Gottlieb

[ByronHoustonsSweatyPalms]

I think Doug G. can be annoying and a complete tool, and acts like a doofus on TV sometimes. I think he's pretty knowledgeable though... Not trying to bag on your post, but shouldn't he be allowed to move past that incident? Not really trying to defend the guy just saying, he can't do anything about that now, and I'm sure he regrets it. Can't believe I just defended a poke.. Oh well onwards and upwards!

Who hasn't been caught in an awkward position on a ladies front porch?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KCRuf/Nek]

Ham,

You are being massively naïve about this. If an official cannot alter the outcome of games, then why did the mafia pay an NBA official for 10 years to do just that. You better believe officials can determine both point spreads and outcomes of games. The mafia is serious when gambling and not going to do that for year after year after year if it is not working.

And the official was rated as one of the absolute top officials in the league. He would not have been caught except the records were found when the mafia was being investigated. Usually we just assume their bad/questionable calls are either due to personal bias (they may be unaware of) or due to a lack of ability. Unfortunately, that is clearly not always the case.

As much money as is bet on college sports it is incredibly naïve to believe there are no parties trying to influence games via officials. That is why it is so important that officials be held to answer for bad calls - or calling a game in a way that helps one team and disadvantages the other. Many leagues avoid any public mention of that because they don't want fans to start thinking about it.

Only 2% of the money wagered on sports is done so legally in Vegas. The rest is on the street. I would bet that there's more money wagered on the street in Vegas than in the books. When i lived there I knew at least 20 places to lay a bet for every book in town. And those guys didn't need the money up front but they were always there to collect. And for a ref to throw a game he doesn't have to blow the obvious call or crap the entire game up. A well placed foul call in the first half can have as much effect on a game as a call in the final minute. Which game was it the other night where the player stepped on the baseline, right under the ref's nose, and there was no call? The only way he didn't see it was if his eyes were shut. I knew a guy that was convinced that almost every outcome in sports could be explained in an illegal way.

And the fix doesn't have to be in a marquee matchup. One thing you learn in the books is you can make just as much money betting on the Nowhere St game than Kentucky.

Don Denkinger made what is probably (maybe even inarguably) the worst call in the history of modern baseball. If so, it's the worst because it happened with the Cards right on the cusp of winning the World Series in Game 6 (up 3 games to 2), in the 9th inning of a game they were winning...a World Series they would go on to lose to the craptastic Royals.

The moral to the story is, from 1985 (age 10 for me) to probably age 25 or thereabouts, I fully blamed Don Denkinger for the Cards losing that World Series.

Aggie.....errrr Cardinal fans continue to wet themselves 30 years later. They made so many mistakes in that inning unrelated to that call it's ridiculous.

 

[campbest]

Ham,

You are being massively naïve about this. If an official cannot alter the outcome of games, then why did the mafia pay an NBA official for 10 years to do just that. You better believe officials can determine both point spreads and outcomes of games. The mafia is serious when gambling and not going to do that for year after year after year if it is not working.

And the official was rated as one of the absolute top officials in the league. He would not have been caught except the records were found when the mafia was being investigated. Usually we just assume their bad/questionable calls are either due to personal bias (they may be unaware of) or due to a lack of ability. Unfortunately, that is clearly not always the case.

As much money as is bet on college sports it is incredibly naïve to believe there are no parties trying to influence games via officials. That is why it is so important that officials be held to answer for bad calls - or calling a game in a way that helps one team and disadvantages the other. Many leagues avoid any public mention of that because they don't want fans to start thinking about it.

There have been far more point shaving scandals involving coaches and players over the years, that is where the bigger problem lies. Those guys have more to gain than most officials.

 

[campbest]

The replays are necessary because fans and media are mostly unreasonable. It's a little ironic to me to complain about replay in the same thread that people are complaining about calls. We want to get the calls right, right? So who cares how long it takes? Just get the call right.

No single officiating call can cost you anything (although multiple gaffes can certainly cost you, see: OU-Oregon in 2007).

I grew up a big baseball fan (less so these days) but the first time I truly fell in love with a team was the Cardinals...in 1985. For some of you, I shouldn't have to say one more word but for the rest of you, I will.

Don Denkinger made what is probably (maybe even inarguably) the worst call in the history of modern baseball. If so, it's the worst because it happened with the Cards right on the cusp of winning the World Series in Game 6 (up 3 games to 2), in the 9th inning of a game they were winning...a World Series they would go on to lose to the craptastic Royals.

The moral to the story is, from 1985 (age 10 for me) to probably age 25 or thereabouts, I fully blamed Don Denkinger for the Cards losing that World Series.

But the bottom line is, after I fully grew up, it's pretty damn obvious they had a ton of opportunities, otherwise, to win that World Series. And if I can come to terms with this bad call...or even the awful call in the Texas game in 1984...blaming officials, refs, umpires...it's what sore losers do. You create your own luck, you create your own opportunities and you either win the game for yourself or you lose it for yourself. Nobody else does it to you.

There's nothing more annoying for me than harping on a call. Now, I understand general criticism, say one football team had a STACK of penalties and the other team had very few, and just happened to be the home team or something. Or one team had a TON more fouls than another in basketball. That's a general criticism that makes sense. But this idea that (for instance) the charge vs Arizona last night cost them the game or something - that's nonsense. There are tons of missed opportunities for either team all game long.

ALL THAT SAID, there are very rare situations where officiating is actually so egregiously bad that one error is compounded by more than one. Don Denkinger missed one call at first base. That, in retrospect, even for this Cardinal fan, and if not taken in isolation, didn't cost the Cardinals the '85 World Series. But the Oregon F-up, where an INSTANT REPLAY official with a chance to correct an on-field mistake - missed THREE separate issues in order to uphold the call on the field...yes, that's an officiating blunder for the ages. An all timer. And yes, there is no question it cost OU the game.

Won't be a popular opinion, but most of this is true. I hate the review of so many end of game plays, but what is the alternative? If they didn't go to the monitor to check, people would moan about not getting it right. Now that they are going to the monitor, now they are moaning because it takes too long. You can't have it both ways.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

No single officiating call can cost you anything

sure it can

 

[oSuJeff97]

What was interesting was Traber asked him if he were interested in the OSU coaching job.

His answer was kind of bizarre, he said that as of that particular day he could not give an informed answer.

It was almost like, OSU doesn't have a coaching vacancy (yet) but come and ask me if (when) they do.

This is exactly what he's doing.

Doug wants the job.

 

[jerry]

I guess if OSU wants a pompous, glib know it all then they have their man.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I guess if OSU wants a pompous, glib know it all then they have their man.

With no coaching experience. Sounds like a perfect hire to me. :facepalm

 

[SoonerinNC]

How about the touchdown call by the Lubbock businessman that allowed Tech to beat OU. I think there were three calls down the stretch against OU in that game and only one overturned by replay. That and the Oregon fiasco showed that replay officials also have a bias.

Officials are affected by home crowds particularly in basketball. Also by the pressure applied by coaches. If you don't believe that count the calls in favor of a coach who has just been T'd at the next opportunity. Also by star status. In other words if Oddesy Sims misses a shot she must have been fouled. If Sims mauls your point guard to get a steal it is really her unique skills. Is it human? Yes but a really good official is probably more likely to avoid those pressures.

Digger Phelps was one of the most effective intimidators of officials. He looked to be like he should have been T'd five or six times a day. But another fan told me that he wasn't saying anything to get T's. He was very skillfully using body language to show his displeasure. Mulkey is also very good at that.

We always see the game from the viewpoint of our team. I don't see a problem with pointing out obviously missed calls. Whining about the 50/50 ones that go against your team is just that, whining.

 

[Big Old Booger]

With no coaching experience. Sounds like a perfect hire to me. :facepalm

I think he would do a good job. He has contacts and can hire a good staff and he was a very good non-scoring PG.

Plus, he would make the bedlam game a rivalry again, IMO. He would be a coach the OU fans would hate which would add more flavor than now.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I think he would do a good job. He has contacts and can hire a good staff and he was a very good non-scoring PG.

Plus, he would make the bedlam game a rivalry again, IMO. He would be a coach the OU fans would hate which would add more flavor than now.

There is a chance he would do a good job. But it would be a risky hire.

Has he actually said he would be interested in coaching one day or is he just playing a game to get a raise from his current employer?

 

[oSuJeff97]

There is a chance he would do a good job. But it would be a risky hire.

Has he actually said he would be interested in coaching one day or is he just playing a game to get a raise from his current employer?

Of course he won't say publicly that he wants the job. That wouldn't be appropriate considering his position at CBS.

But my friends in-the-know with OSU athletics tell me that he's expressed interested to certain people that if the OSU job were to come open, he's definitely interested.

 

[SoonerSpock]

There is a chance he would do a good job. But it would be a risky hire.

Has he actually said he would be interested in coaching one day or is he just playing a game to get a raise from his current employer?

Agreed wiith Gottlieb's coaching experience it would be much more than risky. In fact it would not surprise me if Mike Holder declined to give him an interview do to his lack of qualifications for a major conference division I basketball job. No one is going to expose themselves to that kind of risk unless Gottlieb has Boone in his back pocket and that he doesn't.

 

[campbest]

Bet he could finish better than 8th in the Big XII...

 

[oSuJeff97]

Agreed wiith Gottlieb's coaching experience it would be much more than risky. In fact it would not surprise me if Mike Holder declined to give him an interview do to his lack of qualifications for a major conference division I basketball job. No one is going to expose themselves to that kind of risk unless Gottlieb has Boone in his back pocket and that he doesn't.

I see this same sentiment from OSU fans and just don't understand it.

People act like coaching basketball is some kind of indecipherable rocket science.

I don't question his basketball knowledge one bit. He's from a basketball family; he played point guard for Eddie Sutton; I've heard him many times spout an encyclopedic knowledge of the most obscure teams...

The key to success for college basketball coaching, IMO, is:

(A) Install a system
(B) Recruit the best possible players for that system
(C) Coach 'em up
(D) Repeat

This is what Hoiberg has done at Iowa State, and I think this is one of Ford's biggest failings at OSU...

He's never really established any kind of a system. Our "identity" seems to change from year to year... and his recruiting seems to be focused on the "best player he can get", regardless of what our team needs are... then the "identity" is changed for whatever types of players we have.

And going back to Gottlieb, if he were hired and given OSU as his first job, I'm sure the money would be (relatively) small the initial contract would be short.

There would be much less risk involved with that than letting Travis Ford continue to destroy what is left of our basketball program, IMO.

 

[Dignon003]

Our program was destroyed by the last name on the court. Ford certainly hasn't made it worse.

Doug would be taking a pay cut coaching basketball at OSU from what I understand.

 

[steverocks35]

I see this same sentiment from OSU fans and just don't understand it.

People act like coaching basketball is some kind of indecipherable rocket science.

I don't question his basketball knowledge one bit. He's from a basketball family; he played point guard for Eddie Sutton; I've heard him many times spout an encyclopedic knowledge of the most obscure teams...

The key to success for college basketball coaching, IMO, is:

(A) Install a system
(B) Recruit the best possible players for that system
(C) Coach 'em up
(D) Repeat

This is what Hoiberg has done at Iowa State, and I think this is one of Ford's biggest failings at OSU...

He's never really established any kind of a system. Our "identity" seems to change from year to year... and his recruiting seems to be focused on the "best player he can get", regardless of what our team needs are... then the "identity" is changed for whatever types of players we have.

And going back to Gottlieb, if he were hired and given OSU as his first job, I'm sure the money would be (relatively) small the initial contract would be short.

There would be much less risk involved with that than letting Travis Ford continue to destroy what is left of our basketball program, IMO.

All that may be true, but no way is a major college program going to hire a guy that's never had one minute of even assistant coaching experience. That would be a Hail Mary that I doubt any AD at any university would throw. When OU was looking for a coach Terry Evans's name kept coming up but even he wasn't deemed as being experienced enough.

Edited to add:My bad, Gottlieb does have a smidge of assistant coaching experience: From Wikipedia: Along with then-University of Tennessee coach Bruce Pearl, Gottlieb helped coach the United States team at the 2009 Maccabiah Games.

 

[sperry]

I like Gottlieb as an analyst, unlike many here. I think he does a great job in studio and on the radio. But hiring him as head coach at major D1 program would be insane. I hope OSU's sake they wouldn't consider something so foolish, although it would be kind of amusing to watch them flounder around with a guy with no coaching or managing expereince attempting to be the CEO of a major basketball program all while balancing the Boone Pickens nonsense.

 

[SoonerSpock]

I see this same sentiment from OSU fans and just don't understand it.

People act like coaching basketball is some kind of indecipherable rocket science.

I don't question his basketball knowledge one bit. He's from a basketball family; he played point guard for Eddie Sutton; I've heard him many times spout an encyclopedic knowledge of the most obscure teams...

The key to success for college basketball coaching, IMO, is:

(A) Install a system
(B) Recruit the best possible players for that system
(C) Coach 'em up
(D) Repeat

This is what Hoiberg has done at Iowa State, and I think this is one of Ford's biggest failings at OSU...

He's never really established any kind of a system. Our "identity" seems to change from year to year... and his recruiting seems to be focused on the "best player he can get", regardless of what our team needs are... then the "identity" is changed for whatever types of players we have.

And going back to Gottlieb, if he were hired and given OSU as his first job, I'm sure the money would be (relatively) small the initial contract would be short.

There would be much less risk involved with that than letting Travis Ford continue to destroy what is left of our basketball program, IMO.

From my perspective the impact Travis Ford has on the OSU basketball program is irrelevant. Once the decision is made to replace Ford the object is to get the very best man capable or returning the pukes to the Eddie Sutton standard. While Gottlieb may be able to accomplish this he is not close to the best option available to Holder and Holder's job is to get the best man available. Period!!

 

[Darwin]

I hope they don't talk to Doug when there is a vacancy. Even if he was not a candidate he would know of other very good candidates for the job. I would prefer them to fail again, no, I would really prefer them to keep Ford.