Lon Kruger Article

[Hollisp]

https://cbbtoday.com/mens/lon-kruger-has-an-identity-which-is-clear-yet-easy-to-underappreciate/

Take 5 and read this. Good perspective in it.

 

[WichitaSooner]

https://cbbtoday.com/mens/lon-kruger-has-an-identity-which-is-clear-yet-easy-to-underappreciate/

Take 5 and read this. Good perspective in it.

Thanks for posting, wouldn't have found this article otherwise. The author nails it.

 

[MsProudSooner]

I can only see the picture and the title of the article. Do you have to register or something?

 

[Hollisp]

No I just clicked on it and read it

 

[MsProudSooner]

Switched to a different computerand I could read it fine. Wierd.

 

[skyvue]

I'm not all that savvy about the Hall of Fame, but I would think Coach Kruger is a likely inductee eventually, no?

And I think the writer was a bit premature in claiming Beard is on a path to superstardom. This is one reason I'd rather KSU won the Big 12 title (aside from the beating us part) -- members of the press seem eager to elevate Beard beyond his accomplishments, and that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy: Repeatedly pronounce a particular coach a budding genius and you boost his stock with recruits.

 

[BoulderSooner]

I'm not all that savvy about the Hall of Fame, but I would think Coach Kruger is a likely inductee eventually, no?

And I think the writer was a bit premature in claiming Beard is on a path to superstardom. This is one reason I'd rather KSU won the Big 12 title (aside from the beating us part) -- members of the press seem eager to elevate Beard beyond his accomplishments, and that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy: Repeatedly pronounce a particular coach a budding genius and you boost his stock with recruits.

yes he is very likely a future hall of famer

 

[WTSooner]

I'm not all that savvy about the Hall of Fame, but I would think Coach Kruger is a likely inductee eventually, no?

And I think the writer was a bit premature in claiming Beard is on a path to superstardom. This is one reason I'd rather KSU won the Big 12 title (aside from the beating us part) -- members of the press seem eager to elevate Beard beyond his accomplishments, and that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy: Repeatedly pronounce a particular coach a budding genius and you boost his stock with recruits.

I get that it may be a bit early with Beard, but he's won at a high level at all of his stops. And it isn't taking him years to start winning. He took TT to the Elite 8 last year, and he'll likely have them in a position to match that this year as well. Pretty consistently wins 25+ games a season. Has a system, coaches and recruits to it. I'm impressed. Can he succeed at a bigger school with more expectations? That is always the million dollar question. But he's certainly had quite a bit of success at non-elite institutions in his 7 years as a HC. A 74% winning percentage is pretty solid.

 

[Hollisp]

If Lon does make the HOF my guess is the OU FF team is what put him over the threshold. So, that’s kinda cool. No idea if he gets in or not.

As for Beard, you all bring up a good point: does he leave Tech? I’d assume it would be soon if he does since he’s white hot. Interesting off season story line.

 

[AdaSooner]

Great read, well written and interesting!

Seemed odd to me, though, that he said this as the reason Jeff Capel left OU and tippy toed around the real problem because he didn’t know or he was doing what he could to avoid the negative publicity surrounding Capel’s tenure at OU.:

Kruger took over at Oklahoma after Jeff Capel failed to capitalize on the Blake Griffin Elite Eight run in 2009.

Truth is, the Elite Eight run with BG was the highlight of Capel’s career at OU. He was fired two years later following a NCAA investigation and two straight losing seasons when internal turmoil among the players was commonplace. Lon Kruger inherited a mess, not a program fresh off of an Elite Eight run.

 

[WTSooner]

I think Beard is a UT grad. I could see him sticking around this area for coaching, maybe even staying at TT, and he might be a good option to replace Shaka if he continues at this current level.

 

[CMSOONER]

This is a solid article and I agree with pretty much everything the author wrote. The one area where I tend to disagree is although he doesn't say it, this article gives the impression that OU basketball as a whole is mediocre. I'd like to think I'm not a delusional fan that thinks more highly of the program than I should, but Oklahoma basketball as a whole is more than mediocre. His comparison to the Milwaukee Bucks is spot on, but the overarching feel of the article to me seems to be of a program below that of the point he's trying to make. Would programs like Clemson and Georgia love to make the tourney almost every year....absolutely. IMO Oklahoma basketball is a step above simply making the tourney every year. How do I quantify that? To be honest I don't really know. I mean what's the difference between being a first round out and a second route out in the grand scheme. Realistically I fell we are somewhere in between an every year sweet 16 team and a first round out, which is a second round team. Which still seems just slightly below what our program status is, but it fits right in line with our all-time tournament win percentage of .569.

This is a frustration that OU has been dealing with forever. A historically really good program that is consistently viewed as less than the sum of the whole when talking about the status of college basketball programs.

 

[Hollisp]

This is a solid article and I agree with pretty much everything the author wrote. The one area where I tend to disagree is although he doesn't say it, this article gives the impression that OU basketball as a whole is mediocre. I'd like to think I'm not a delusional fan that thinks more highly of the program than I should, but Oklahoma basketball as a whole is more than mediocre. His comparison to the Milwaukee Bucks is spot on, but the overarching feel of the article to me seems to be of a program below that of the point he's trying to make. Would programs like Clemson and Georgia love to make the tourney almost every year....absolutely. IMO Oklahoma basketball is a step above simply making the tourney every year. How do I quantify that? To be honest I don't really know. I mean what's the difference between being a first round out and a second route out in the grand scheme. Realistically I fell we are somewhere in between an every year sweet 16 team and a first round out, which is a second round team. Which still seems just slightly below what our program status is, but it fits right in line with our all-time tournament win percentage of .569.

This is a frustration that OU has been dealing with forever. A historically really good program that is consistently viewed as less than the sum of the whole when talking about the status of college basketball programs.

Very well said. I definitely find that as a whole we don’t get the respect but we are gonna have to CONTINUOUSLY win in the tourney to garner more.

 

[SoonerinNC]

Our basketball program is underrated because of our success in football. Also we have not won the big one.

 

[CMSOONER]

I can't recall seeing all of this in once place so I put it together. Here is where OU Stands in NCAA tournament history.

Tied for 19th in total NCAA Tournament wins (41)
19th in total appearances (31)
Round of 32 (17)*
Tied for 26th - Sweet 16's (10)
Tied for 18th - Elite 8's (9)
Tied for 9th - Final Fours (5)
Tied for 17th - Championship Game (2)

Some of the rankings are slightly skewed by the tournament only being a field of 8 from 1939 until 1975. A good number of small programs had success during this time like Holy Cross, Temple, CCNY, NYU, Oklahoma State (jk).

*I couldn't find stats for historically ranking Round of 32 appearances

 

[WaymanFan]

I can't recall seeing all of this in once place so I put it together. Here is where OU Stands in NCAA tournament history.

Tied for 19th in total NCAA Tournament wins (41)
19th in total appearances (31)
Round of 32 (17)*
Tied for 26th - Sweet 16's (10)
Tied for 18th - Elite 8's (9)
Tied for 9th - Final Fours (5)
Tied for 17th - Championship Game (2)

Some of the rankings are slightly skewed by the tournament only being a field of 8 from 1939 until 1975. A good number of small programs had success during this time like Holy Cross, Temple, CCNY, NYU, Oklahoma State (jk).

*I couldn't find stats for historically ranking Round of 32 appearances

I think what's frustrating about those stats is when you drill down, we're FIRST in NCAA Tournament victories (41) for schools who have not won a national championship (that was as of 2017, so I may not be current). Also, we're tied for first (Houston, Illinois) for most Final Four appearances (5) without winning a national championship.

Another reason we're under-appreciated is due to underachieving in the NCAA Tournament based on our seed (historically). However, that is more of a reflection of Billy and Kelvin getting more out of their teams than what was expected. For example, Billy's 1984 and 1990 squads had no business being seeded where they were based on preseason expectations. Those teams would have had to win 6 games to "achieve expectations". They won 1. Kevin's 1995, 2000 and 2001 teams should have won 6 games - and they won 1 for basically the same reasons. Teams who play beyond reasonable expectations are often knocked out of the Dance prematurely...it happens.

 

[Hollisp]

I think what's frustrating about those stats is when you drill down, we're FIRST in NCAA Tournament victories (41) for schools who have not won a national championship.

Man that makes me sad.

Gonna be sweet when we do it!

I’m also a Cubs fan so I can wait.