The Bobcat Nation

http://bobcatblog.bozemandailychronicle.com/?p=11605 He's coming back, according to Assistant AD for Media Relations Bill Lamberty. They're working on "an extension," Lamberty said. Fields and Huse were not made available for comment.

Like I always say, it's what you do in your eighth year that really counts.

Apparently MSU is shooting to have the lowest RPI and home attendance ever recorded in the history of basketball?

Ugh!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Bay Area Cat wrote:Like I always say, it's what you do in your eighth year that really counts.

I lol'd. Then I

Turn it around coach. Please!

Looks like a pretty stable year in the Big Sky coaching ranks. Might not be any changes on the men's side anyway.

That means that we need a Fields has to go thread.

All right guys, taking bets on the number of new JC players in 2013-14. Over under is 6.5, any takers? If Huse gets a 3 year contract I'll pretend to not care anymore for the 74th time but get sucked back in again like always. #feeltheenthusiasm

I was thinking of an over and under of players that leave the program in the offseason. I'm feeling optimistic, so I'll set it at 4.5.

This is very frustrating!!! The ONLY possible explanation is MSU cares nothing about winning, or attendence or consistancy, unless conisistancy includes consistancy losing players and games!

gtapp wrote:consistancy

Yeah...we can't really complain about consistancy can we? The same thing happens every year.

gtapp wrote:This is very frustrating!!! The ONLY possible explanation is MSU cares nothing about winning, or attendence or consistancy, unless conisistancy includes consistancy losing players and games!

I'll say it again: Fields seems to care about is the players attaining good grades and obtaining diplomas (whether its on time or within a five-year span) and that Huse does a lot of community work.

Gidal Kaiser wrote:

gtapp wrote:This is very frustrating!!! The ONLY possible explanation is MSU cares nothing about winning, or attendence or consistancy, unless conisistancy includes consistancy losing players and games!

I'll say it again: Fields seems to care about is the players attaining good grades and obtaining diplomas (whether its on time or within a five-year span) and that Huse does a lot of community work.

Are we a D-III program? This is especially frustrating with danny sprinkle hunting for a job.

I guess ill follow fields lead and continue my apathy towards mens bball.

Mens basketball likely was a money maker for the athletic department a few years back. Or at the very least close to break even. Maybe in the early 2000's. But now it has to be a huge drain on the budget. It sounds like the feildhouse is almost empty.

I don't know any of this for sure, because I am too lazy to look that far back for details.

I just don't see how working on an extension is in any way positive for the athletic department. Specifically on the income statement of the athletic department. We are already in the cellar, how does keeping Huse change that in any way?

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk 2

Coaching searches are expensive. As long as football is doing well the majority of the fan base is satisfied, especially the really big boosters. So why use scarce resources for a non-football releated coaching change? I really believe this is what's going on here.

Call me crazy-I want both to be successful, but apparantly we can't have both.

In the 11-team Big Sky Conference, Montana State is better than seven teams in men's basketball and probably overall, along with UM, the strongest athletic department in the league. As an athletic director at a FCS/mid-major Division I school, what else do you want?

Colter_Nuanez wrote:In the 11-team Big Sky Conference, Montana State is better than seven teams in men's basketball and probably overall, along with UM, the strongest athletic department in the league. As an athletic director at a FCS/mid-major Division I school, what else do you want?

I want a less than mediocre BB team that is boring to watch and losses 30% of its non Senior players every year! I am happy as hell!!!! Being happy because your team does not suck quite as much as the other bad teams in the conference is no way to go through life!!!!

Colter_Nuanez wrote:In the 11-team Big Sky Conference, Montana State is better than seven teams in men's basketball and probably overall, along with UM, the strongest athletic department in the league. As an athletic director at a FCS/mid-major Division I school, what else do you want?

So in other words, we are a mediocre team in a terrible conference.

What do i want? I want to occasionally host the conference tourney. I want a fighters chance of making the big dance. I want a RPI better than 300. I want the atmosphere at the brick to be what it was 10-12 years ago.

I dont think any of these things are unreasonable, but right now we arent anywhere close to these expectations.

Probably not all huse's fault, but we need to make a change somewhere, otherwise we're guilty of doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.

Colter_Nuanez wrote:In the 11-team Big Sky Conference, Montana State is better than seven teams in men's basketball and probably overall, along with UM, the strongest athletic department in the league. As an athletic director at a FCS/mid-major Division I school, what else do you want?

In the case of men's basketball, I'd rather MSU be great 1/3 of the time, mediocre 1/3 of the time, and terrible 1/3 of the time. Now they are just 100% mediocre all the time, as MSU has finished between 4th and 6th every single year of Huse's tenure (until this year in a 9-team league) while going 2-7 in the Big Sky Tournament, usually because they lose to the teams that are better than they are right off the bat. You are right though about the overall strength of the athletic department, which I don't think gets enough recognition.

wbtfg wrote:

Colter_Nuanez wrote:In the 11-team Big Sky Conference, Montana State is better than seven teams in men's basketball and probably overall, along with UM, the strongest athletic department in the league. As an athletic director at a FCS/mid-major Division I school, what else do you want?

So in other words, we are a mediocre team in a terrible conference.

What do i want? I want to occasionally host the conference tourney. I want a fighters chance of making the big dance. I want a RPI better than 300. I want the atmosphere at the brick to be what it was 10-12 years ago.

I dont think any of these things are unreasonable, but right now we arent anywhere close to these expectations.

Probably not all huse's fault, but we need to make a change somewhere, otherwise we're guilty of doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.

Sums it up for me as well (Also agree with GTAPP above). I think it is almost time to get Cruzado involved to inject some life back into the program.

So I was wondering why there hasn’t been an outcry for Huse to be let go from students, alumni, boosters and fans. I have realized that the only explanation is that no one cares about the program. The program has so little support that people won’t call for a change. Basketball is as popular at MSU as track, tennis, etc. If our tennis team sucks do we call for the coach’s head? No, because we don’t even know who it is! Huse has created excellent job security by creating a program that no one cares about!!! What a great strategy...

[quote="Colter_Nuanez"]In the 11-team Big Sky Conference, Montana State is better than seven teams in men's basketball and probably overall, along with UM, the strongest athletic department in the league. As an athletic director at a FCS/mid-major Division I school, what else do you want?[/quote]

How about actually getting better during the course of the season for a change, instead of enduring our annual February collapses, and/or winning a game in the BSC tourney more than once every 15 years? These hardly seem to be unreasonable expectations. Fields needs to be asked some tough questions regarding his rationale for this decision, and I believe you're just the man for the job.