problem wasn't him but the system. Lets say for a moment that he's spot on. Then why not keep the system as-is or adjust appropriately? Why not go to the system that was already put in? Why sign Reggie Moore to run a system that can't work in Pullman and instead embrace Thames who was brought in to run the only system that has a chance to succeed in Pullman? If you can't win or even Calipari or John Wooden wouldn't be good enough to run a different system why didn't he change his recruiting? Why not go out and find Low, Rotchestie, Weaver, Cowgill?
On Moore, I guess you are stuck. Moore was around for a few more years after Thames transferred and as others have said Bone didn't do enough to help change Moore's behavior to keep him on the roster. The hitching his wagon to Moore isn't about choosing Moore over Thames. Ultimately a bad decision but I didn't discuss that decision even though Thames as a point guard long term was obviously the better choice. The issue is making Moore the centerpiece of the program and how ultimately that was a fundamentally disastrous decision Thames or no Thames. Moore didn't do much to bring in other Seattle-area players. He was hurt, suspended, etc. year 2 and 3 and finally tossed out of school before his final season. Not exactly what you want from your point guard. I wouldn't go so far as to say other Pac 12 coaches would have picked Moore over Thames. That's an assumption on your part that may or may not have been true. A good coach might have had the vision to balance the on-court production the first year with the off-court red flags he should have known about.
Bone did a nice job giving us a chance to win against UCLA. He had those moments where he could put together a great game plan. That's what I thought we were getting having watched what he did to Gonzaga while at PSU. It just wasn't consistently there especially after a few years. He couldn't put those kind of performances together over a schedule filled with Gonzaga's. Would Bone be successful at Gonzaga? Last I checked Gonzaga wasn't winning with Seattle players. So no, he would most likely fall flat on his arse. I think Seattle U. and obviously fine at SPU. At some point it's about the coach not Pullman. He's not a P5 or high mid-major level head coach. At that level he's a lead assistant and I'm sure a quality one with the right fit.
It has never been about the system, but rather about getting good talent that will buy in to whatever system you run. You can run Bennett ball all you want in Pullman and if you don't get the talent all you will accomplish is losing closer, but you will still lose.
A couple of more Davonte Lacy's and a couple of less key injuries and Bones tenure in Pullman would have looked quite a bit different. Of course anything less than back to back 26 win seasons and he would have still been a bum in many peoples eyes.
A couple of more Davonte Lacy's and a couple of less key injuries and Bones tenure in Pullman would have looked quite a bit different. Of course anything less than back to back 26 win seasons and he would have still been a bum in many peoples eyes.
I don't know of any Cougar fan who expected another back to back 26 win seasons...even from Tony Bennett, much less Ken Bone. It certainly is not easy being the guy who comes in after a very successful coach, but if Ken Bone was as good a coach as some believe, the program would not have regressed to the level it did.
Glad Cougar
Glad Cougar
How ironical, given the drastic difference in defensive intensity between the Bennett's and Bone's teams, that Bones' last season at Montana was spent coaching the Bennett's 'pack-line defense' and making that squad the best in the conference defensively.
From things I have heard Bone was his own worse enemy behind the scenes. I personally think he went into panic mode when he realized doors didn't open in Seattle, agree with Ed on anticipating getting a lot of talent out of Seattle especially after not getting back to the Tournament quickly, and you that he simply didn't get enough "Davonte Lacy's". Talent evaluation wasn't necessarily the problem but for one reason or another he couldn't recruit enough of it and strangled the talent he had in the program.
I'm not giving Bone or anyone a pass when they make excuses on the way out. It doesn't work for me when you are making mid-6 figures or higher where the program has had success in the past. Go cry a river somewhere else.
The past tense is really confusing given the continued regression of the program.
Well, that's true. I should have finished the sentence with more clarity that the program regressed as far as it did "under Bone's tenure." The slide has continued under Ernie's watch but he certainly inherited a much worse team than Bone inherited.
Glad Cougar
How ironic is that?
Bone was the only coach I have ever seen who could suck the momentum out of his OWN team. It was simply amazing to watch. Virtually every time we had a run in a close game, HE would call a timeout. I've never seen anything like it. I also recall him pulling players when they started hitting a few shots. The guy overthought things. He had no sense of game flow and of exploiting his own team's momentum. Of course, that was just part of his coaching deficiencies. I heard he's a nice guy though.
If he hadn't had one of the best players in the world (seriously...and one he didn't recruit), imagine his record.
A couple of thoughts---the question was really about Bone when he was asked if "You" could win consistently. He was talking about his own failings in Pullman. He owns up to them, as he views his time as great in Pullman in terms of loving to live there, but he also tells KJR in an interview this is a wins and losses business.
In terms of he changing his system- would you expect Mike Leach to change his system? While Bone didn't have Leach cache, he did do something at PSU that no other coach in that schools history has done. As Mike Leach is fond of saying coaching is coaching regardless of level.
Yes, when Bone was hired and it was told to me he is scrapping the defense I knew from day one there was going to be problems. They had a working system in place. Why change it? Because he didn't think he could recruit players that could run the system and score enough points to win games in the Pac 12 defense. The players he knew wanted more up tempo. The fact he had to shed four players after year one, Witheril (D3) Hartune, and Brown meant Tony did not get the same players his Dad got year two and three of the program. If that was a strong group I think it gives Bone or another coach better odds of converting the program to their system. Bone going from Bennett's system to his is no different than Doba going from Price's wide open offense to a more controlled passing game. Doba did it for reasons that on the surface made sense. More ball control, defense gets to rest, less exposure. The problem is it affected the athlete they were recruiting, and other teams didn't care about defense. They were going to outscore you. Thus it created a huge talent gap. And the moment it happened the program was set on the wrong course. The same can be said for Bone.
I think Thames leaving, Moore getting hurt and smoking, and then Thompson and Casto caused Bone to fill gaps to stop the hemorrhaging. I think like with Kelvin if he could have stabilized the program, got back to the tourney and had that carrot to sell we might not be where we are today.
Stuff like that just pops up when you coach in the Pac 12. Fortunately he worked at powerhouses like PSU and SPU that they could overcome game flow issues and calling a time out.
I guess it's what context you take the "you". His follow up comments suggest he was making a general statement not one specific to his ability.
Thompson, Casto, a young Motum and Thames isn't exactly leaving the cupboard bare. He never quite seemed to connect with the returning players and that was nail 1. You compared Low to Thames. Obviously Low had a few years with Tony & was recruited by Tony as well. Did Thames have the same history with Bone? Sure didn't and to say Thames "quit" is a ridiculous statement when he made a lateral move and then soon a better program in SDSU.
I bet you didn't even notice that he did that at WSU (called TO during close games where we had all the momentum). Be honest Ed. No historical revisionism. By the way, I don't think a lot of people noticed it.
He was gone by December 1 of his freshman year. When does a player quit vs. leave? His decision was made for purely selfish reasons. He didn't stay to help the team get better, see D Low. He didn't want to sacrifice not handling the ball all of the time.
The problem was he took over an 8-10 team losing there two best players in Baynes and rochestie. He plugged the hole at PG with a freshman. The problem is two of his best players when they were seasoned left early, something this program has never had the depth to deal with. To make matters worse is the Witherill class was a bust.
And the fact he didn't get to the tourney when Thompson would have been a senior simply meant he was a dead man walking.
And his comment about "you" is dead on. Even if a generic sense you could talk about it and say "one could make that argument", then immediately point out the success of Tony and Dick.
There was a reason why Dick left after year three and not four. Meanwhile his son looked for every job to get out of dodge, and I have heard it from a very reliable source it was his belief he couldn't win consistently in Pullman. He was never offered the LSU job, he used that as a hammer.
And what he meant by his comments was simply you have to have the right plan in place, and you have to execute that plan. He will readily admit he didn't have the right plan.
Better fire him. Is a coach that is .333 in any sport after three years "his record is what it says he is". ?
1. Given that he had no history showing he was better than that at the Pac-12 level at any time prior to WSU, then yes.
2. Given that his recruiting was not showing promising results each year, then yes.
3. Given that his teams were getting worse, not better, then yes.
By the way, do you realize that he had one of the premier players in the world at the college-level when he coached at WSU?
There was no way Tony would have stayed at WSU no matter what. Even if he could win consistently.
