Tate: I think Guenther would've made move, too
CHAMPAIGN — Now that Mike Thomas has carried out his sports version of Donald Trump — "You're Fired!" — the question is asked: What would Ron Guenther have done?
In nearly two decades as AD, Guenther was renowned for his loyalty to coaches he hired. Would he have gone for the trifecta of Ron Zook, Jolette Law and Bruce Weber?
This opinion will be attempted without Guenther's input. Since his retirement in June and the hiring of Thomas in August, I've run into Guenther once in seven months, exchanging greetings at Gene Vance's visitation. Nor, contrary to public perception, did I see him frequently before that. What follows will be my thoughts on how a reasonable administrator would have responded, taking Guenther's loyalty tendencies into consideration along with the coaches' style, record, recruiting prospects, gate appeal and perceived momentum.
Zook at dead end
Guenther has been criticized for keeping Lou Tepper and Ron Turner a year too long.
Let's look closer. Tepper turned out solid defensive units but lost nine games by six points or less in his first three seasons. His losses in a 7-5 campaign in 1994, his third year, came by 1, 6, 5, 4 and 6 points. The Illini were in every game. That gave him status ahead of the 5-5-1 campaign in 1995, and Tepper was retained amid a growing discontent even as Michigan drew 70,000 here and two others topped 65,000. He had only one year remaining on his contract when he was fired after the Illini slipped to 2-9 in 1996. Nothing totally illogical there.
Turner was retained one year too long. He showed positive signs with an 8-4 season in 1999, beating Michigan and Ohio State ahead of a 65-21 bowl rout of Virginia. He had real cachet after a 10-2 title run that included seven straight wins in 2001. Like Zook, he couldn't beat Missouri, which set him back in 2002-03, and the 1-11 disaster of 2003 should have ended it. Guenther gave him another year, and another 3-8 disaster followed.
Which brings us to Zook. The 2007 upset of Ohio State and the Rose Bowl trip provided the same cachet that buoyed Turner in 2001. After the 3-9 season of 2009, I believe Guenther seriously considered a change and tested the marketplace. He discovered, as did Thomas this year, that the hot-shot cadre of logical coaching prospects don't have particularly high regard for Illinois.
Even so, Guenther should have pulled the plug. It was a mistake not to start over, and for a time he leaned that way. Instead, he fooled media and fans when he took a novel turn, providing the funds and influencing Zook to turn over the offensive and defensive leadership to two high-priced (by UI standards) coordinators. Guenther's scheme appeared to work with the Illini showing dramatic improvement as Mikel Leshoure ran wild in 2010, and the 7-6 season was actually better than the record when taking into consideration the triple-OT loss at Michigan and the 25-23 misfortune at Fresno State. The 38-14 Texas Bowl rout of Baylor looks even better after seeing then-outplayed quarterback Robert Griffin III win the 2011 Heisman Trophy.
Weighing in on a Guenther decision after the 6-0, 0-6 season of 2011 would be his own job status. Would he have made a change if he was on the verge of retiring? President Michael Hogan was viable and involved at the time. Would he have pushed for change?
Those considerations muddy the water. But in the end, whatever personal feelings Guenther might have had, and regardless of his pattern of resistance, he would have had to change following the 27-7 final-game collapse at Minnesota. Even if it was an admission of his own mistake, he would have been obliged to take into account an outraged fandom, dwindling attendance, faltering recruiting, a collapse of Paul Petrino's offense, and Zook's dismal failure in his chief responsibility of special teams. Zook wasn't the right guy.
One down, two to go.
On the women's side
One question as it relates to Law is whether an administrator wants to take on two hirings in basketball simultaneously.
But if you separate the women, you only needed to attend a game and watch opposing players look around and wonder where the fans went. In the process of five sub-.500 Big Ten seasons, Law had lost the folks to a point where it did not appear she could get them back. The lethargy became overwhelming. And this attendance breakdown was particularly noticeable for those fans who also attended the upbeat volleyball matches at Huff.
Guenther might have given Law another year. Her team showed signs, however spotty, of improvement in February. After a 0-7 start in the conference race, the Illini went 5-4 before bowing in the first round of the conference tournament, 68-53, to Michigan. With the top five scorers returning, something tells me Guenther would have given her another year. That's a weak guess. He would certainly have felt pressure to make a change, but it wouldn't have come easy for him.
Just a matter of time
Assuming the longevity of his own job played no part, Guenther would have reluctantly, conceding to strong pressures from donors and fans, fired Weber.
Coaches Lou Henson, Lon Kruger, Bill Self and Weber himself built expectations that were unrealized in the post-Dee Brown period that shows one NCAA victory in six seasons. When this team lost 12 of the last 14, virtually collapsing in emotional distress during the tailspin, the hole became too wide and too deep to be superficially covered.
A year ago, to avoid the anticipated bumps in this road, Weber was advised to take both the Missouri and Oklahoma jobs. He chose his own fate, declining to take over a dashing Missouri squad similar to his 2005 club.
Should Guenther had fired Weber sooner? No, and for the following reasons:
(1) Weber led the Illini to undisputed Big Ten titles in 2004 and 2005, their first such accomplishments in a half-century. The run to the title game showed he could coach at the highest level if provided with the right players.
(2) So there were funds stored in the Weber bank when he lost Jamar Smith and had difficulties with Shaun Pruitt in the 16-19 season in 2008.
(3) The Illini recovered to 24-10 (11-7 in the Big Ten) in 2009 and 21-15 (10-8) in 2010, and like the Cubs — Wait till next year! — began to anticipate Mr. Basketball award winners Brandon Paul and Jereme Richmond in UI jerseys. They'd be great with fellow juniors and sophomores in 2012. Except they weren't.
On Thursday morning, Guenther would have seen the same dismal picture that Thomas faced. Illini Nation had spent the last half of the season in an uproar. Assembly Hall seats were left empty, and the players had ceased to respond to the coach. Some of the losses were embarrassing. The one difference maker, Meyers Leonard, is poised to turn pro. Recruiting has produced one marginal incoming player while Michigan State continues to hit the jackpot, Indiana has a Top 5 class, Michigan is getting 6-foot-10 Chesterton (Ind.) All-American Mitch McGary, and so on. Every Big Ten team has more and better talent on the way. And right or wrong, if/when Leonard leaves, the national and Midwest analysts will project Illinois deep in the conference's lower half.
So Guenther, facing this, would have gritted his teeth and done what had to be done.
Should it have been done sooner? No, Weber deserved this season to see how a fresh, revamped squad would develop after Mike Tisdale, Bill Cole, Mike Davis and Demetri McCamey graduated. The need for change became clear when Richmond and Crandall Head departed, when Paul, D.J. Richardson and Tyler Griffey faltered, when it became apparent Leonard would turn pro, when an overrated freshman class didn't meet expectations, and when rivals jumped so far ahead in attracting the next class.
Loren Tate writes for The News-Gazette. He can be reached at ltate@news-gazette.com.
MoreMoreYou've got to hand it to Moses - he's always right there on the cutting edge of the irrelevant.
Hey Tate, I'd rather know what James Naismith would have thought of Weber's firing. Weren't you there with him telling him what a horrible idea this "peach basket game" was?
UrbanaTHROWUPman...I see that you ride on every word that Loren writes and thoughtfully think of a really clever response. While I think you tend to be a little snotty and arrogant at times it is clear that all those years that Loren spent first getting an education and then year after year his writing of stories and reporting .....all those will never compare to your verbage, articulation, insight, character, outstanding morals or your overall sense of pure sincere love of a fellow writer. It just plain cannot be kept in you no matter how hard you try..THROW UP MAN FROM URBAN (ryhmes mabye ) and I am sure Loren will not sleep at night knowing you are going to replace him someday...hahahaha
Hmm. I get the sense here that I'm, perhaps, being insulted. But this is such extreme blather that I can't really be sure. Something about I " 'ride' on every word." I googled this phrase and believe this is the first time it's ever been used anywhere. Along the lines of, "DaisyJ fingerpaint therapy drool session." But like Tate's writing, it basically makes no sense or I'd try to respond somehow. And fyi - "THROW UP MAN FROM URBAN (ryhmes mabye (sic))" doesn't rhyme in print. A pat on your little head for the effort, though. But the maniacal laugh at the end of your strings of words - THAT makes perfect sense.
Ron Guenther had it all planned out. Ron gave Zook, Weber and Law raises and extensions with his retirement coming up just so he wouldn't have to deal with firing them and conducting a new head coach search. I'm not happy that Guenther saddled Illinois with long term contracts for poorly performing coaches which is now costing massive buyout dollars. I am glad though that it's not Guenther that is selecting the new coaches. His last time hand selecting candidates is what stuck us with Ron Zook, Bruce Weber and Jolette Law in the first place. So glad that incompetent triumvirate and Guenther are GONE!
The bigger question Loren shouldn't be would RG have pulled the plug but would the plug have been pulled on Ron Guenther. He might have survived the football implosion by firing Zook at the behest of the administration and other powers that be. He likely understood he had to fire Zook or else get canned himself. But, i also believe that had Illinois finished with 7 regular season wins then RG would have kept him. As umpopular as it still might be he would have kept Zook it that situation but losing 6 straight...even RG knew he had to act...just to try to save himself.
But, there is no way Guenther would have survived BOTH major sports imploding the way they did. They were his coaches and his contract extensions. RG would have preceded Weber through the exit and maybe a month or so ahead of him given the way things were going. The uproar demanding change at AD would have been huge and as great as the cry for a new basketball coach.
But, that would have left the university in a hell of a mess. How long does it take to find a capable A.D? Then you would need to find a new basketball coach. By then the best candidates may have been cherry picked and some of your current players and recruits may have decided on going a different direction.
Now THAT would have been a mess if RG was still here and worse than the situation is now.
WWRGD? Come on Loren, this is just sad.
And I agree with the above comment, this is all moot because Guenther was essentially fired for hiring these guys. Acting like he would have been here if he wanted to is disingenious at best. Hogan sent Guenther packing after overseeing 20 years of terrible football results and sliding results in basketball due to a poor hire in Weber.
Okay Tate, now your really bottoming out! Who cares what you think RG would have done? This is in no way informative journalism, just your uninformed opinion of mind reading! If you cannot get an interview with the man, (for whatever reason), just admit it. A real journalist would have gone the distance to get an interview from the subject or left it alone and moved on. I only read the first part of your story about Zook and realized that I was wasting my time, as nothing was factual. Why can't you get Ron Guenther to talk to you, hmmm? I used to enjoy reading your pieces, but you have gotten so soft in your old age, it is clear that you really need to hang it up. No offense, but "In Times Of Rapid Change, Your Worst Enemy Is Experience!"
Anyone who knows basketball knew the 2005 run was due to two factors and two factors only:
1. Outstanding players, and
2,. Outstanding players.
Weber's system, if anything, probably held that core of players back, since it took so long for them to learn it, it cost U of I an entire season.
We knew even then that Weber was the wrong guy, and while we understand why you can't fire a coach coming off an NCAA Championship game, we also knew this would end badly.
In no time at all, Weber's disgraceful reaction to Eric Gordon's reversal, and all the crap with Caldwell, Smith, Pruitt, etc., (not to mention his overbearing sideline antics) proved he had no control over the team -- or himself -- even then. His inability to recruit well sealed the deal.
We've known for some time Old ManTate existed to carry Guenther's water. But Tate misses one key point here: Guenther is like George Costanza. He wanted everyone to like him, and that was more important than the W's or the contracts or anything else. (In fact, it probably explains some of those contracts.) The recollection of Ron Turner sharing the podium with Guenther at Turner's own firing still naseautes.
Keep in mind, just weeks ago Old Man Tate was warning everyone not to castigate Weber and how hard it would be to replace him. Now he's saying Guenther should and would have let him go after this so-called season?
Flip. Flop. Flip. Flop. ...
This is one of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read. I understand you dont like Weber, but its absolutely ridiculous to say that his system 'held those players back' in 2005. The improvement in vistually every player on the roster was amazing under Weber. The improvement in the middle of 2003-4 was amazing. Luther showed nothing under Self in two years remotely like what he showed under Weber those two years. I shudder to think what those guards would have done shackled in the high-low, or the 'clear out' offense Self used to run where Frank Williams would stand there and dribble and penetrate one on one. The high-low worked pretty well with guys like Cook and Arch, and Frank was a great 'take it to the hoop' guy who create and could finish when he got there. Dee and Deron where much more perimeter players without Frank's size and strength, and they thrived in that passing offense with a great ballhandler like Deron.
I mean, it is hard to write a long post where you get so much wrong in the same post, but somehow you managed to do it.
And BTW, I think RG would have fired Bruce also. Good coach or not, Bruce had lost of the faith of the fan base and a change was necessary. I like Bruce and consider him a good coach, but I agree with a change. The program had lost too much enthusiasm this year and instead of turning the corner as expected.
Give us a break. You want to credit Weber for taking a handful of the best players in the country -- which someone else recruited, of course -- and winning with them, be my guest.
But it wasn't the system. And it wasn't the coach. For if is were the system and/or the coach, he would -- read this closely, troll -- have been able to do it more than once.
But alas, Weber couldn't. And those of us who know basketball saw it all coming.
he never remotely had players as good as 2003-5. I didnt say it was all the system, obviously talent matters too, but those players THRIVED under that system, in a way that Luther and Roger did not thrive under Self. The improvement in their play was very noticeable within a few months.
And if it was only the players, why the terrible loss to ND in the tourney in 2003 under Self when he had the BTPOY in Cook anchoring all that young talent (and Luther and Roger were sophs).
That 2004-5 offense was a thing of beauty, passing to find the open man for the open shot, and creating inside off of movement. That style benefitted the 2004-5 team in the same way that it did not benefit the team as much this year since they were a poor passing team without a good (and healthy) PG.
uh, so what? The point is that both Roger Powell and Luther Hood looked MUCH better in Weber's offense than in Self's offense. The high low just didnt fit Roger, but he was very successful in the perimeter motion under Weber. Go back and watch that Notre Dame game and then watch those two guys in 2003-4, they dont even look like the same players.
In fact just about the only guy who didnt look better under Weber's motion was Nick Smith who was much better suited to the High Low and never really found his role in the motion the way Powell did. James looked good in both systems because he was good at being the 'low' in the high low with Cook. But everyone except those two looked MUCH better by Jan '04.
Oh come on. Did Frankie Williams improve his junior year? Did Cory Bradford improve much after his freshman or soph year?
The fact is, virtually every player on that team improved in 2003-4 and again in 2004-5. They thrived in Weber's offense. They were very talented, but come on, there was one NBA lottery pick on that team, and one low first round pick, the other guys were second round. Only one player made it in the NBA. UNC, Duke and Kentucky put out that kind of talent year in and year out. They were a talented team, but not so talented that they could beat everyone regardless of the system they played. If they were, they would have done better their freshman/soph year under Self when he also had the BTPOY Brian Cook but managed to lose in the round of 32. Its not like they were the UCLA Bruins of the late 1960s. That offense was a thing of beauty under Weber in 2003-5, but soon as we lost the PG it regressed, just like this year it struggled without a playmaker at PG. I mean, they werent showcasing that offense on ESPN Sportscenter because it was a lousy offense with good players., they showcased it because it was a beautiful offense with good players, and when it clicked, boy did it click.
"Only one player made it in the NBA."
Only one, eh?
Could that one player be Luther Head, who has been in the NBA since 2005?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/headlu01.html
Or Dee Brown, who played parts of two seasons?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/brownde03.html
Or Roger Powell or James Augustine, both of whom got a cup of coffee?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/powelro01.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/augusja01.html
Or Deron Williams...nuf said?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willide01.html
The entire starting five played in the NBA. Math is not your strong suit.
I'm just happy that he wasn't here to make that decision. If he had been and decided to replace any of them I'm sure it would have been done on the cheap and the chances of Guenther hiring a high quality replacement for anything were very low. Thank God for Thomas!!!
Didnt RG hire Kruger and Self? And didnt Weber take us to an NC game? Weber turned out not to be a good enough recruiter, at least not soon enough, but those are three highly respected coaches. Blame RG for bad hires in football (although I am beginning to wonder if any hire will succeed at UI in football these days), but overall his hires in hoops were pretty good.
Didnt RG hire Kruger and Self?” yeah… he just couldn’t keep them
The AD at Florida ( a school that had in its entire history 1 NCAA tournament win into the mid 90’s), Jeremy Foley was able to keep Billy Donavan from the pro’s (magic) and elite programs (Kentucky)… a school with NO basketball history whatsoever up to that point… so if our illustrious AD could have kept Lon from going to the Hawks( the MSU AD kept Izzo on the very same hire)or Self.... Weber might have been getting fired at Purdue.
LOL, right, it was RG's fault we didnt keep Lon or Kruger. Good one there. If only we had a better AD, Lon would have ignored the recruiting issues and the $10M from the Hawks, and Self would have turned down the KU job. Riiiiiight.
And BTW, both Izzo and Donovan got the big bucks AFTER they won an NC. Both Self and Kruger left after they had flamed out in the round of 32. Even if UI could have afforded to pay those kinds of salaries, which it couldnt. Even now we cant remotely compete for the top coaches, we just dont have the money or the political will to spend it.
Izzo had won a NC, Kruger had not, not by a long shot. There was no way we would pay Kruger Izzo-level money under those circumstances... even if we could have afforded it, which we could not. Ditto for Self, KU paid him far more than we could afford. I love it how you guys have to find a scapegoat for everything. Just admit the obvious, Kruger wanted out because of the Chicago recruiting struggles and because of the big bucks, and Self wanted to go to an elite program for elite money. Face it, they left for greener pastures. There was not a national commentator who blamed Self for taking the KU job, because its clearly a better job. If our next coach is successful, there is a good chance we will lose him too. Guys like Izzo with loyalty to one program are becoming rarer and rarer - not to mention the big bucks that Izzo makes relative to what we pay.
Not sure why you think schools like MSU, Florida and KU can afford to pay coaches and we cannot. The issue wasn't that we were unable to pay a premier coach, the issue was the RG would not. RG didn't understand how to market and grow a program he simply managed DIA finances by cutting costs. That approach rarely works long-term in business and rarely works long-term in Division 1 athletics. I'm happy to have someone that now understands it.
well, for starters, Izzo and Donovan had won NCs before those coaches got the really big bucks. Those NCs meant better fan participation and stronger donor support. That hadnt happened at UI, and the finances show it. Because of its historically strong basketball program, KU also has tons of money to throw at a basketball coach, far more than UI. The point is the money to the coaches followed the program's success. We have never had that kind of success, and when we neared that point, in 1989 and 2005, it was not sustained. Marketing helps but in the end it comes down to success. The idea that we could pay Self as much as KU could is nonsensical, not until we have more final four success and that success is sustained. The athletic dept is not like a company that can borrow money based on the hopes of future success, the finances dont work that way, and I doubt the university would ever allow it, especially not in this age of budget cuts.
Our AD talks, but talk is cheap. What matters is if those new coaches win or lose. If they win, we will get better attendance, better fan support, better booster support, and that will provide more funds for coaches salaries. If they dont win, we wont have any more funds than we do now, and in fact it might be worse given the fact that if boosters pay those remaining contracts now, they are that much less likely to do it again in a few years.
You have this notion the University of Illinois is some second or third rate institution… that somehow, Kansas is much more elite, with much more prestigious alumni and donors. When in fact they may soon be a school without a conference.. the B1G wasn’t interested in them.. you never answer how a school like Florida.. who NEVER won a SEC football conference championship..EVER, till Spurier got there… who wasn’t even a footnote in basketball till Krueger got there turned both programs into national power houses… I was at the O’Connell center to watch the 90 illini (post Nick Anderson) rip the gator’s and teasing my Gator alum brother in law about how their facility wasn’t as good as a 2nd rate Chicago suburb high school… do they have more prestigious alumni?? No, they got an AD who demanded excellence.. he hired Lon Krueger who USED THEM as a stepping stone to Illinois.. so at that point in time we were the clearly superior basketball school… HE LEFT FLORIDA FOR ILLINOIS.. What’s happened since?
How can it not be they had a MUCH better AD
Didnt RG hire Kruger and Self?” yeah… he just couldn’t keep them
The AD at Florida ( a school that had in its entire history 1 NCAA tournament win into the mid 90’s), Jeremy Foley was able to keep Billy Donavan from the pro’s (magic) and elite programs (Kentucky)… a school with NO basketball history whatsoever up to that point… so if our illustrious AD could have kept Lon from going to the Hawks( the MSU AD kept Izzo on the very same hire)or Self.... Weber might have been getting fired at Purdue.
This is a sad article. I'm astonished at how unusual and pointless it is.The replies and comments are actually all very interesting and valid. All of them show more insight and express a more realistic point of view than the effort of Mr.Tate. I don't mean this in a cruel way but I'm actually somewhat embarrassed for the man. Even for those who dislike Loren Tate,this article has to invoke a little bit of sympathy.I don't think there is a news source in the country that would publish anything like this article.
The question I have is why would Weber want all of his buy out money at once? I would think the tax implications would be very massive,
Everyone should resolve to begin looking to the future. Many Illnois fans have a step child mentality like they are not good enough. I think the right coaches at the right price can turn matters around. To me the biggest problem in both football and basketball other than recruiting is teaching and requiring self disciplene from the players. Coach Beckman appears to be attempting to do this in his off season work and whoever is the next bb coach needs to do the same thing.
Here's something I have seen in several places, and unless there's something not being told, really tells a story about our programs. In 2010 Illinois spent $12.9 million on its football program. That put us in 10th place in football budgets besting only Purdue $12.4 million. In comparison Ohio St $34.3 milllion, Wisconsin $23.6 million, Michigan $23.5 million. I'm not sure if bowl game expenses add to some of the discrepency but based upon money spent differential, should we really expect the Illini to be competitive, nor should we be surprised when we have to dip down to find a coach?
Our basketball budget, and those of all the schools in the league are somewhat similar taking away Indiana, about $2 million more than average and Mich St. at $4 million above the rest. I can't help but think if we aren't spending, especially in football, It doesn't matter who's the AD or the coach. We are really playing JV ball here......
http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/12/21/big-ten-financials-10-11/big-ten-10-11/
houstonillini--are you under some GOP notion that if a person doesn't agree with a column they should not have read it and certainly should not comment and express their opinion on a fan board, which is provided for fans to comment?
Good luck in Ricky Santorum world, old pal.
More Like This
Most Commented
-
Wed, 3:13 pm
-
Thu, 12:42 pm
-
Fri, 10:41 am
-
Thu, 11:14 pm
-
Fri, 2:42 pm
Most Viewed
-
Sun, 6:25 pm
-
Wed, 3:13 pm
-
Tue, 11:10 am
-
Mon, 10:23 am
-
Fri, 2:42 pm
Social Media
Comments
News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.