Rambling Sunday thoughts on Utah Basketball

[Jarid in Cedar]

It is a tough time to be a fan of the Running Utes. The catastrophe that we are witnessing is not as easy to explain as some would like it to be. Some blame Hill, some blame Boylen, some even blame Majerus. There is a little truth in every view, and a bunch of BS in each one as well.

Starting with Majerus. Majerus was the most significant sports figure in the state of Utah for the decade of the 90's. He led the program to dizzying heights, and set up every successor to fail because of his immense shadow. After the finals in 98, he obsessed about how close to the prize he has come, but as with many with genius, the obsession can become toxic and detrimental. He flirted with every job offer, his recruiting suffered, he released valuable coaches(esp Judkins), he became more toxic with his players, transfers became the norm. Yet as fans, we held on to hope because his teams still won, and played above their collective skill. Ultimately, I think we would have been better off if he had moved on to ASU in 2000.

As for Hill, the worst thing that happened to Utah basketball was the 2004 Fiesta Bowl. Hill saw(correctly, I might add), that football was becoming the driving force of college athletics. With this, he diverted as much funding into the football program as he could. This led to neglecting the other programs in regards to facilities, recruiting budgets, etc. Hill also tried to go on the cheap with Giac and Boylen. Now to the dismay of some, Hill will never lose his job at Utah, but he holds the hat for several key missteps in the basketball programs decline.

Giac was a disaster. He could not coach. He didn't think that he could compete recruiting instate, so he neglected local talent(Jackson Emery is the biggest example IMO). And he rode Bogut to a contract extension that I think we are paying for to this day. Not much else to say here.

Boylen is different. The ultimate problem with Boylen was that he was not capable of being a leader. He could not inspire his players to greater accomplishments, and could not control the personalities on his own teams(esp '09-10). IMO, this is the big unknown when promoting long time assistants; can they lead.

Contrary to popular opinion, Boylen brought some talent to Utah. Esp, when you look at 2010-11. Clyburn, O'Brien, Foster, Watkins, Glover were a solid core to build a team around. The trouble was he was not able to get talent to improve over the course of a season. Last years team was far more disappointing to me than 09-10(that team was not nearly as talented). Boylen however had trouble recruiting that one elite talent that could have elevated any of his teams, but he was able to bring in players with some real assets.


Boylen lost the support of a significant portion of the fanbase because of the specter of Majerus. Fan expectation was for a return to the glory days of the 90's. Boylen did not recruit enough talent for that to be a reasonable expectation. However, Boylen deserved his fate because he could not lead the talent that he had amassed. The 2009-10 team played 2-4 wins below their ability. This was followed up by the 2010-11 team playing 4-6 wins below their ability. There is no reason that this team should not have made at least the CBI and more likely the NIT. The reason was that Boylen was not a leader. Someone who could direct the show, have the respect of the players to run the system the way that he wanted. If he could have done that, he would still have his job for at least this season.

As for this year, the dearth of talent on this team is going to make any real evaulation of Krystkowiak very difficult. Krystkowiak probably hurt himself in this area by not coddling some of the holdovers a little bit more. But to me, the loss of Foster essentially took the legs out of any thoughts respectability this season. It took any chance that we could be a plucky team that wins a few games that they shouldn't. These guys could play to the best of their abilities every night and still lose to by 20-25 points regularly. Foster was the only player with legit D-1 skills(on the defensive side). His ability to protect the paint would allow there to be a cohesive defensive game plan. With that, we would be able to stay in some games, and steal a few along the way.

The only bright spot in a dim future is that the two best players on the team are redshirting this year, and Krystkowiak has a nice recruiting class coming in next season. I do worry that all of the losing this year will have a negative effect when it comes to 2013 recruits.

Either way, me and my 9 season tickets are invested for the long run. Hopefully, all of our fans will have some patience to see if Krystkowiak can get the ball rolling again. I think he has the leadership abilities, and has shown some skill in recruiting. He also assembled a solid staff. Slocum is a solid assistant and recruiter, and Conners is a good pickup as well. Sadly, we are a few years before we can fully evaluate where he can lead us as a program.

[LA Ute]

Good thoughts, NJIC. I think the one Krysko decision that will be (and should be) debated for some time is whether he should have coddled Clyburn, O'Brien et al. more. Maybe one of these days he'll comment on that.

I do think the seeds of today's problems lie in Majerus' time as HC. I'm not blaming him, just trying to point to is historical impact. He did change noticeably after 1998.

[Top Ute]

I find it amazing that some view Chris Hill as untouchable.

Ask yourself this: If (heaven forbid) we had to find a new football coach tomorrow, would you trust Hill to make that hire?

If there is any hesitation in answering that question, then you have your answer. He's gotta go. He's certainly not going to have any kind of say if Larry doesn't work out -- and yesterday was a very disturbing sign that it won't. How does a team full of players with no guarantees of having a scholarship for next year mail it in like it did against Fresno? Deplorable. Damn straight we can judge Larry on that.

What kind of transparency has Hill allowed in his last two coaching searches? My observations is that there has been none -- anything we found out in advance came from outside sources. That lack of accountability has absolutely killed basketball, and that hiring M.O. hasn't worked since Urban.

We can point the finger all we want at the guilty culprits in the demise of Utah basketball. Most points are valid, although there are some I disagree with. If anything, my pet peeves are the issues that are often forgotten. For example, Boylen destroyed and dismissed international recruiting, and given the success Utah has had in that area, it's an unforgivable strategy.

But there is one point that I think a lot of people are conveniently dismissing: Utah basketball should NEVER have gotten to the point it has today.

The resources and advantages Utah has over the company it currently shares (read: sub-250 RPI teams) is damn near infinite. With rare exception, these schools have no tradition, no TV presence, no conference affiliation of note, are afterthoughts in their own recruiting base, don't have the sheer number of donors and corporate partners, and play in arenas about a third or half the size of the JHC.

Even as mismanaged as things have been over the years, those advantages will always be in play.

I was at Boise State yesterday for the Broncos' game against UNM. I found it ironic that within the space of 1,000 feet and in a two-week span, Boise hosted the worst FBS team in the country, and the worst basketball team from a major conference (Utah). Can you imagine Boise State in 8-10 years being as bad in football as New Mexico? Yet that's what has happened to Utah hoops.

Why on earth we're tolerating the lone common denominator in one of collegiate sports' all-time spectacular craterings to keep his job, or even celebrate the job he's done, is beyond me. Hill has gotten us into the Pac-12, and for that he'll always have the gratitude of the fanbase (much like Ron McBride will likewise for making Utah football relevant).

But eventually, McBride was fired because his presence within the football program was deemed more potentially detrimental than positive. Chris Hill should be held to the same standard.

[LA Ute]

Chris Hill is 62. He's gone in 3 years. Short of a scandal, he's not leaving until then.

[Pheidippides]

Oops. Sorry. Butt-posted on my phone.

[Jarid in Cedar]

I find it amazing that some view Chris Hill as untouchable.

Ask yourself this: If (heaven forbid) we had to find a new football coach tomorrow, would you trust Hill to make that hire?

If there is any hesitation in answering that question, then you have your answer. He's gotta go. He's certainly not going to have any kind of say if Larry doesn't work out -- and yesterday was a very disturbing sign that it won't. How does a team full of players with no guarantees of having a scholarship for next year mail it in like it did against Fresno? Deplorable. Damn straight we can judge Larry on that.

What kind of transparency has Hill allowed in his last two coaching searches? My observations is that there has been none -- anything we found out in advance came from outside sources. That lack of accountability has absolutely killed basketball, and that hiring M.O. hasn't worked since Urban.

We can point the finger all we want at the guilty culprits in the demise of Utah basketball. Most points are valid, although there are some I disagree with. If anything, my pet peeves are the issues that are often forgotten. For example, Boylen destroyed and dismissed international recruiting, and given the success Utah has had in that area, it's an unforgivable strategy.

But there is one point that I think a lot of people are conveniently dismissing: Utah basketball should NEVER have gotten to the point it has today.

The resources and advantages Utah has over the company it currently shares (read: sub-250 RPI teams) is damn near infinite. With rare exception, these schools have no tradition, no TV presence, no conference affiliation of note, are afterthoughts in their own recruiting base, don't have the sheer number of donors and corporate partners, and play in arenas about a third or half the size of the JHC.

Even as mismanaged as things have been over the years, those advantages will always be in play.

I was at Boise State yesterday for the Broncos' game against UNM. I found it ironic that within the space of 1,000 feet and in a two-week span, Boise hosted the worst FBS team in the country, and the worst basketball team from a major conference (Utah). Can you imagine Boise State in 8-10 years being as bad in football as New Mexico? Yet that's what has happened to Utah hoops.

Why on earth we're tolerating the lone common denominator in one of collegiate sports' all-time spectacular craterings to keep his job, or even celebrate the job he's done, is beyond me. Hill has gotten us into the Pac-12, and for that he'll always have the gratitude of the fanbase (much like Ron McBride will likewise for making Utah football relevant).

But eventually, McBride was fired because his presence within the football program was deemed more potentially detrimental than positive. Chris Hill should be held to the same standard.

Don't misread me here. I don't think Hill should be untouchable. He should be accountable. However, I don't see him losing his job.

[Top Ute]

Chris Hill is 62. He's gone in 3 years. Short of a scandal, he's not leaving until then.

We got death-penalty results in hoops without getting the death penalty.

To me, it's positively scandalous that Utah hoops is in the position it's in.

[LA Ute]

We got death-penalty results in hoops without getting the death penalty.

To me, it's positively scandalous that Utah hoops is in the position it's in.

I hate it too. It's still almost surreal.

[SeattleUte]

I do think the seeds of today's problems lie in Majerus' time as HC. I'm not blaming him, just trying to point to is historical impact. He did change noticeably after 1998.

BS. No matter how many times poeple repeat this canard it remains absolutely false.

Majerus left Bogut, and a very strong supporting cast. They went on to win the MWC tournament and go the the Sweet 16 the following year, after running away with the MWC regular season title.

It's been almost seven years since Majerus left. None of this is his fault. He left a damn good stake. The only way he caused this debacle is it's always hard to follow a legend.

The proximate cause of this fiasco is Jim Boylen's failure to recruit or develop a single freshman who became quality DI caliber player in four years. If you want to hold out for Clyburn being a quality DI player, then Boylen had that one recruit who could play well at this level--who was a rolling stone, a mercenary who came for one season and left. But as we see with Watkins, it's possible to have a great looking stat line and be a less than good player, simply because in basketball somebody has to score the points. I am not convinced anyone on last season's team was any good.

With the benefit of hindsight and some history, it's now possible to say that even Giacoletti looked good by comparison to Boylen. Colorado is 4-3 and Carlon Brown is its leading scorer. Boylen inherited one of the best low post players int he country.

I'd love to try that case against you--Whether Majerus ruined Utah basketball. I'd win a directed verdict 10 out of 10 times.

On the other hand, Jim Boylen is the most inept coach I've ever seen anywhere. he is also a man of low character. Just look at the revolving door his last two seasons; his legacy. His statement to the Las Vegas paper is also circumstancial evidence he deliberately tried to gut the program last season.

Let's stay focused on the real all-time villian of Utah sports. We ought to be burning Jim Boylen in effigy. I recall that Giacoletti handled his termination with a lot more grace than Boylen. He said something like "we didn't get the job done." That some Utah fans continue to defend that horrific coach Boylen and attack Majerus makes me think they deserve this devastation.

[SeattleUte]

It is a tough time to be a fan of the Running Utes. The catastrophe that we are witnessing is not as easy to explain as some would like it to be. Some blame Hill, some blame Boylen, some even blame Majerus. There is a little truth in every view, and a bunch of BS in each one as well.

Starting with Majerus. Majerus was the most significant sports figure in the state of Utah for the decade of the 90's. He led the program to dizzying heights, and set up every successor to fail because of his immense shadow. After the finals in 98, he obsessed about how close to the prize he has come, but as with many with genius, the obsession can become toxic and detrimental. He flirted with every job offer, his recruiting suffered, he released valuable coaches(esp Judkins), he became more toxic with his players, transfers became the norm. Yet as fans, we held on to hope because his teams still won, and played above their collective skill. Ultimately, I think we would have been better off if he had moved on to ASU in 2000.

As for Hill, the worst thing that happened to Utah basketball was the 2004 Fiesta Bowl. Hill saw(correctly, I might add), that football was becoming the driving force of college athletics. With this, he diverted as much funding into the football program as he could. This led to neglecting the other programs in regards to facilities, recruiting budgets, etc. Hill also tried to go on the cheap with Giac and Boylen. Now to the dismay of some, Hill will never lose his job at Utah, but he holds the hat for several key missteps in the basketball programs decline.

Giac was a disaster. He could not coach. He didn't think that he could compete recruiting instate, so he neglected local talent(Jackson Emery is the biggest example IMO). And he rode Bogut to a contract extension that I think we are paying for to this day. Not much else to say here.

Boylen is different. The ultimate problem with Boylen was that he was not capable of being a leader. He could not inspire his players to greater accomplishments, and could not control the personalities on his own teams(esp '09-10). IMO, this is the big unknown when promoting long time assistants; can they lead.

Contrary to popular opinion, Boylen brought some talent to Utah. Esp, when you look at 2010-11. Clyburn, O'Brien, Foster, Watkins, Glover were a solid core to build a team around. The trouble was he was not able to get talent to improve over the course of a season. Last years team was far more disappointing to me than 09-10(that team was not nearly as talented). Boylen however had trouble recruiting that one elite talent that could have elevated any of his teams, but he was able to bring in players with some real assets.


Boylen lost the support of a significant portion of the fanbase because of the specter of Majerus. Fan expectation was for a return to the glory days of the 90's. Boylen did not recruit enough talent for that to be a reasonable expectation. However, Boylen deserved his fate because he could not lead the talent that he had amassed. The 2009-10 team played 2-4 wins below their ability. This was followed up by the 2010-11 team playing 4-6 wins below their ability. There is no reason that this team should not have made at least the CBI and more likely the NIT. The reason was that Boylen was not a leader. Someone who could direct the show, have the respect of the players to run the system the way that he wanted. If he could have done that, he would still have his job for at least this season.

As for this year, the dearth of talent on this team is going to make any real evaulation of Krystkowiak very difficult. Krystkowiak probably hurt himself in this area by not coddling some of the holdovers a little bit more. But to me, the loss of Foster essentially took the legs out of any thoughts respectability this season. It took any chance that we could be a plucky team that wins a few games that they shouldn't. These guys could play to the best of their abilities every night and still lose to by 20-25 points regularly. Foster was the only player with legit D-1 skills(on the defensive side). His ability to protect the paint would allow there to be a cohesive defensive game plan. With that, we would be able to stay in some games, and steal a few along the way.

The only bright spot in a dim future is that the two best players on the team are redshirting this year, and Krystkowiak has a nice recruiting class coming in next season. I do worry that all of the losing this year will have a negative effect when it comes to 2013 recruits.

Either way, me and my 9 season tickets are invested for the long run. Hopefully, all of our fans will have some patience to see if Krystkowiak can get the ball rolling again. I think he has the leadership abilities, and has shown some skill in recruiting. He also assembled a solid staff. Slocum is a solid assistant and recruiter, and Conners is a good pickup as well. Sadly, we are a few years before we can fully evaluate where he can lead us as a program.

You have no idea if O'Brien and Clyburn failed to return because K failed to "coddle" them. There is NO evidence of that. You and others are making that up.

My theory, which has circumstantial support, is that the prior season was not a good experience for them, and then after Clyburn left the transfers fell like dominos, as Boylen actively helped to knock them over.

Note that we still have Hines and Washburn, two of Boylen's three cornerstone freshman recruits from his first two seasons, and you see how good they are.

Who cares anyway; I'd rather lose every game than have him coddle people like that.

Nevertheless, I'm not giving up on this team winning a few. They've been playing not a brutal schedule, but a very respectable one, and not on their home floor, after they were slapped together. They've played six games outside of the Huntsman Center and one at home. Let's hope they improve in the upcoming four straight home games.

[LA Ute]

I'd love to try that case against you--Whether Majerus ruined Utah basketball. I'd win a directed verdict 10 out of 10 times.

Whoa, put your gun down. I'd be the last person to make such a claim. When I said the seeds of our current problems lay in RM's tenure, I meant that in the same sense that the seeds of UCLA's post-Wooden problems lay in John Wooden's tenure. (Before anyone gets worked up, I'm not comparing Majerus to Wooden.) Having an extraordinarily successful head coach can cause problems down the road. That is all I am saying. And Majerus did change after 1998, but that caused problems only for him and the program under him, not for later coaches. The Utes' current hoops problems are not about Rick Majerus, so let's drop that meme. We could have survived Giacoletti, but not Giacolletti followed by Boylen.

[SeattleUte]

Utefans seem to forget that you don't build a program with 11th hour JUCO panic pickups. Especially in basketball, JUCOs ought to be the exception to the rule that you build with freshmen.

Clybun and Watkins were not a solid nucleus. They were a band aid on an amputation.

I don't like Jim Boylen.

[Katy Lied]

That sugar bowl year was such a massive achievement, and that sugar bowl victory soooo sweet, Hill should have ten years to coast and do nothing. For that, and for being lucky enough to be on watch when the Pac12 invite came, Hill should have a job until he wants to retire.

[SeattleUte]

That sugar bowl year was such a massive achievement, and that sugar bowl victory soooo sweet, Hill should have ten years to coast and do nothing. For that, and for being lucky enough to be on watch when the Pac12 invite came, Hill should have a job until he wants to retire.

Like the Sugar Bowl, this situation has nothing to do with Hill.

[Mormon Red Death]

I find it amazing that some view Chris Hill as untouchable.

Ask yourself this: If (heaven forbid) we had to find a new football coach tomorrow, would you trust Hill to make that hire?

Hell yes. He hired Mcbride, Meyer and Whittingham. His track record for football coaches at least is fantastic

He's certainly not going to have any kind of say if Larry doesn't work out -- and yesterday was a very disturbing sign that it won't. How does a team full of players with no guarantees of having a scholarship for next year mail it in like it did against Fresno? Deplorable. Damn straight we can judge Larry on that.

What kind of transparency has Hill allowed in his last two coaching searches? My observations is that there has been none -- anything we found out in advance came from outside sources. That lack of accountability has absolutely killed basketball, and that hiring M.O. hasn't worked since Urban.

We can point the finger all we want at the guilty culprits in the demise of Utah basketball. Most points are valid, although there are some I disagree with. If anything, my pet peeves are the issues that are often forgotten. For example, Boylen destroyed and dismissed international recruiting, and given the success Utah has had in that area, it's an unforgivable strategy.

But there is one point that I think a lot of people are conveniently dismissing: Utah basketball should NEVER have gotten to the point it has today.

The resources and advantages Utah has over the company it currently shares (read: sub-250 RPI teams) is damn near infinite. With rare exception, these schools have no tradition, no TV presence, no conference affiliation of note, are afterthoughts in their own recruiting base, don't have the sheer number of donors and corporate partners, and play in arenas about a third or half the size of the JHC.

Even as mismanaged as things have been over the years, those advantages will always be in play.

I was at Boise State yesterday for the Broncos' game against UNM. I found it ironic that within the space of 1,000 feet and in a two-week span, Boise hosted the worst FBS team in the country, and the worst basketball team from a major conference (Utah). Can you imagine Boise State in 8-10 years being as bad in football as New Mexico? Yet that's what has happened to Utah hoops.

Why on earth we're tolerating the lone common denominator in one of collegiate sports' all-time spectacular craterings to keep his job, or even celebrate the job he's done, is beyond me. Hill has gotten us into the Pac-12, and for that he'll always have the gratitude of the fanbase (much like Ron McBride will likewise for making Utah football relevant).

But eventually, McBride was fired because his presence within the football program was deemed more potentially detrimental than positive. Chris Hill should be held to the same standard.

Down dips in programs happen. Indiana has had some terrible years after some hiring and firing mistakes. Even byu which in basketball probably has more resources than the U suffered a 1-25 season. Lots of programs with better resources than the U have gone through some shitty years after bad hires and weird things happen to the team.

Additionally, we get that you don't like Krysto. But be honest about the talent level he was left with. Its horrible. Utahby5 and me were talking about all the 4rd, 5th & even 6th bananas from recent utah bball history that would be "go to guys" on this team and its astonishing.

Big Red would be our leading scorer.
Jordie Mctavish would play 38 minutes a game
tyler kepkay would be our leading scorer
Ricky Johns would be our leading scorer
Dave "the dog" Jackson would be far and away our best player.
the list goes on.

The fact is this team doesnt have talent. Krysko did the best he could with the circumstance.