2
Started By
Message
Educate me on Howland
Posted on 4/26/14 at 10:49 am
Posted on 4/26/14 at 10:49 am
I never followed his departure from UCLA. I only know generally that there was a black cloud, they had actually been doing pretty damn good and he was fired. Really don't want to deal with another Frank Haith, so what's the story behind it all?
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:11 am to reedus23
Several issues:
1) pulled a scholly from a kid late; speculation was that the timing was so that no other PAC school would evaluate and offer; this was after the kid committed very early. When UCLA was evidently cooling on him and his dad asked for reassurances, Howland said they were absolutely committed to the kid. Then, dropped like a bad habit pretty late in the process. Dirtbag move and demonstrates deeper issues than simply withdrawing an offer. AAU coaches there started funneling their kids elsewhere
2). Numerous player control issues. Had several kids who were reported to basically be running a gang in the locker room. Reaves stuff got all the pub but it was evidently an endemic issue.
3) recruitment of Shabazz Muhammad was dirty dirty dirty. The NCAA warned everyone recruiting him to stay away because there was so much smoke. UCLA didn't care, long hair. The NCAA suspended Muhammad pending an investigation. Abby Grantstein's boyfriend blabbed on a plane how she was gonna take down UCLA and a lawyer overheard and forwarded to UCLA. This was the same time that the Miami stuff was blowing up in the NCAA's face. They immediately reinstated Muhammad and everyone kinda got an out of jail free card.
If those events had happened here, Howland is fired here. So pretending it was just UCLA's expectations is a bit disingenuous. (Not that anyone here did that. It just seems to be a thematic justification for arguing for him.)
Eta: I don't think any of this means he isn't considered. But he'd have to have pretty good answers as to how this doesn't happen again in CoMo.
1) pulled a scholly from a kid late; speculation was that the timing was so that no other PAC school would evaluate and offer; this was after the kid committed very early. When UCLA was evidently cooling on him and his dad asked for reassurances, Howland said they were absolutely committed to the kid. Then, dropped like a bad habit pretty late in the process. Dirtbag move and demonstrates deeper issues than simply withdrawing an offer. AAU coaches there started funneling their kids elsewhere
2). Numerous player control issues. Had several kids who were reported to basically be running a gang in the locker room. Reaves stuff got all the pub but it was evidently an endemic issue.
3) recruitment of Shabazz Muhammad was dirty dirty dirty. The NCAA warned everyone recruiting him to stay away because there was so much smoke. UCLA didn't care, long hair. The NCAA suspended Muhammad pending an investigation. Abby Grantstein's boyfriend blabbed on a plane how she was gonna take down UCLA and a lawyer overheard and forwarded to UCLA. This was the same time that the Miami stuff was blowing up in the NCAA's face. They immediately reinstated Muhammad and everyone kinda got an out of jail free card.
If those events had happened here, Howland is fired here. So pretending it was just UCLA's expectations is a bit disingenuous. (Not that anyone here did that. It just seems to be a thematic justification for arguing for him.)
Eta: I don't think any of this means he isn't considered. But he'd have to have pretty good answers as to how this doesn't happen again in CoMo.
This post was edited on 4/26/14 at 11:20 am
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:19 am to the808bass
quote:
the808bass
I don't really give a shite about his disciplinarian stuff right now to be honest.
Pinkel is supposed to be a high class moral guy that does well with these kids, look at the issues he's having lately.
It's at a minimal level, still a lot going on though.
There are going to be issues when you are taking kids from home and allowing them to be on their own for the first time, not to mention their treatment as athletes.
The level it seems to have been at UCLA though is still alarming.
With that said, you have to think Howland realizes that wouldn't fly again after being tossed out and having trouble getting another gig.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:24 am to Mizzoufan26
quote:
Pinkel is supposed to be a high class moral guy that does well with these kids, look at the issues he's having lately.
I think there's a distinct difference between kids being out of control when they're out on the town and kids being out of control on the town and at practice. If you can't control the athletes when they're right there in front of you, it's a whole different level of dysfunction.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:27 am to the808bass
quote:
If you can't control the athletes when they're right there in front of you, it's a whole different level of dysfunction.
Valid point. I haven't even read the article, was that the case and if so how would that even go?
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:28 am to Mizzoufan26
Reeves was said to try to intentionally injure other players in practice. Kids showed up to practice drunk and/or high. Multiple fistfights in the locker room. Etc.
Eta: Reeves sued SI for defamation and the case was tossed because the article was so well-sourced.
Eta: Reeves sued SI for defamation and the case was tossed because the article was so well-sourced.
This post was edited on 4/26/14 at 11:29 am
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:28 am to Mizzoufan26
We keep looking for the white knight with no issues to roll in and save the basketball program, we might as well give up.
Howland has his issues no doubt, but he was clean before he went to UCLA. With the pressures there, LA agents all over the place, big time donors demanding this and that, Howland made some mistakes. The real question is, has he took a good look in the mirror, acknowledged to himself where he went wrong, and pledged to never let shite like that happen again?
Taking his whole body of work as a coach, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and say yes. Up until UCLA too, he had the rep of being a hard arse, so I doubt disciplinary issues would be a problem with him at Mizzou.
For every hit piece on Howland, there is just as many former players of his that has come out to defend him.
Howland has his issues no doubt, but he was clean before he went to UCLA. With the pressures there, LA agents all over the place, big time donors demanding this and that, Howland made some mistakes. The real question is, has he took a good look in the mirror, acknowledged to himself where he went wrong, and pledged to never let shite like that happen again?
Taking his whole body of work as a coach, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and say yes. Up until UCLA too, he had the rep of being a hard arse, so I doubt disciplinary issues would be a problem with him at Mizzou.
For every hit piece on Howland, there is just as many former players of his that has come out to defend him.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:29 am to Mizzoufan26
quote:
I don't really give a shite about his disciplinarian stuff right now to be honest.
I do. That's a huge part of what led to a season of suck this year. To be honest, reading that SI article, all I could keep thinking was, that's Mizzou under Haith.
quote:
There are going to be issues when you are taking kids from home and allowing them to be on their own for the first time, not to mention their treatment as athletes.
No doubt there will be issues. I don't think anyone suggests there won't be. The question is how does he handle those issues. Apparently, he chooses to do nothing in response, allowing the issues to snow ball out of control. Sounds familiar.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:30 am to Mizzoufan26
quote:
Valid point. I haven't even read the article, was that the case and if so how would that even go?
Read the article. Seriously. It reads just like this last year at Mizzou. Alchohol. Drugs. Fights between teammates.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:30 am to Mizzou4ever
quote:
For every hit piece on Howland, there is just as many former players of his that has come out to defend him.
Players defend coaches. It's what they do. It doesn't really count for much. There's still Mizzou players who would defend Woody Widenhofer or Frank Haith.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:33 am to Mizzou4ever
quote:
Taking his whole body of work as a coach, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and say yes.
I get it. I like his resume in terms of W's and L's. But don't be one to complain when similar type shite comes back to haunt Mizzou.
quote:
For every hit piece on Howland, there is just as many former players of his that has come out to defend him.
A coach with a winning track record like his doesn't get fired over a hit piece or what a couple of players are saying. Which is why I was wondering what the story behind it all was. What allegations had enough legs that you fire a coach with that background of winning.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:37 am to the808bass
Yeah but some of his players that are defending him were ones that didn't particularly like him wen they played for him. He was a hard arse but accessable. Now that some of these players have grown up, lived more of life, matured, can see why Howland was the way he was. He prepared them for life and are acknowledging it.
So yeah, players do defend coaches, but it brings a whole new meaning when they grow up and see Howland for who he is, and not the scumbag some articles try to make him out to be.
So yeah, players do defend coaches, but it brings a whole new meaning when they grow up and see Howland for who he is, and not the scumbag some articles try to make him out to be.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:38 am to reedus23
Okay, so let's just hire Anderson and be done with it. Because that's the only squeaky clean person rumoured to be in the mix.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:44 am to Mizzou4ever
quote:
Okay, so let's just hire Anderson and be done with it. Because that's the only squeaky clean person rumoured to be in the mix.
Grow up. No one said this. If Alden hires Howland, I'll be ok with it because I'll assume that he had good answers for the questions. But, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if he runs into the same issues here that he had there.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:48 am to Mizzou4ever
quote:
Okay, so let's just hire Anderson and be done with it. Because that's the only squeaky clean person rumoured to be in the mix.
I'm not in that camp. Just trying to get a better idea of what we would be getting with Howland. He may very well be worth the risk if Marshall is out of play.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:51 am to the808bass
Okay I will give you a "grown up" answer, blow me dude. I made that post because what we know there are 3 names in the mix, Anderson, Marshall, and Howland. Don't be so damn snarky as I'm just trying to roll through this search like everyone else.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:52 am to Mizzou4ever
quote:
Don't be so damn snarky as I'm just trying to roll through this search like everyone else.
If you don't want snark, don't dish snark. It's quite simple.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:53 am to reedus23
Reedus, maybe that's why they hired a firm, to do the necessary investigation on Howland. He seems to be the only one that would need it, if the top 3 on the list is correct.
Posted on 4/26/14 at 11:54 am to the808bass
frick you dude, you started the shite. Just don't respond to anything I say if you don't like it, it's that simple.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News