Here We Go Again.

Here we are again. Two years after Tubby decided to leave Kentucky for Minnesota over a disagreement regarding his coaching staff, UK is again looking to hire a new coach to lead the basketball program back to the promise land of SEC Championships and Final Fours. Admittedly, UK looks pretty bad right now. The basketball program has not been relevant in four seasons and currently doesn't have a coach. Our fan base has been painted as psychotically obsessed with success. As a result, the perception is that coaching the basketball team has become the hardest job in sports. Why is this? And is it fair?

Kentucky has been a target of the national media since the "firing" of Tubby Smith, and it appears have just painted a wider target on our backs after the FIRING of Billy Gillispie. I happen to feel that both decisions were the correct ones. Tubby was great at UK. It's hard to argue he wasn't. He led some of the most beloved UK teams in recent memory. The Bogans-led squad of 2002 finished the regular season ranked number one. The Fitch-Hayes-Daniels led squad of 2003 also finished number one. They are two of the most popular teams over the last 20 years. The 2005 Hayes-led squad was also great. And don't forget the championship team of 1998 led by Sheppard. However, it was also apparent that Tubby was starting to slip. His tournament success was fading, and his recruiting was very suspect. Tubby was a great coach, but was clearly failing to bring in the talent UK was used to. His assistant coaching staff was largely to blame, and largely incompetent. His request to add his son Saul Smith to the staff had to be met with great trepidation. Though UK has been blasted for its decision, most close to the program believe it was the right decision. It is true, Tubby's race was an issue for a minority of UK fans. That's the world we live in, not the state. Furthermore, it had absolutely no bearing on Tubby's tenure with the program. If he were elected for the position every four years, race may have played a factor. He's not and it wasn't. Tubby's end at UK revolved around missed recruiting opportunities that led to two bad years and his own refusals to make changes to his assistant coaching staff. I don't think Tubby should have been required to make changes, but I also thought his performance was slipping to the point it was a warranted suggestion by the department.

One thing is clear - the national media is obsessed with the idea that we ran Tubby out of town. Make your own determination of the situation, but I find it hard to place all the blame on the athletic department. Tubby brought in a class of Bobby Perry, Sheray Thomas, Lukaz Orbzut, and Shagari Alleyne. Now, if you can make an argument that he wasn't slipping - I'd be glad to get really drunk and try to entertain it. Regardless, the bashing of UK over the Tubby Smith situation, to me, is just not entirely fair. The fans deserve some criticism over their reaction to Tubby Smith during his nine years. Some never warmed up to him. He was a great coach and a great person to lead the program. He just started slipping, and it was noticeable to everyone in the State who had to watch Shagari Alleyne run the floor. We've moved on, but ESPN hasn't. Now we are in a similar situation after firing Clyde and again the bashers have come out in full force. I'm looking at you Michael Wilbon. Tony Kornheiser made you.

So where are we at and where do we go from here? Let's make a few things clear.

First. The National Media outlets from ESPN to Fox Sports have lambasted the program for firing Billy Clyde after only two seasons. Where our treatment of Tubby Smith may have deserved a little criticism from the media, the media's criticism of our program this go around seems to be entirely misplaced. After the general distaste for the program after the Tubby situation, here seem to be the basic gripes about the UK program's firing of Billy Clyde.

1. UK fired him to early. He deserved a third year. This is an argument I simply do not understand. His record on the basketball court certainly was not deserving of a third year. Allegedly, his off-court behavior and treatment of players, parents, and others close to the program suggested he wasn't deserving of a second year. ESPN apparently feels that any coach that is hired automatically deserves at least three years to get the program where he wants it to be. Many have suggested he still didn't have his players at UK, yet. (We will address his recruiting later.) The bottom line is that no one has pointed out to me an affirmative action taken by Billy Clyde that made him deserving of a third year. Plenty of things suggest he wasn't deserving, but nothing suggests he was deserving besides his hiring in the first place. Personally, I don't think anyone deserves a certain amount of years just because they were hired. Hence, the existence and use of the famous buy out clause.
   
2. UK Fans Have Unreal Expectations. This is a problem with any major program, but is accentuated at UK because of the rabid fan base. However, the majority of the fan base just wants a team they can be excited about. We want to know we are at least moving in the right direction. That was never seen during the Billy Clyde era. Now there are certainly a large group of fans who lose their shit on the message boards after any loss, bad half, or questionable moves made by the coach. People cut Billy slack last year because of injuries, but this year there was no excuse for the complete collapse. Watching this year's team for every game, there is no reason fans shouldn't have been upset with Billy's coaching job. He had a 12-4 record in a down SEC conference last year. We were happy, but that is no reason to not be upset with how things have gone this year.
   
3. UK Hired a Rebuilding Coach and Didn't Let Him Rebuild. There is merit to this argument. However, I don't think it's entirely an indictment of UK's firing, but more a comment on the hiring. We didn't need a rebuilding coach, and that's not what we were looking for. We were looking for an enthusiastic recruiter, a guy that seemingly slept and ate around basketball. The problem is that the pressure at UK teamed with that type of personality created an atmosphere for a guy to snap.
   

It's hard to find any strong argument on the court against the firing of Billy Clyde. He wasn't getting the job done and there were no signs that progress was being made to get the job done in the future. That's a deadly combination for any coach, anywhere.

Second. Should he have been fired? It is difficult to form a complete opinion on the Gillispie firing, because it is clear off-court issues the fans and media are not privy to were the deciding factor in the decision. Several former players and a few current players have publicly expressed their backing of the decision. In my experience, when players have so quickly turned on their former coach it's a sign of how bad things were. Players are naturally inclined to support their coach, to turn on him means there was some really bad stuff going on behind the scenes. The national media has yet to comment on this. They have demonized the UK department and fans. I don't think that's fair.

Not having all the information on the off-court issues, let's look solely at what he produced on the court and in the recruiting efforts and evaluate whether or not the firing was at least partly justified by that. Now, again, I think his firing was mostly a result of the off-court issues, but record being 13 games over .500 didn't help anything. If he was winning, Barnhart and Todd may have been more willing to discuss his behavior, though there is evidence they had tried several times during his tenure. Here's what he did for the program.

1. Losses at VMI and Gardner-Webb. Two really bad losses. Maybe the two worst in UK history. That's quite an accomplishment for a coach in only two years. Now, as bad as these losses where it wasn't the names of either school that got Billy in trouble. Essentially, these two games highlighted Billy's complete refusal or inability to make changes in game strategy. They highlighted his stubbornness which eventually was his downfall.
2. 2009 Collapse. Let's get one thing straight, no UK fan was happy about playing in the N-I-T. But let me also make clear, it was not the N-I-T that upset fans alone. If we were depleted in talent, recovering from a scandal, etc. the N-I-T would have been a perfectly acceptable option. It was the complete collapse in 2009 that caused the fans to turn on Billy. It was evident none of the players were having fun. There was a horrible stench around the program and as a fan it became very difficult to watch. UK had the talent to play in the tournament this year, and at several points looked like a 4 or 5 seed. Billy completely lost the team in 2009 and when they ceased to be enjoyable to watch, the fans got really upset.
   
3. Recruits. This hasn't gotten much attention. I don't like to comment on recruits before they get on campus, but in defense of the program it may be necessary. As I stated earlier, ESPN feels adement about Billy deserving a third year, largely so he can get his players into the program. Let's take a look at his recruiting efforts. Alex Legion transfers out before the turn of the 2007-2008 season. Donald Williams doesn't see a minute of action all year long. Josh Harrelson and Kevin Galloway see very limited action all year long. They get sporadic playing time that is confusing at best and mentally-challeged at worst. Billy admitted to sometimes forgetting about players on the bench. Deandre Liggins is the sixth man, and receives the majority of minutes at point guard through much of the pre-conference schedule, but then fails to see the court in several games and plays less than 5 minutes in many of the others. It is no secret he and Gillispie butted heads, but doesn't some of the blame land on coach. Liggins was a five-star point guard who was never allowed to play through a mistake, rarely allowed to get in a good rythm with the team. I always felt that when he got significant minutes he made something happen and made us a more dynamic team. Darius Miller looked great to start the season and great to end the season, but had a stretch of 15 games in the middle where he obviously lacked any and all confidence in himself. In summary, Gillispie had five players on this year's team who were expected to contribute, and only one really did. His recruiting did not appear to be much stronger for the future. He's bringing in Orton, Hood, Vilarino and Tucker in for next year. Orton is a top center in the class, but his rankings were falling. That was before a season-ending knee injury. Hood's play has been criticized throughout the state, and many doubt he would have seen much time over Harris or Miller next year. Vilarino is a point guard from Texas who was not ranked in the top 150 players. I think they are all good players, but I don't see any of them turning the program around. Let's not forget the 8th grader he recruited - Micheal Avery. We also have Dakotah Euton and Vinny Zollo who look more like Tuba players in the band than Division I college players. The thought of those two on the blocks at the same time makes me want to start following the Lady Wildcats for a few seasons. KC Ross Miller has fallen out of the top 150 in his class and looked really bad duringa tournament against decent talent in Lexington. He plays in an all-Christian high school league in Texas that doesn't put top talent on the floor. Dominique Ferguson seems like a legitimate talent in 2010. But that's where we were standing with Billy's great recruiting. This was more of a rant than a coherent comment, but my point is that things didn't look much brighter for the future with scholarships tied up on players still waiting for their testicles to drop (Avery) and players who look like a pair of testicles (Zollo and Euton).
   

Third. The department is partly to blame. I will concede that point. They made a bad hire without weighing all of the information. As said by almost anyone who has commented on the situation - It was a bad fit. Many are quick to point out that complete blame has to fall on the hiring committee. We knew what we were getting. We knew his personality. But should the blame fall on the department for acknowledging they made a bad hire, cutting their losses, and trying to correct the decision?

Can anyone truly hold them responsible for knowing of Gillispie's actions. Let's take a step back and consider what are rumored to be several of the off-court issues. I can't think of any instance in which he publicly humiliated a female reporter on television. I can't think of any reports on his behavior towards players and parents, besides being somewhat of a hard ass. Personally, I think Billy wasn't used to losing and as a result he started losing it. Yes, the hiring committee jumped the gun when Tubby left, but Billy's actions were not completely foreseeable. If some of the stories released are true, and I suspect that they are, Billy is also largely to blame.

With every rant, I feel it is important to try and summarize my central ideas. From the on-court evidence, the firing of Gillispie was the right decision. Add the rumoured off-court issues and it seems like a no-brainer for the department. In many respects, I feel they didn't have much of a choice in the decision. It was something that had to be done. UK is to blame for making a bad hire, but shouldn't be blamed for the firing in any respect. If Tubby would have retired, rather than being forced out, I feel there would be much less bashing of this firing, and more consideration paid to the off-court issues that ultimately led to Billy's firing.

To the UK fans: Don't worry. I don't have the highest confidence in Barnhart, but I do believe this situation will force the administration to carefully consider who the next coach will be. Again, I feel the firing was something that many close to the program - players, parents, boosters, and department staff - felt had to be done. I tend to trust that many people that close to the team. I know many of us, myself included, wanted the next hire to have been in place. But take some solace in knowing that the next hire will have been made under careful consideration. I tend to believe it will be a successful hire. Barnhart knows it has to be.

As to who that next person will be - I honestly have no idea. But the program is in a better place now, than it was Friday morning.