For as bad as this season has been so far, firing Prohm after last season's success would have been f*cking idiotic.
We would have gotten absolutely torched PR wise, and rightfully so.
This is why Prohm must go........
- Thread starter ohly2311
- Start date
For as bad as this season has been so far, firing Prohm after last season's success would have been f*cking idiotic.
We would have gotten absolutely torched PR wise, and rightfully so.
What success? We had a legitimate shot at the conference title and completely collapsed. Steve even lost control of his team for a while.
Seriously? Look, I know you absolutely hate the man, but we made it back to the NCAA tournament and won the Big 12 championship one season after finishing dead last in the conference.
Honestly, this is the kind of b*llshit that drives me nuts; the vocal contingent on here who made up their minds to hate Prohm from Day One (whether that's because of who he replaced or because they didn't want him in the first place) and who absolutely refuse to give him credit for anything good that he's done here.
Yes. This season sucks so far, and that's on him primarily. That doesn't erase the good seasons and victories that he has had here. If you honestly feel that he should have been fired after a 23-victory, NCAA tournament season then it's pretty clear to me that your animosity towards him renders you incapable of any sort of objectivity.
Are you really saying making the NCAA Tournament and winning the conference tournament title isn't success?
NCAA tourney bid, conference tourney title. Historically that's a successful season at ISU.
ISU was 5-3 entering February. Hardly a legit shot at the title since there's that whole 1.5 months left thing.
I'm not sure if I've ever heard of a coach getting fired after earning a 6 seed in the tourney unless there was some sort of scandal, and even that, I can't recall.
The lull was weird and bad but we also don't know all of the details that contributed.
*This is NOT a blind support of CSP or longing for Fred. I'd be surprised if next season is a repeat of this year and he's retained.
First of, by your standards of a successful season, 2017-18 was a halfway successful season because we won a meaningless tournament during that season too. Also, in what world is finishing the regular season 2-6, going on a hot streak to win a tournament, and then proceeding to getting bounced first round a successful season.
Secondly, I do not hate Steve at all. The guy went out of his way to have lunch with me and a few others where we shared ideas as far as atmosphere in Hilton goes. He even payed the check. I don't have any ill will against the guy, I just have seen enough and don't think he's cut out for the job.
Are you serious? Uh, no we didn't.
And we collapsed in February, plus the collapse against Ohio State, even as a heavy favorite
Leaving Manhattan on Feb. 16, we were either tied or a half of a game out from first place in the conference. All we had to do was win out (against the bottom half of the conference), or could've possibly gotten away with a loss, and had something fall in place. But instead, we proceeded to lose 5 out of 6 of those games, including by 15 to the last place team.
Also, this whole conference tournament championship is not a good measure of a successful season, at all. Especially when you don't do anything to show for it the week after.
For where this program should be, making the NCAA tournament should be the bare minimum. Getting bounced in the first round is not success. Sure a conference tournament title is a nice additive, but so would have been an Atlantis title this year or a Maui title last year.
Last edited:
Again people seem to have this idea that historically successful is all that matters. Yes if you look at all of our history and ignore how good the team really was and what the rest of the country had it was a successful season. When you look at the context of how talented the team was plus the down Kansas team it was at best mildly successful.
I'm typing from my smartphone, I forgot to add tournament there.
And we were not a "heavy" favorite against OSU. I don't recall what the point spread was, but I would be very surprised if it was any more than 4-5 points.
Making the tournament will always be success. Maybe not to the point we want or some expect, but continually downplaying making it or winning the conference tournament title makes you look like an entitled brat.
If you are honestly and seriously going to try to equate a non-conference, early season tournament championship with a conference tournament championship than in all honesty I don't think having a rational discussion is in the cards.
Why is it so hard for you to give him any sort of credit?
Point taken - I think "heavy favorite" was inaccurate. But it was a disappointing loss.
It was still success. Which is all I'm saying.
Like I said, where this program should be based on the last decade, making the NCAA tournament should be the bare MINIMUM.
Getting to the second weekend = success
Losing second round = Not bad, but not great
Losing first round = unless you’re going against a much higher seed, that ain’t good.
I give credit where it is due, but it’s hard to give credit when there isn’t much to be given.
And yes, I did compare mid-season tournaments to conference tournaments. Only differences between the two are that one is later in the season so teams are more developed, and two, winning the Maui Invitational doesn’t give you an automatic bid, unlike winning the conference tournament.
He did...........
Thanks for lunch..........now find another job.
