One day after accepting the Arkansas coaching job, Dana Altman has decided to go back to Creighton. One has to wonder how much the Hog fans' less-than-enthusiastic response to his hire was a factor in his decision...
Printable View
One day after accepting the Arkansas coaching job, Dana Altman has decided to go back to Creighton. One has to wonder how much the Hog fans' less-than-enthusiastic response to his hire was a factor in his decision...
wonder how this sets with Razorback boosters?
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2824653
Hi,Quote:
Originally Posted by 365Duke
Maybe she will head to Texas and then say, "What have I done?" :)
GO DUKE!
How funny! We both posted at the same time.
If you want a bit of entertainment, take a look at the viewer feedback to the story on the website for LR's ABC affiliate:
http://www.katv.com/news/allposts.hrb?s=411193
Broyles mucked this one up. Popular opinion around here is that he fired Heath because he thought he had Gillespie signed on the dotted line. Turns out Gillespie was using AR to get a big fat raise from A&M. The list of people who have turned down the job is starting to look something like the one on the "I said no to Dean" t-shirts!
The Arkansas AD and Joe Alleva are having a great competition for the title of Worst Athletics Director in Division I.
For whatever it's worth, I thought Altman was a bad choice for Arkansas anyway.
King Frank is retiring in December, and AR is looking for a new AD. Maybe we can hire Joe Alleva!!! (just kidding...)
I can't figure out why Broyles didn't interview Lon Kruger. I think he would be an intriguing choice. Rick Majerus and Mike Montgomery were reportedly interested. Majerus has some health issues. I'm not sure how I'd feel about Montgomery.
There are reports surfacing that several key players will be academically ineligible and that several have tested positive for drug use. Apparently folks on the hill knew this and didn't tell Altman at all: he found out on his own. That's allegedly the real reason he backed out on AR. Is Broyles looking as bad as Alleva yet?
The Chancellor has hired a search firm to conduct the new search, rather than letting Frank do it again. Wally Hall (Sports Editor for the Democrat-Gazette) said in today's column that the only reason none of this came out is that Dana Altman took the high road when he decided to leave. He also probably committed career suicide as far as getting a job somewhere other than Creighton.
(sorry; I'd link the column, but it is subscription only...)
Wally Hall is a co-host on a local sports talk show and dropped a big bombshell a few minutes ago: 6 players (!) are academically ineligible and 1 tested postive for drug use. I believe there was also mention of players approaching Altman with their hands out, expecting to get money.
This is getting as entertaining (in a bad way) as the recent football program debacle with Mustain.
according to FoxSports:
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/6658992
for the razorbacks
This is, what, their 6th choice?
Arkansas has the players to be a Top 25 team, maybe a Sweet 16 team. They just need the coaching, chemistry, and not have these off-the-court issues mess up their season.
That we know about. In reality, I doubt Pelphrey was even on the fringes of the radar when Heath got canned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wander
My question to DBR:
What do you, an impartial fanbase (1994 notwithstanding), think of Arkansas? What is our standing in your eyes? What other schools do you think occupy a similar place in the college hoops landscape?
I assume you mean overall as a program and not just this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by crote
There are six programs that stand out above the rest historically: UCLA, Kentucky, Duke, UNC, Indiana, and Kansas (in no order). After that, there a bunch that are in a "second tier" of elite programs, like Louisville, Michigan State, Arkansas, Syracuse, Cincinnati, etc. So Arkansas is right in that area, which is to say, really good.
If you're talking about the present day though, I'd say they're similar to a program like Wake Forest, Oregon, or Oklahoma. Capable of making some noise, but not a lock to make the tournament every year and not a consistent player on the national picture.
According to a reporter for the AR Democrat-Gazette, Oliver Purnell was one of the finalists who was interviewed on Saturday. If this is true, was he really interested, or was he attempting to get more money from Clemson? Thoughts?
I have been, by turns, amused and dismayed by the fans' reaction to the hire of John Pelphrey. I've been seeing a frightening number of comments such as, "Broyles promised us a big-name coach and we got someone who's no better than Heath," and "We paid $90K to a consulting firm to hire a big-name coach and we get another mid-major coach with a mediocre record." There are also people who think this is a good hire. Personally, I think Pelphrey is a good fit for the school - better, in fact, than Dana Altman. I am not quite sure why Hog fans think we should be competing with the likes of Kentucky for a head coach.
I think Pelphrey will end up being a good hire. His style of play is exciting, and he seems to be a good fit given our returning personel and regional recruiting base. What dismays me, though, is the fact that we had to dive that deeply into the talent pool to find our guy. Maybe shooting for a Gillispie or a Calipari is too much, especially when the Kentucky job is open. But there's no reason I can think of why we shouldn't be able to land the likes of Floyd or Montgomery.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArkieDukie
Remember, Duke fans, as bad as Joe Alleva may seem sometimes, he's no Frank Broyles.