As it has been noted on this site, Coach Lutz is the final member of Coach Fred Hoiberg’s staff at Iowa State, I did not know a whole lot about Coach Lutz so this has brought up questions about the former head coach at Charlotte…During all of his successes earlier in the 2000’s, does anyone know why he didn’t take a job at a larger school because I saw at one point, Tennessee had offered him but he opted to stay, does anyone know what offer he was waiting for but never got? What was his demeanor like? Does he lead the team or is he more of a babysitter, and just lets the players play their own game? Did he ever get up in player’s faces for screwing up? or was he just laid back and didn’t really show any emotion at all? Thanks for any insight!
welcome to the board. youre probably going to get a lot of different responses to youre questions but i will start. lutz was a very intense coach. his sideline antics are well known(and by many coaches hated). he is not the best at keeping guys under control and is more of a laid back guy in practice. this was probably one of our problems and why we always struggled on defense was because of the laid back practices. i cant offer insight into the tennessee situation. i will say this, he is a great guy, who was very passionate about our school and deeply appreciated the fans and the support that they showed. you guys are getting a good one. i do however question him as an assistant because it seemed like he lost the enthusiasm for recruiting the past few years and he is not an x’s and o’s guy. anyways, good luck to iowa state and lutz. the cyclones are now my second favorite team.
Welcome to the board, Blake. I can answer a few points.
- The Tennessee thing… my understanding was that Pearl just got that job over Lutz.
- Lutz definitely lets the players do their thing. If the players can play under control, it’s fine. But we weren’t really a set-offense team under him.
- He’s definitely NOT laid back. VERY enthusiastic and emotional on the sidelines. Off the court, though - pretty chill, very nice, VERY smart, has never met a stranger. If you get him as an assistant, I think you’re getting a great one.
Definitely did not get offered the Tennessee job the last time they were hiring, he kept his name in the hat until Pearl accepted the job. I belive the general feeling around here is that he would have left if they offered it to him. Didn’t get try for it the first time around when they went with Buzz?
A lot of positives, he does his best to sell the program, great ambassador and can definitely win with the right group of players.
I think the biggest reason he is no longer the coach here is that he couldn’t keep up his recruiting in the A10, and with that his teams lack of discipline (on both sides of the court) really showed. He got away with it for years with higher level talent.
[quote=“UNCCTF, post:3, topic:23384”]Welcome to the board, Blake. I can answer a few points.
- The Tennessee thing… my understanding was that Pearl just got that job over Lutz.
- Lutz definitely lets the players do their thing. If the players can play under control, it’s fine. But we weren’t really a set-offense team under him.
- He’s definitely NOT laid back. VERY enthusiastic and emotional on the sidelines. Off the court, though - pretty chill, very nice, VERY smart, has never met a stranger. If you get him as an assistant, I think you’re getting a great one.[/quote]
Under Lutz we were very much a set-play offense. We never had any type of continuity offense, it was an offense predicated around set plays. Especially, set-plays for 3’s.
[quote=“Ruckus42, post:5, topic:23384”][quote=“UNCCTF, post:3, topic:23384”]Welcome to the board, Blake. I can answer a few points.
- The Tennessee thing… my understanding was that Pearl just got that job over Lutz.
- Lutz definitely lets the players do their thing. If the players can play under control, it’s fine. But we weren’t really a set-offense team under him.
- He’s definitely NOT laid back. VERY enthusiastic and emotional on the sidelines. Off the court, though - pretty chill, very nice, VERY smart, has never met a stranger. If you get him as an assistant, I think you’re getting a great one.[/quote]
Under Lutz we were very much a set-play offense. We never had any type of continuity offense, it was an offense predicated around set plays. Especially, set-plays for 3’s.[/quote]
I’d argue we rarely ever ran the full set though… may be his point.
Lutz was probably heading to UT until Pearl had the run in the tourney at Wis-Milwaukee.
Lutz is a fine pickup for an Asst.
The comment about him not being an X’s and 0’s coach is way off base. He is a very good offensive coach, though his offense is designed to let guards shoot jumpers (he believes in “shooters” and “fetchers”, as he’ll tell you). When he had 2 and 3 good shooters on the team, we would absolutely drill people. Look at some of the scores from seasons like 2001. We would routinely hit 14+ 3’s per game and blow people out. He’ll play small guards if they can shoot, even though they’re a defensive liability. He prefers a “jet” PG to run fast breaks, preferably, end to end, and his defensive mentality is to play lots of “junk” zones, switching defenses frequently to offset his usually small lineups and lack of man to man principles. When he has the players, he’ll play the passing lanes and score a bunch off of steals and transition.
His on court mentality is that of a guy who hates losing. He is extremely passionate, some would say to a fault (he’s not afraid of an F bomb). He’s not an especially tall guy so people love to comment on a supposed Napolean complex. It doesn’t come off that way off court at all.
He believes in letting his players have free reign, and do what they do best. He;ll run sets, but he won’t demand 3 passes before a shot, etc.
His basic philosophy is to create more possessions in a game - by steals, rebounds, and early shot clock shots. He wants to force tempo. He does not want to play a Butler style grind it out man to man halfcourt game, or one that relies on very high efficiency offense, and rarely had the players to do so. It seems to be the antithesis to his philosophy.
Bobby was here for 12 years. That’s a long time these days. In 2004-2005, we were once again ranked in the top 25, I think we were 23-4 at one time. Then the TN job went to Pearl, Bobby knew we were headed to the A10 the following season and wasnt happy about it, one of our players (Eddie Basden) was selected CUSA Player of the year over Pitino’s golden boy(Francisco Garcia), and it appeared to go to his head, and the team just fell apart, losing I think every game they played in March. Bobby had put his recruiting eggs in some longshot baskets and they didnt come in, and we ended up loading up on JUCOs and transfers. We kinda faked it with those guys and our CUSA leftovers for a year… then we got exposed. The A10’s play style is not Bobby’s thing, and then we had the Dalonte Hill/Mike Beasley fiasco. We rode a gutsy guard to a 20-14 NIT bid 3 seasons ago, then lost our backcourt the following season (injuries and Mike “Transferrity” Gerrity left for USC), and had a horrific 11-20 season. This past year, it looked like we had our first solid recruiting class in years, and we played a favorable schedule and raced to 19 wins and just outside the top 25 ranking, before yet another total meltdown that ultimately cost Bobby his job.
He’s a good coach with a particular philosophy who couldnt recruit in the A10. If he can get players, he can find shots for them and you will win games. Consistency was his problem. The flaw in his offensive philosophy is also its greatest strength. His teams could shoot themselves to stunning upsets and stupifying losses. You can be cursed with the opposite problem, but he’s been here so long that our younger fans don’t realize what that’s like and were only too happy to see him go. Ultimately, it just comes down to players, Lutz included.
Alot of Lutz is debatable but one thing isnt. He is an awesome guy. He will remember your name and your major, your gf and your dad and even your birthday. Coach Lutz will come over from the other side of the room to say hello. You guys lucked out in getting such an awesome coach.
Very passionate coach, bleed green. He would routinely dip into his pocket to buy pizza for students and generally do anything for Niner Nation.
Good luck, I’ll be following you guys closely.
You can expect Bobby’s new team to receive more coverage from the local press than he is accustomed to receiving. MUCH MORE coverage. Out of curiosity, does your local paper do an article 8 days in a row on if a new Iowa recruit is going to start school early or not. Yes, I said Iowa, not Iowa State; and yes, I said EIGHT days in a row.
How could they not? Iowa is just a stone’s throw from the basketball mecca of Chapel Hell. EVERYONE worships the pale blue faeries.
How could they not? Iowa is just a stone’s throw from the basketball mecca of Chapel Hell. EVERYONE worships the pale blue faeries.[/quote]
I have to admit, you lost me on that one.
How could they not? Iowa is just a stone’s throw from the basketball mecca of Chapel Hell. EVERYONE worships the pale blue faeries.[/quote]
I have to admit, you lost me on that one.[/quote]
Just extending the Observer rationale to its ridiculous extreme.
I mean, why would the Ames & Des Monies paper bother covering the local teams when they could be covering the MIGHTY TARHOLES!!
[quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:8, topic:23384”]The comment about him not being an X’s and 0’s coach is way off base. He is a very good offensive coach, though his offense is designed to let guards shoot jumpers (he believes in “shooters” and “fetchers”, as he’ll tell you). When he had 2 and 3 good shooters on the team, we would absolutely drill people. Look at some of the scores from seasons like 2001. We would routinely hit 14+ 3’s per game and blow people out. He’ll play small guards if they can shoot, even though they’re a defensive liability. He prefers a “jet” PG to run fast breaks, preferably, end to end, and his defensive mentality is to play lots of “junk” zones, switching defenses frequently to offset his usually small lineups and lack of man to man principles. When he has the players, he’ll play the passing lanes and score a bunch off of steals and transition.
His on court mentality is that of a guy who hates losing. He is extremely passionate, some would say to a fault (he’s not afraid of an F bomb). He’s not an especially tall guy so people love to comment on a supposed Napolean complex. It doesn’t come off that way off court at all.
He believes in letting his players have free reign, and do what they do best. He;ll run sets, but he won’t demand 3 passes before a shot, etc.
His basic philosophy is to create more possessions in a game - by steals, rebounds, and early shot clock shots. He wants to force tempo. He does not want to play a Butler style grind it out man to man halfcourt game, or one that relies on very high efficiency offense, and rarely had the players to do so. It seems to be the antithesis to his philosophy.
Bobby was here for 12 years. That’s a long time these days. In 2004-2005, we were once again ranked in the top 25, I think we were 23-4 at one time. Then the TN job went to Pearl, Bobby knew we were headed to the A10 the following season and wasnt happy about it, one of our players (Eddie Basden) was selected CUSA Player of the year over Pitino’s golden boy(Francisco Garcia), and it appeared to go to his head, and the team just fell apart, losing I think every game they played in March. Bobby had put his recruiting eggs in some longshot baskets and they didnt come in, and we ended up loading up on JUCOs and transfers. We kinda faked it with those guys and our CUSA leftovers for a year… then we got exposed. The A10’s play style is not Bobby’s thing, and then we had the Dalonte Hill/Mike Beasley fiasco. We rode a gutsy guard to a 20-14 NIT bid 3 seasons ago, then lost our backcourt the following season (injuries and Mike “Transferrity” Gerrity left for USC), and had a horrific 11-20 season. This past year, it looked like we had our first solid recruiting class in years, and we played a favorable schedule and raced to 19 wins and just outside the top 25 ranking, before yet another total meltdown that ultimately cost Bobby his job.
He’s a good coach with a particular philosophy who couldnt recruit in the A10. If he can get players, he can find shots for them and you will win games. Consistency was his problem. The flaw in his offensive philosophy is also its greatest strength. His teams could shoot themselves to stunning upsets and stupifying losses. You can be cursed with the opposite problem, but he’s been here so long that our younger fans don’t realize what that’s like and were only too happy to see him go. Ultimately, it just comes down to players, Lutz included.[/quote]
this 110%
What is this about? McAdoo? It’s the same story, it’s just been on the website, it’s not a new story, and I hardly believe it’s been 8 days. Maybe 6, if it’s still up.
[quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:8, topic:23384”]The comment about him not being an X’s and 0’s coach is way off base. He is a very good offensive coach, though his offense is designed to let guards shoot jumpers (he believes in “shooters” and “fetchers”, as he’ll tell you). When he had 2 and 3 good shooters on the team, we would absolutely drill people. Look at some of the scores from seasons like 2001. We would routinely hit 14+ 3’s per game and blow people out. He’ll play small guards if they can shoot, even though they’re a defensive liability. He prefers a “jet” PG to run fast breaks, preferably, end to end, and his defensive mentality is to play lots of “junk” zones, switching defenses frequently to offset his usually small lineups and lack of man to man principles. When he has the players, he’ll play the passing lanes and score a bunch off of steals and transition.
He’s a good coach with a particular philosophy who couldnt recruit in the A10. If he can get players, he can find shots for them and you will win games. Consistency was his problem. The flaw in his offensive philosophy is also its greatest strength. His teams could shoot themselves to stunning upsets and stupifying losses. You can be cursed with the opposite problem, but he’s been here so long that our younger fans don’t realize what that’s like and were only too happy to see him go. Ultimately, it just comes down to players, Lutz included.[/quote]
I was going to craft a response for this - but could not have said it better NA.
Here’s a list of Lutz qualities:
- He will eat your children
- He will take your mother out for a nice steak and seafood dinner and never call her again
- He will kick your dog
- He will punch your kitten
- He will bring a grenade to a knife fight
anymore needed?
[quote=“NinerWupAss, post:16, topic:23384”][quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:8, topic:23384”]The comment about him not being an X’s and 0’s coach is way off base. He is a very good offensive coach, though his offense is designed to let guards shoot jumpers (he believes in “shooters” and “fetchers”, as he’ll tell you). When he had 2 and 3 good shooters on the team, we would absolutely drill people. Look at some of the scores from seasons like 2001. We would routinely hit 14+ 3’s per game and blow people out. He’ll play small guards if they can shoot, even though they’re a defensive liability. He prefers a “jet” PG to run fast breaks, preferably, end to end, and his defensive mentality is to play lots of “junk” zones, switching defenses frequently to offset his usually small lineups and lack of man to man principles. When he has the players, he’ll play the passing lanes and score a bunch off of steals and transition.
He’s a good coach with a particular philosophy who couldnt recruit in the A10. If he can get players, he can find shots for them and you will win games. Consistency was his problem. The flaw in his offensive philosophy is also its greatest strength. His teams could shoot themselves to stunning upsets and stupifying losses. You can be cursed with the opposite problem, but he’s been here so long that our younger fans don’t realize what that’s like and were only too happy to see him go. Ultimately, it just comes down to players, Lutz included.[/quote]
I was going to craft a response for this - but could not have said it better NA.[/quote]
Thanks for cleaning that rambling mess up. Some of that I’ve been wanting to say for a while. We may see a total pendulum swing with Alan Major, and it’ll be curious how the fanbase reacts. You can have a very sound, hard nosed man to man team that can’t beat a more talented team no matter how hard they try. (Not saying that’s Major’s m.o.).
Unelss you have a team full of complete players, you have to pick your poison.
Bobby’s style was more high risk/reward, and all the joy and pain that went with it. I think a great example was the Alabama game in Halton that went to how many OTs? We lost, but that was as thrilling of a game as any I’ve seen in years. So were some others that we came out on top of - like Leemire vs Steph Curry in Halton, or Plavich ruining Syracuse’s NC banner hanging night with ten 3’s. We almost lost that Cuse game despite being up 25 at halftime. That was Bobby ball. Good and bad, I loved it for a long time. Best of luck to him on his new start. I think he’ll be a HC again very soon.
[quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:18, topic:23384”][quote=“NinerWupAss, post:16, topic:23384”][quote=“NinerAdvocate, post:8, topic:23384”]The comment about him not being an X’s and 0’s coach is way off base. He is a very good offensive coach, though his offense is designed to let guards shoot jumpers (he believes in “shooters” and “fetchers”, as he’ll tell you). When he had 2 and 3 good shooters on the team, we would absolutely drill people. Look at some of the scores from seasons like 2001. We would routinely hit 14+ 3’s per game and blow people out. He’ll play small guards if they can shoot, even though they’re a defensive liability. He prefers a “jet” PG to run fast breaks, preferably, end to end, and his defensive mentality is to play lots of “junk” zones, switching defenses frequently to offset his usually small lineups and lack of man to man principles. When he has the players, he’ll play the passing lanes and score a bunch off of steals and transition.
He’s a good coach with a particular philosophy who couldnt recruit in the A10. If he can get players, he can find shots for them and you will win games. Consistency was his problem. The flaw in his offensive philosophy is also its greatest strength. His teams could shoot themselves to stunning upsets and stupifying losses. You can be cursed with the opposite problem, but he’s been here so long that our younger fans don’t realize what that’s like and were only too happy to see him go. Ultimately, it just comes down to players, Lutz included.[/quote]
I was going to craft a response for this - but could not have said it better NA.[/quote]
Thanks for cleaning that rambling mess up. Some of that I’ve been wanting to say for a while. We may see a total pendulum swing with Alan Major, and it’ll be curious how the fanbase reacts. You can have a very sound, hard nosed man to man team that can’t beat a more talented team no matter how hard they try. (Not saying that’s Major’s m.o.).
Unelss you have a team full of complete players, you have to pick your poison.
Bobby’s style was more high risk/reward, and all the joy and pain that went with it.[/quote]
I agree - it will be very interesting to see how fans react. Some of the games we won with Bobby we had no business winning, given the talent on the floor and some of the losses we had no business losing, but man when he had the dogs his teams we a blast.
So the question is if we can win all the games we are supposed to win but never win the games where we are under dogs due to talent on the floor, is the fan base happy?
Not trying to be a smart a$$, but this is a pet peeve of mine…why do people automatically assume that no one would be willing to stay at a school like Charlotte (which by the way, is anything but small-----25,000+ students and rising every year) and instead go to a “larger school” (very inaccurate term most of the time by the way----ex: Charlotte is twice the size of Duke)? Its not like Charlotte is some podunk D2 school. Its a big school, in a big city with asperations of moving into a BCS league one day and has been a pretty decent name in basketball for the last 2 decades, with MUCH more bball success than MANY current BCS schools…sorry, end of my rant.