The CardBoard
Would we want Howland? - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Would we want Howland? (/thread-4970.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Would we want Howland? - GoodGrief - 03-23-2013

Over on the LA Times, it seems like every day appears a new article questioning whether Ben Howland will get fired at the end of this season. I admit that I really haven't followed hoops very closely in the last several years, but it seems to me that Howland and Stanford would be perfect for each other. My impression of Howland (please let me know if I'm wrong) is that he's a great, hard-nosed defense-minded coach (three Final Fours at UCLA) who has had some problems with unmotivated or thuggish players. With Stanford students being pretty motivated and respectful, it seems like the perfect place for Howland.

If I were Muir, I'd snatch up Howland in a second. Of course, if I were Muir, I'd also mandate that soccer games be played with two balls at a time to make the game more interesting. So i freely admit I don't know much about the current state of hoops. Anybody with more knowledge care to opine?

Re: Would we want Howland? - 81alum - 03-23-2013

I don't really know anything about MBB coaches, but I found the behavior of the players described in that SI article to be positively revolting.  It did not sound like Howland handled it well, either.

Down my way, George Nessman suspended the top SJSU player (James Kinney) for a year, and the team promptly lost nearly every remaining game, leading to Nessman's firing.  Maybe Nessman was not a good coach and should have been fired anyway.  However, it is easy to see how coaches can be made fearful of their own players if an administration values winning more than running a disciplined, ethical operation.  Didn't the Kentucky coach say something similar about appeasing his players after his team's recent loss?

Come to think of it, these examples might make me soften my distaste for Johnny Dawkins a bit.  Has he ever had players doing ecstasy at raves, drinking before practice, or beating each other up?  I'd rather have an ethical coach who wins than an ethical coach who loses--so I would replace Dawkins--but not without some misgivings.

But what the legion of stories about MBB do more than anything is to discourage me from watching MBB in general.  It just seems like stories like Howland's have been circulating in this game for decades.  Maybe--like politics--we only hear about the corruption and dysfunction and this creates an unduly negative impression.  But if I have a limited amount of fan energy to invest, perhaps I should spend it all on the women, whose worst offense in living memory appears to be a DUI on a golf cart.

Re: Would we want Howland? - 81alum - 03-23-2013

(03-23-2013, 07:39 AM)garvin link Wrote:Monty the Traitor and Trent Johnson won at Stanford without recruiting problematic players. So did Jim Harbaugh and David Shaw. This is not an either/or situation; we don't have to accept mediocre results in order not to have criminals and jerks on the court.
I agree.  What I'm saying is that knowing that there is so much unethical, undisciplined, prima-donnaish behavior throughout MBB in general diminishes my enjoyment of the game, even if we do get it right here at Stanford. 

That said, I did used to be a fan in the Monty days, so maybe I'm just depressed and will cheer up when we start contending again.



Re: Would we want Howland? - BobK - 03-23-2013

Howland would be great if you are hoping for mass transfers.  Terrible terrible thought.  Good grief.  Lol

Re: Would we want Howland? - washingtonismoney - 03-23-2013

While I wouldn't support a Howland hiring, I think he'd do well with Stanford-type kids; he might be served well by having the pool limited for him.

Re: Would we want Howland? - fullmetal - 03-23-2013

How about Andy Enfield?

Re: Would we want Howland? - 76lsjumb - 03-23-2013

Hearing the rumors, I find myself scratching my head over the following: 

Given the past few months, which of the following is [apparently] likely to lose his job:

Johnny Dawkins
L.ane K.iffen
Craig Robinson
Ben Howland

Bonus points:  Which of the those guys actually got his team into "legitimate" post-season play [i.e., something other than a 2d-tier bowl or b'ball tournament]?

Coaching is a tough business.

[BTW, put me in the "Don't want Howland" camp. I hear echoes of Wlat.]

Re: Would we want Howland? - GoodGrief - 03-23-2013

Hmm, I suppose my thought process was kind of naive. I kind of figured that at Stanford,  the Admissions Office keeps the thugs out and the Stanford culture keeps the primadonnas in line. But that article showed that even upperclassman leadership can't create a cohesive team if the coach isn't exerting discipline. Okay, scratch that idea.

Re: Would we want Howland? - Leftcoast - 03-23-2013

I wonder about that article and that year.  I also wonder if a more balanced portrayal is possible.

Prior to that and certainly during his string of NCAA runs at UCLA after taking over from "Let the players play" Lavin, Howland was given credit for bringing discipline and defense to the talented kids that came to UCLA.  He also was reputed to have a nose for finding talented point guards, several of which are still in the NBA (Westbrook for instance.). We would have jumped at any longshot chance for Howland in the mid-2000s.

How did it all turn so bad so quickly for the guy?

Re: Would we want Howland? - socalstanfan1 - 03-23-2013

I have to say, until reading that article, I though Good Grief's idea had some merit.  Howland's reputation when he came from Pitt to UCLA was very good, in fact kind of the opposite of the the image that emerges from the article (the author of the SI piece even acknowledges that at the beginning).  But I think I wouldn't want to take a chance on a coach that clearly, if the article is accurate, looked the other way when problems began to emerge.  It seems like coaching 101: the coach must have control of the team.  Fail that and you are courting disaster.

Re: Would we want Howland? - pincemob - 03-23-2013

Coaching at Stanford vs. UCLA is almost a different sport.  Adidas put Howland at UCLA, and from what I've read sent him most of his players via their AAU programs.  I doubt Howland had final say on a lot of those guys, and probably couldn't put his foot down either.  We compete so differently, I doubt a guy like Howland could adjust.  I mean, hiring Jordan Adams' AAU coach so he can get Adams?  How is any of that stuff going to work at Stanford? 

Re: Would we want Howland? - dabigv13 - 03-23-2013

You guys are forgetting about his stint at Pitt, where he was a very good coach who played a style not dissimilar from Monty, and from my recollection had none of the problems like he encountered at UCLA.

I highly doubt Howland would be an option for us at any point, but if he were I'm willing to bet he'd probably be the surest thing we'd have a chance at getting. I think he'd do well here.

Re: Would we want Howland? - dabigv13 - 03-23-2013

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaab--sources--ben-howland-out-at-ucla-013325438.html

Well, it takes two to tango....but we're still doing the macarena with Johnny Dawkins.

Re: Would we want Howland? - pincemob - 03-23-2013

I would bet on Scott Drew from Baylor:  relatively proven Adidas coach in smaller market.  Needs a bigger platform, similar to Howland when he showed up from Pitt.  We will probably see Mark Gottfried's name, from NC State.  Also Adidas, and worked for Harrick so it can be disguised as a "Ucla ties" type of hire. 

Re: Would we want Howland? - BobK - 03-23-2013

Mrs Andy Enfield

http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/sKXCdouoq1rG_LR90aqewg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/sptusncaabexperts/d0319am.jpg

Re: Would we want Howland? - Kathy - 03-24-2013

(03-23-2013, 03:03 PM)GoodGrief link Wrote:Hmm, I suppose my thought process was kind of naive. I kind of figured that at Stanford,  the Admissions Office keeps the thugs out and the Stanford culture keeps the primadonnas in line. But that article showed that even upperclassman leadership can't create a cohesive team if the coach isn't exerting discipline. Okay, scratch that idea.

Maybe hiring Howland isn't such a great idea, Good Grief, but I really like your soccer suggestion. Even I would watch a match like that.  ;D

Re: Would we want Howland? - Bruce Wang - 03-26-2013

Sports Illustrated really hates Howland:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/-college-basketball-mens-tournament/news/20130325/ucla-ben-howland/?sct=uk_t12_a5

According to this article, Howland's reputation in SoCal AAU circles is shot after he pulled a scholarship from Kendall Williams, who incidentally was interested in STANFORD, and is now a standout player at New Mexico.  STANFORD does recruit nationally but STANFORD must have some advantages in Southern California.

Re: Would we want Howland? - Bruce Wang - 03-26-2013

Sports Illustrated really hates Howland:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/-college-basketball-mens-tournament/news/20130325/ucla-ben-howland/?sct=uk_t12_a5

According to this article, Howland's reputation in SoCal AAU circles is shot after he pulled a scholarship from Kendall Williams, who incidentally was interested in STANFORD, and is now a standout player at New Mexico.  STANFORD does recruit nationally but STANFORD must have some advantages in Southern California.

Re: Would we want Howland? - yvonne - 03-26-2013

Why are you shouting?

Re: Would we want Howland? - yvonne - 03-26-2013

Why are you shouting?