Huse contract extension? Good idea?

[luvMtFootball]

As I follow this years Bobcat's, it looks like another middle of the pack finish, with about 15 - 15 record again. What do Bobcat fan's expect? Are you okay with this? Coach Huse was awarded a contract extension this past spring, did Fields jump the gun? What has Huse accomplished to be rewarded with an extension? His best season was last year (15-14 record) and 10 - 6 in the Big Sky which was an accomplishment, however they then lose the first round game of the tournament at home! In my opinion had the Cats not got hot and defeated the Griz and Weber St. in 2008 Big Sky Tournament his job would be in jeapordy, not rewarded with a three year extension.

Fields must feel the program is in good hands and content with being a middle of the conference program! Since Huse took over the Cats they are 61-71 overall and 31-33 in the Big Sky. Over the past four seasons, his record is only better than Sac. State, Idaho State, EWU, and No. Colorado. No. Colorado however as we all know went from a 4-24 record in Huse's first year to 25-8 last year. This is the company the Cats are keeping with in men's basketball and that is okay???

I am sorry, I don't see it. What are his strengths? Recruiting? Game Management? He micro manages every aspect of a game, berates the players, you can sense the players don't care for him, I don't see anything on the horizon that lends itself to feeling the program is on the upstart! With three seniors this year graduating (the two best players), I see the team being even weaker next year!

Lets just get used to being a Big Sky non contending program that finsishes in the middle of the conference and maybe in a year or two the team may upset a couple more teams in the tournament and Huse can get another extension! The fan's would never accept this type of mediocrity in football, but basketball not so much!

[longhorn_22]

I think Huse is a great coach. He gets a TON out of the talent he has here. However, I'm getting tired of seeing the same 2 or 3 JC guys come in every year and no really add the big guys up front that we need to be effective in the BSC. It just feels like a puzzle piece team most of the time. I'd like to see more continuity and a "4-year" team. That being said, I don't know if Fields dares gets rid of him after all he's done with the APR and the student-athletes he's brought in. But I guess we'll have to see. I do like Huse, for the record, but I'm tired of sitting behind UM, NAU, and Weber every year.

[GrizinWashington]

Ahhh, the fickleness of sports fans....

When LK left for the Bucks' job, nearly everyone on this board was convinced that Huse was a better coach than Tinkle, and that they were extremely glad he went to MSU before LK left Montana. Here is one thread on the subject, but there are many more:

http://www.bobcatnation.com/bobcatbb/vi ... lit=tinkle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


This isn't meant to be a slam on you, luvMtfb. I just find it funny that 3 years ago everyone was anointing Huse THE guy and laughing at the Griz hiring of Wayne, and now they would give their left nut to trade head coaches.

FWIW, I think Huse has done a commendable (if not remarkable) job at MSU. It wasn't as though he took over a program which regularly went to the NCAAs. I agree with LH22. I think he gets more talent out of his players than is likely there, so he can clearly coach. So far, if he has a weakness, it's recruiting, where I think it's fair to say that Tinkle's results are head and shoulders above.


That all said, it's just nice to see some basketball conversation on this board. I was beginning to wonder if there weren't any BB fans here....

[BelgradeBobcat]

now they would give their left nut to trade head coaches.

I think that's a bit of a leap!

Right now I don't see any Big Sky coach that really excites me-they're all pretty mediocre-just like the league is.

Huse does have a 3 game winning streak going against the griz. That will probably end this season, but it's something. That along with the fact that the players are going to class, staying out of trouble, and are competitive in the Big Sky will keep him here as long as he wants.

I was hoping for more when Huse got here...a lot more. I keep hoping he hits on the right combination one of these seasons. If he doesn't Huse will be stuck here-like Mike Adras is at NAU. Not good enough to get a higher profile job-not bad enough to get fired. I must say-I do like the young talent on this team. Johnson, Reed, McCall, and Budnich could all be pretty good in a season or two.

[GrizinWashington]

-they're all pretty mediocre-just like the league is.

Wow. I'd say the BSC conference may be stronger right now than it has ever been, and certainly stronger than at anytime since the early 80s.

As for the coaching talent, again I'd be hard-pressed to think of a a period with more quality coaches, top to bottom.

[WSUWILDCAT]

now they would give their left nut to trade head coaches.

I think that's a bit of a leap!

Right now I don't see any Big Sky coach that really excites me-they're all pretty mediocre-just like the league is.

Huse does have a 3 game winning streak going against the griz. That will probably end this season, but it's something. That along with the fact that the players are going to class, staying out of trouble, and are competitive in the Big Sky will keep him here as long as he wants.

I was hoping for more when Huse got here...a lot more. I keep hoping he hits on the right combination one of these seasons. If he doesn't Huse will be stuck here-like Mike Adras is at NAU. Not good enough to get a higher profile job-not bad enough to get fired. I must say-I do like the young talent on this team. Johnson, Reed, McCall, and Budnich could all be pretty good in a season or two.

How about Randy Rahe? 3 Big Sky titles in 4 years

[longhorn_22]

Huse is a better coach than Tinkle. Tinkle is a better recruiter. The amount of talent that UM has had in the last 4 years, they should have won a ton more games.

[BelgradeBobcat]

As for the coaching talent, again I'd be hard-pressed to think of a a period with more quality coaches, top to bottom.

It's a subjective argument. I just see the coaches for the leagues current top teams, Tinkle, Rahe, and Adras as being a notch below Taylor/Krysto, Abegglin, or Howland. But I guess time will tell.

One thing that is for sure-the Big Sky sure has a bunch of boring coaches. Where's the characters? Remember guys like McCarthy, Abegglin, Herb Williams at ISU, Blaine Taylor, Jerome Jenkins at Sac State. These were guys opposing teams loved to hate. Fans would go to the games just to harrass them. The only real character we have now is Joe O'Brien at ISU. He's good for blowing a gasket at least once a game-but opposing fans don't hate him-more likely they just feel sorry for him. Or maybe Adras, but his only quirk is he won't watch his players shoot freethrows. Heck Tinkle and Huse are BFF's! It was more intriguing when Taylor and Durham were going at it-as there was no loved lost between those two. There's nothing like pure hatred fueled by eccentricity to spice up some rivalries.

That all said, I'm sure glad conference season is starting. Non-confernece is really boring. With the Big Sky expanding there should be more conference games-which is a good thing for basketball.

P.S. How could I forget Dancing Joe Cravins. Don't we all miss that guy?

[GrizinWashington]

Great post, BB!

[luvMtFootball]

Mick Durham's final two season's he went 16-15 (7-7 Big Sky) and 13-19 (8-8 Big Sky) and was forced out. Five years later, in what area has the program inproved?

[BelgradeBobcat]

The internet is awesome! Here's the clip of dancin' Joe (the fun starts about 40 seconds into it):

[youtube][/youtube]

Now that sells tickets!

I just noticed: There's a lot of people in EWU's gym!

[GrizinWashington]

LOL!! Cravens was hilarious!! We had seats near courtside one game and we kept calling him, "Mario". I don't think he appreciated that very much, but it got a few smiles from his players.

[bozbobcat]

Mick Durham's final two season's he went 16-15 (7-7 Big Sky) and 13-19 (8-8 Big Sky) and was forced out. Five years later, in what area has the program inproved?

I think the last season you mentioned was Huse's first season. Mick went 16-15 (7-7 BSC) in his final season, losing 71-70 to Sacramento State in the first round Big Sky game. The year before that, the overall record was about .500, but they were 9-5 in conference play and got the #2 seed and the first round bye. The year before he retired, Mick Durham was the Big Sky coach of the year.

I've kept my two cents out of this thread, but I've been interested in it. I'm not sure what to say about Coach Huse. He has maximized what talent he has, and has reached the Big Sky tournament in all 4 seasons so far. I think they've finished in the following positions in Big Sky play the last few years: 5th, 6th, 6th, and 3rd. He has two tournament wins from two years ago on that run to the Big Sky Championship. They've had some good wins, especially beating Colorado and Oregon State on the road. The team has won some big ones in conference play, including 3 in a row against the Griz and two wins in the same season at Weber State. Some problems still exist, such as we're seeing this season with non-conference road games and February swoons. I think a lot of people had issues with Mick Durham about these two things, and Huse hasn't shaken those problems quite yet.

The team is 6-6 right now, but started 5-1. Out of those 12 games, 4 have been at home, and only 2 of those were D-1 games. The 2 neutral site games looked good, but the 6 D-1 road games have ended up quite ugly. If we shortened road games to 30 minutes, that might change the Bobcats' record. I've noticed a few problems with the team: they're too reliant on 3 pointers, not quite big enough inside, and seem to go cold in the second half. These problems can be fixed, and tough efforts on the road should help in conference play. However, the Cats have to find more ways to win than just by launching 3 pointers and they need to find a way to score points in the second half. I think things can turn around and they can have a decent season, but it will be a challenge.

I think Huse has been a decent motivator so far in his tenure, but he needs help in recruiting some more guys. I'd like to see this team build with more 4 year guys, but that's getting harder and harder to do in the Big Sky. They've done well so far considering how many games they've had in close succession and how few home games they've had. They need work on diversifying the offense and staying strong for 40 minutes. In the 2 D-1 home games, they had big problems breaking a full court press. The team needs to be more solid on fundamentals.

As for Huse, I'm really torn about him. I think he needs a little more time to build the program his way, but I would hope that win totals would improve soon. It would be nice to challenge for the Big Sky championship again, and by March, it will have been 15 years since the last trip to the NCAA tournament. I don't like the way he conducts himself on the court all that well, and I don't care for how he talks to certain players while on the bench. My answer is to give a little more time, but the expectations should go up after this season.

[bozbobcat]

LOL!! Cravens was hilarious!! We had seats near courtside one game and we kept calling him, "Mario". I don't think he appreciated that very much, but it got a few smiles from his players.

Joe Cravens was always a fun one to watch. As someone else said, Joe O'Brien is about the only entertaining coach in the league anymore. I do remember Blaine Taylor coming to the Fieldhouse quite well. The student section had signs that said "Hey Blaine, It's Miller Time" after he got a DUI. It's not classy, but it was funny to a 12 year old kid.

[longhorn_22]

Mick Durham's final two season's he went 16-15 (7-7 Big Sky) and 13-19 (8-8 Big Sky) and was forced out. Five years later, in what area has the program inproved?

All about APR, my friend. Huse also has his players under more control. I can't tell you how many times I would see players goofing around before a game while the other team was doing serious warmups. It seems more tight-knit under Huse. And maybe that has something do with why he was brought in and after all the issues, but I think Huse has done a satisfactory job thus far as per what he has had to do with the program. If the wins do not go up in the next 2 years I would definitely agree that we might have to look for a new head man.

[longhorn_22]

As for the coaching talent, again I'd be hard-pressed to think of a a period with more quality coaches, top to bottom.

It's a subjective argument. I just see the coaches for the leagues current top teams, Tinkle, Rahe, and Adras as being a notch below Taylor/Krysto, Abegglin, or Howland. But I guess time will tell.

One thing that is for sure-the Big Sky sure has a bunch of boring coaches. Where's the characters? Remember guys like McCarthy, Abegglin, Herb Williams at ISU, Blaine Taylor, Jerome Jenkins at Sac State. These were guys opposing teams loved to hate. Fans would go to the games just to harrass them. The only real character we have now is Joe O'Brien at ISU. He's good for blowing a gasket at least once a game-but opposing fans don't hate him-more likely they just feel sorry for him. Or maybe Adras, but his only quirk is he won't watch his players shoot freethrows. Heck Tinkle and Huse are BFF's! It was more intriguing when Taylor and Durham were going at it-as there was no loved lost between those two. There's nothing like pure hatred fueled by eccentricity to spice up some rivalries.

That all said, I'm sure glad conference season is starting. Non-confernece is really boring. With the Big Sky expanding there should be more conference games-which is a good thing for basketball.

P.S. How could I forget Dancing Joe Cravins. Don't we all miss that guy?

This is so true. I LOVE heckling Tinkle. I miss Ken Bone and Jenkins and the like.

And I also agree about the scheduling. I don't know about the other teams but the coaches here have not done MSU any favors in the out-of-conference home scheduling this year. The teams have been awful and not very intriguing. I'd like more Boise St.'s, Oregon St.'s. It helps fill the seats and sell season tickets.

[mttiger]

It is still too early in the season for me to offer a firm opinion, but so far I'm not too impressed with the way things are going. Let's get into the Big Sky schedule and see how it goes.

[mttiger]

A couple more comments a day later. I agree about the scheduling. In football it's OK to play an FBS team because it brings in big money. (By the way, remember when the Griz said they were essentially above such tactics? Now I see where they are playing at Tennessee next year! Good luck, Griz, you'll need it!).

However, in basketball, really, what is the advantage to playing teams from big conferences? I mean, does anyone really think a Big Sky champion is going to run deep in the NCAA? Not unless we figure out how to become the next Gonzaga or Butler.

Regarding fans' expectations--I've always been AMAZED at how MSU has put up with mediocrity for decades while the school across the state was dominating. In fact, I really could not think of another state in the country with two major universities where one school just dominated the way Montana used to (I emphasize the USED TO!)

I once wrote a letter to the MSU AD (not Fields), admonishing them to do something, mainly pointing out the discrepancy with the two stadiums. The reply that I received was unbelievable. The guy basically said that we are doing what is right for MSU, and we don't care what UM does. Well, Cuz, you'd better pay attention to what your rival does, because in the end, it directly affects how YOU do!

Sorry to say, but good athletic teams (with good character) produce more donations for the university from the alumni and fans. That's just the way it works. It may not be right, but that's how it goes. Ask Notre Dame, Oregon, Auburn, Florida, Michigan State, you name it.

I really like the leadership of President Cruzado in athletics. In talking to several long time Bobcat Boosters, she is very, very popular. I don't think you are going to see her settle for mediocrity with our sports teams. And she shouldn't. The support for most MSU sports is fantastic. I went to several volleyball games this year, and the crowds were amazing, especially since the girls had a losing record.

The hoops crowds could be better, and they would be if the teams would produce.

Let's see how we do against Weber on 12-29. One thing's for sure, we need to have a good crowd and do our part and see what the coaches and players can do with a good, vocal home crowd.

Go Cats

[BelgradeBobcat]

This year's schedule really has been awful. Four countable home games and only 2 of those against D-1 teams. Maybe next year will be better. I assume Illinois State and Seattle owe us return trips?

[GrizinWashington]

A couple more comments a day later. I agree about the scheduling. In football it's OK to play an FBS team because it brings in big money. (By the way, remember when the Griz said they were essentially above such tactics? Now I see where they are playing at Tennessee next year! Good luck, Griz, you'll need it!).

However, in basketball, really, what is the advantage to playing teams from big conferences? I mean, does anyone really think a Big Sky champion is going to run deep in the NCAA? Not unless we figure out how to become the next Gonzaga or Butler.

Regarding fans' expectations--I've always been AMAZED at how MSU has put up with mediocrity for decades while the school across the state was dominating. In fact, I really could not think of another state in the country with two major universities where one school just dominated the way Montana used to (I emphasize the USED TO!)

I once wrote a letter to the MSU AD (not Fields), admonishing them to do something, mainly pointing out the discrepancy with the two stadiums. The reply that I received was unbelievable. The guy basically said that we are doing what is right for MSU, and we don't care what UM does. Well, Cuz, you'd better pay attention to what your rival does, because in the end, it directly affects how YOU do!

Sorry to say, but good athletic teams (with good character) produce more donations for the university from the alumni and fans. That's just the way it works. It may not be right, but that's how it goes. Ask Notre Dame, Oregon, Auburn, Florida, Michigan State, you name it.

I really like the leadership of President Cruzado in athletics. In talking to several long time Bobcat Boosters, she is very, very popular. I don't think you are going to see her settle for mediocrity with our sports teams. And she shouldn't. The support for most MSU sports is fantastic. I went to several volleyball games this year, and the crowds were amazing, especially since the girls had a losing record.

The hoops crowds could be better, and they would be if the teams would produce.

Let's see how we do against Weber on 12-29. One thing's for sure, we need to have a good crowd and do our part and see what the coaches and players can do with a good, vocal home crowd.

Go Cats

Wow. There's a lot I disagree with in this post.

UM has never claimed they were "above" playing FBS teams. They've claimed they don't need to play the game for the money (they don't; they'll make more on their DII game at Wa Griz then they will at Knoxville). The difference now is that while Hauck didn't like the play-up games, Pflu does, so you'll see them every 2 or 3 years.

The point about it not making sense to play those teams in BB is ridiculous. The Big Sky PLAYS at that level in basketball. They're not "play-up" games in basketball. They'll just games against other teams at your level. IMO, basketball is the ONLY time to play teams from major conferences.

I don't know if you're talking about domination in FB or BB, but here's a list of states in which one team traditionally dominates another FBS team in either FB, BB or both: Ohio State, Washington, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Illinois, Arizona. Man, I could go on a long time.

I like Dr. Cruzado as well. We agree on that.